When I got into work today the Kentucky Derby talk by the non-horse-players was that this proves that horse racing is totally random, similar to a slot machine or a lottery. One of my co-workers cited the poor win percentage of the guys in the newspaper as proof that there is no rhyme or reason to horse racing results. I feel if this reaction by the people I work with is representative of the general public, this race has done more harm to racing.
The reason I do not gamble on anything other than racing is because I feel racing is somewhat predictable. If I thought of it in terms of slots or lotteries, I wouldn\'t get involved, nor would I spend money to get data on it. Results that defy most logic in races that are as high profile as the Kentucky Derby, reinforce the man on the street\'s conception that horse racing is just another form of random type gambling. If enough casual gamblers come to that conclusion, then they will just head to the casinos to play slots. We\'ve already seen this since the rise of casinos at tracks & other venues. This race made it more difficult to defend the predictability of racing to the average Joe.
toppled Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When I got into work today the Kentucky Derby talk
> by the non-horse-players was that this proves that
> horse racing is totally random, similar to a slot
> machine or a lottery. One of my co-workers cited
> the poor win percentage of the guys in the
> newspaper as proof that there is no rhyme or
> reason to horse racing results. I feel if this
> reaction by the people I work with is
> representative of the general public, this race
> has done more harm to racing.
> The reason I do not gamble on anything other than
> racing is because I feel racing is somewhat
> predictable. If I thought of it in terms of slots
> or lotteries, I wouldn\'t get involved, nor would I
> spend money to get data on it. Results that defy
> most logic in races that are as high profile as
> the Kentucky Derby, reinforce the man on the
> street\'s conception that horse racing is just
> another form of random type gambling. If enough
> casual gamblers come to that conclusion, then they
> will just head to the casinos to play slots. We\'ve
> already seen this since the rise of casinos at
> tracks & other venues. This race made it more
> difficult to defend the predictability of racing
> to the average Joe.
The race is getting a lot of nation-wide press. I hear Rome spent half the day on the race, and the other programs gave it more coverage than past runnings. Durkin\'s shock and bewilderment (mess-up if you will) is only adding to the mystique of this little $102 colt. Sure, not a great outcome for serious players, but for the public at large, this is a good story.
I\'m not sure what is the bigger mystery.
This horse winning or him paying only $102.
FWIW, the number 8 is considered good fortune in Asian cultures.
He\'s also the Canadian two-year-old champ....post 8 has had the most Derby winners I believe....Birdstone won the Travers in the slop....Borel...
It obviously wasn\'t based upon speed figure handicapping. That group was diluted in the betting pool.
Keep going.
You now have him down to less than 150-1.
Totally random is better than totally fixed which is the usual charge. Besides, the totally \"random\" gaming industry is eating our lunch. Maybe that\'s the way we should promote the sport?
Sounds like you\'re having a real issue with this. What are you implying?
It was brought to my attention on another site that all you needed to do was box the three horses with the best winning record (most wins) and you would have hit the triple for $40K+...........that\'s too easy eh?
NCT
You are too funny.
Slow horse in 20 horse field runs the race of his life wins. Great Story and not a fairy tales because it happened.
A 200-1 shot seems random and an even more \"eye-catching story\" But 50-1 seems like on paper at least there something to like and there really wasn\'t. Except for the story.
So next year instead of reviewing morning works let\'s tell bedtime stories and then decide who we should bet.
50-1 has been explained, thats the way the public bets.
Beyer reported Betfair odds of 113-1 and I thing 200-1 at some point.
Means nothing, cept you get robbed if you actually liked the horse.
Win pool that is, the exotics were probable fair.
That\'s exactly right Tony. MTB (4 career wins), POTN (5 career wins) and Musket Man (5 lifetime wins from 6 starts) all hit the trifecta. The only other 4 win horses in the field were the betting fave FF, Choc Candy and Desert Party.
When Beyers were first coming out I was at the look-and-lose parlor one day saying how cool these new speed figures were in the form. Some cranky old timer leans over and barks \"Son - that crap don\'t matter. Does the horse like to win or not?\"
I actually think that one race isn\'t going to change the perception of anyone. If you believe race handicapping is skill, this isn\'t going to change your mind. If you believe racing is random and luck, you aren\'t going to be swayed from that closed mindset either.
