I looked in the red board room for selections of the card at GP yesterday and had a question.
I recognize that picks are made before hand and that you don\'t have the benefit of earlier races on the card but you do have the benefit of previous days\' bias or trends.
My question concerns the 8th race. I too liked Iwin to get back or go through his previous top in this race and thought he offered value vs foes that either ran new tops in their last or were possible bounce candidates. The problem I had in making the play, even at what I would normally consider acceptable odds, was the position that I would have expected Iwin to be in. He broke from the 7 hole in a 7 horse field on a track which greatly favored the rail and had been favoring the inside for 2 days. I couldn\'t forsee a trip where Iwin would be able to get the rail or save ground.
Is this a situation where you would have to pass the race at 5-2 or 3-1 (the odds suggested) but couldn\'t resist the race at say 5-1 or 6-1?
John Gaspar wrote:
>
> I looked in the red board room for selections of the card at
> GP yesterday and had a question.
>
> I recognize that picks are made before hand and that you
> don\'t have the benefit of earlier races on the card but you
> do have the benefit of previous days\' bias or trends.
>
> My question concerns the 8th race. I too liked Iwin to get
> back or go through his previous top in this race and thought
> he offered value vs foes that either ran new tops in their
> last or were possible bounce candidates. The problem I had in
> making the play, even at what I would normally consider
> acceptable odds, was the position that I would have expected
> Iwin to be in. He broke from the 7 hole in a 7 horse field on
> a track which greatly favored the rail and had been favoring
> the inside for 2 days. I couldn\'t forsee a trip where Iwin
> would be able to get the rail or save ground.
>
> Is this a situation where you would have to pass the race at
> 5-2 or 3-1 (the odds suggested) but couldn\'t resist the race
> at say 5-1 or 6-1?
TG--This is the second question in a couple of weeks based on a set of assumptions which, to put it mildly, I don\'t agree with. To answer your question as posed--if I agreed about the bias, I would agree with your conclusions, and need higher odds to bet the horse.
There\'s a recurring quote in Atlas Shrugged by a character named Hugh Akston (sp?)--something like, if your conclusion seems impossible, check your givens. Alydar? TGJB
We agree to disagree about the track condition on Wednesday. I felt that the rail was the place to be, less so in routes.
I felt the track had played with a rail bias earlier in the meet off a very similar set of circumstances. Heavy rains caused a good track to open the meet on a Thursday. By Saturday, the track seem to be in favor rail speed and the condition lasted a couple of days. I felt my hypothesis was backed up by some horses running wide on these days came back to win or run 2nd in their next race. Heavy rains came again last weekend and caused a good track on Saturday and Sunday and I felt the rail was the place to be on Monday and Wednesday
I am not Alydar nor am I trying to bust anyone\'s chops. I thought I asked a legitimate question on how you would adjust your odds line based on \"correct\" or \"incorrect\" observations.