I saw a woman the other day who caught some exacta on a simulcast race and she got in the face of almost everyone within earshot. EVERYONE knew she won after the race. She said to another bettor \"i gave you that exacta, you should have listened to me\". Then, she want on to parade around like a peacock with her feathers in the air. There was nothing at all to suggest she didn\'t think she was a full fledged racing expert. I enjoyed her \'show\' because i know that its people like her that keeps my pockets full.
Wonder what the Betfair odds were on Flying Private or Nowhere to Hide who both went off lower than Mine That Bird, and both who had no business in the Derby either, at least on paper?
Fact of the matter is that there is ton of casual money bet on the Derby, favorite numbers, favorite jockeys, favorite colors, you name it. I heard one guy say he bet the 8 because of the late Mark \"The Bird\" Fidrytch.
Silver,
You are really a piece of work. Your sarcasm and all knowing attitude really wears thin. Because you say something, it must be the all knowing truth. Are you a cousin of a certain Clown??
Slew makes some good points, such as:
- 2 YO Canadian Champ
- good post position
- Sire won a TC race in the slop
- Derby winning rider who also has great experience over the track. Not to mention he won the Oaks the day before, which probably prompted some to bet him.
There are millions bet on the Derby. This may surprise you, so you may want to sit down.
Not everybody uses Thorograph figures. Rags either.
Lets take a look at his PPs, since most people use the DRF or similar to handicap races.
- Wins 3 races in a row after breaking his maiden, including a GR3 in his first route race.
- Runs in the BC Juvenile, albeit up the track.
- Returns 4 months later and loses by a neck in a 100K race.
- 1 month later has a wide trip in a 900K race, finishes 4th beaten 3 lengths in a 12 horse field.
While this horses PPs don\'t scream BET ME!!, it also doesn\'t say hopeless loser. This horse is usually an off the pace type runner. 2 races back, he suddenly shows speed and runs an excellent race ( the 100K race). His next race, he resumes his stalking/closing style and had the wide trip. I know several handicappers that love a change in running style, especially closers that all of a sudden show speed. They view this as a positive development in a horse\'s form cycle. Yes, the fractions were softer. But that doesn\'t matter, many horses will take their usual place in the pack. This horse didn\'t.
I didn\'t play him. I know some that did. Their information had MTB with excellent closing numbers, so they used him. They also liked the change in running style from 2 races back.
Just because the all knowing Silver Charm proclaims that there was \"nothing on paper\" means it must be true??
Instead of acting smug and arrogant....again....perhaps you should acknowledge that there are many different ways to handicap a race.
Congrats to those that had the winner.
Well I will give you this, he certainly provided a lot more value than Fraudulant Fire
And he also verifys my longstanding argument that if a trainer has a horse who can get in then run him. Don\'t let the media make that decision for you because.....
You never know......
\"Totally random is better than totally fixed which is the usual charge. Besides, the totally \"random\" gaming industry is eating our lunch. Maybe that\'s the way we should promote the sport\"
JR,
I think that consistently \"totally random\" results would spell the end of the betting side of the game as we know it. Most large players cover the \"random\" factor with rebates, sound data,sharp overall handicapping accumen and good money management.If totally random ruled, they would be gone.I could not gamble a totally random racing game.
It may surprise some to learn that the drug/move up thing is something some large players feel that have a decent handle on and factor it in accordingly. Some prefer the game the way it is, while others would prefer the total elimination of the move up guys.
Mike
Wow,can\'t believe the thread going on here. The winner was near impossible going in by any data, worse on Beyer and Rags than TG. Thats not to say someone could find a reason to take a small flier on a bomb in the lower underneath slots.MTB then proceded to run one of the fastest last quarters in derby history after making a sustained run to get close.Great ride by Borel and a nice win for the trainer who did not think the horse had a shot before the race.
I\'ts Tuesday and MTB\'s still doesn\'t reconcile unless he\'s a wet track freak that rode a biased rail to victory.Forward pattern, TGI, Canadian Champion, changed running style, gimme a break.You can take every horse in the Derby and manufacture reasons why he may have won.It\'s called resulting.
MTB goes to the top of the list as far the biggest upset(not necessarily by odds) in Derby history. The slow rat Giacomo is replaced and it remains to be seen if MTB is really a slow rat is sheeps clothing.
Mike
Miff-- actually, I think Giacomo was a bigger upset, given how much slower than the fastest horses he was. But I agree, I don\'t get why everyone is beating this to death. A 3yo made a 4-6 point jump, like many do in the spring, got a rail trip, and many did not fire, over a muddy track. It happens. Turn the page.
And PDub, enough with the personal slams. I\'m not kidding.
Wow Miff...Finally someone willing to give it the way it is..We\'re on here because we use sheets right? I mean to talk about how you could have bet MTB is the epitome of redboarding....He was indeed the 18th slowest horse in the race on both sets of sheets. I still don\'t understand the result. Everyone is talking about the ride Borel gave..which indeed is worth commending..but did everyone watch the blimp view. That horse accelerated quicker than any horse I\'ve seen in recent memory...and sustained the run for almost a half mile. NOTHING...I mean NOTHING...could have forecasted that effort. I think he wins for fun even if he wasn\'t on the rail the whole time. If you can say that MTB was a possibility to bet on Saturday...then you for sure can find reasons to bet any horse in any race on any day.
JB,
Yeah could see that.Think Giacomo\'s win was explained mostly by the implosion up front, MTB made a serious legit long sustained late run,tough to explain, except for the wet surface and the iron rail.
Mike
Jerry,
In the end, yes it is just a 4-6 point jump for a 3 year old. But there are some other aspects of the performance that were more outstanding than just his final Tgraph number. I know you don\'t like to dissect the race into pieces and analyze pace (and most of the time I don\'t either), but coming home the last quarter in 23 and change for a 3 year old, on dirt, in May of his campaign is something that very few horses do, let alone New Mexico shippers with TG tops of \"5\". He showed both acceleration and athleticism in that rail skimming ride, particularly that burst of acceleration being at the end of a distance race. To me, that makes it more incredulous, than just the 4-6 point TG move.
Also, as I believe you have talked about in the past, very few horses make significant moves up in the Derby. Generally, you have to be fast enough coming in. How many horses have made 6 point forward moves going 1 1/4 in the Derby? None?
THis performance was more than a \"ho-hum\" developing 3 year old. We have seen 3 year olds jump in prep races at shorter distances, but I really can\'t remember a 6 point derby jump up. Anybody?
Hey, I turned the page after my 5th tequila Saturday night, but why is it so strange that he ran a fast half to finish the race when he spent the first 6F in a relaxed gallop all by his lonesome on the best part of the track?
Assuming you have sobered up by now, find somebody else who has done it in the DErby? There are laggards in every run of the Derby. Find one that accelerated like that and came home in 23 and a piece.
Barbaro and Giacomo both jumped 4 points. Worth noting that he came into this with only 2 starts this year, which makes a jump more likely than for all those derby starters that have made 3 or more.
Whirlaway ran final quarter in 23 3/5 seconds to win by eight in 1941. Trip sounds similar.
http://www.kentuckyderby.com/2005/derby_history/derby_charts/years/1941.html
WHIRLAWAY, eased back when blocked in the first eighth and taken to the inside approaching the first turn, started up after reaching the final half-mile, was taken between horses on the final turn, responded with much energy to take command with a rush and, continuing with much power, drew out fast in the final eighth.
APny Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you can say that MTB was a possibility to bet on
> Saturday...then you for sure can find reasons to
> bet any horse in any race on any day.
Thats why they call it horse racing!!! In reality the horse had a 1 in 19 shot to win once he got loaded into the gate with the other 18 runners
miff Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------
> I\'ts Tuesday and MTB\'s still doesn\'t reconcile
> unless he\'s a wet track freak that rode a biased
> rail to victory.Forward pattern, TGI, Canadian
> Champion, changed running style, gimme a break.You
> can take every horse in the Derby and manufacture
> reasons why he may have won.It\'s called
> resulting.
>
> MTB goes to the top of the list as far the biggest
> upset(not necessarily by odds) in Derby history.
> The slow rat Giacomo is replaced and it remains to
> be seen if MTB is really a slow rat is sheeps
> clothing.
>
>
> Mike
Mike,
Its called resulting. Ok. Kinda like when people around here look at a winner they didn\'t have, go back over the sheet, and find a reason he won? Horses win all of the time that have \"inferior numbers\". If that wasn\'t the case, every horse would pay around 6 bucks. Because the numbers would dictate it.
You sound like Silver Charm. Because your data and ideas didn\'t work, must mean that any other line of reasoning is fradulent? I never knew there was only 1 way to handicap. Maybe you and Silver can give your own seminar, letting us all know what the ONLY way to handicap a race is.
When sheet players find a nice priced winner, its because they found a reason to bet a horse that others didn\'t. Good for them, thats the idea.
I gave several legitimate reasons why someone COULD have had this horse. Again, I have a friend that uses a program that had MTB listed with the best late fraction in the race. It also had the race listed as pressured. Its 1 reason he used the horse. He also liked the other factors I mentioned, such as a change in running style. Now, you may think thats BS. And you are certainly entitled to that opinion. But again, its a little smug and arrogant to proclaim that its hogwash. Other handicappers use positive form factors when analyzing a race.
I love Thorograph. Its pointed me to some of my biggest scores. When my non-TG playing friends have a winner that couldn\'t be found on TG, do you think they care?? Think that they feel they found a winner because of a fluke?? They don\'t. They just use different methods that work for them.
I don\'t necessarily handicap that way, nor did I sniff the winner. But again, because someone had the winner and you didn\'t doesn\'t mean their methods are worthless.
P-Dub,
Would love to see the program that had MTB with the fastest closing fraction. I had both early pace figures and late pace figures from multiple qualified sources and none of them had MTB in the top 5 in late pace figures.
YOu are making this sound like a Thorograph \"fluke\". This is not a \"thorograph fluke\". This was a fluke, period. MTB was one of the two slowest horses on TG, RAgs, Beyers, and had lousy pace figures. There are methods like \"pick your favorite color\" and \"pick your favorite\" number, and they work sometimes too. That doesn\'t mean they are good methods.
He changed his running style, signaling he had an imminent 6 point TG jump up, 24 point beyer jump up, etc?
Gimme a break. You have been posting way too often here, and made way too many good points, to actually believe that this is a good point.
BTW, not to be a wiseass, but wouldn\'t you know that I finally got a 1w/1w tri from your boy Mike Smith aboard Lemon Chiffon on Derby day, in what I personally thought was the best bet of the day, and he did it on what may have been a dead rail on the turf course... There is some sick irony in that one.....
Jerry,
They made 4 point moves. Have you given MTB a 4 or 6 point move? It makes a difference. And you have been making figures for how many years, 25? Maybe two horses in 25 years of Derbies, figuring at least 15 horses per year average in the derby, make that a probability of 2 in 375? ABout 1/2 of 1 percent? And that is if you only give him a 4 point top. I am guessing higher than that when you finalize the figures (assuming you haven\'t done so yet).
Paul,
Back to basics, he was a slow rat GOING IN with absolutely no license to win off, period. You can put any slant you want on it and to those who figured him pre race, they need to go to a seminar.
Mike
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And PDub, enough with the personal slams. I\'m not
> kidding.
Personal slams?? I said he acted smug and arrogant. If I thought that was a personal attack and not allowed, I wouldn\'t have said it.
Next time I\'ll say it a non-offensive way. But the facts remain the same.
Next time split the difference, either call someone smug or arrogant but not both. And don\'t do it too often, it heats things up unecessarily around here.
Jimbo-- I just looked at winners, and just the last couple of years. But yes, it\'s a big jump-- so what\'s the issue here? Horses do jump, and this one did. That\'s not the same as saying it happens often to this degree, or the horse should have been keyed.
Turns out one guy that has been using our data forever (and Ragozin before that) did use the horse heavily,and din\'t hit it either.
I\'m about to do the day, more comments afterward.
Can\'t find the chart but Unbridled (Naftzger, coincidence?) may fit that bill.
Also, if I\'m posting as \"magicnight\" I\'m at work and - theoretically - should be sober. If I\'m posting as \"BB\", well, I could be a few sheets to the wind (look for a late night post time and an excess of flowery language).
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P-Dub,
>
> Gimme a break. You have been posting way too
> often here, and made way too many good points, to
> actually believe that this is a good point.
Thanks for the compliment. I was beginning to feel that I was the board dumbass. Not that someone couldn\'t have found a reason (kinda like MTB).
> BTW, not to be a wiseass, but wouldn\'t you know
> that I finally got a 1w/1w tri from your boy Mike
> Smith aboard Lemon Chiffon on Derby day, in what I
> personally thought was the best bet of the day,
> and he did it on what may have been a dead rail on
> the turf course... There is some sick irony in
> that one.....
Make that 2 people. I was all ready to tell you all about that rail skimmimg ride, I was all set to see this horse close and win, then nothing. I\'m blaming you.
Look, all I was trying to say is that there were other reasons that someone COULD have had MTB. Thats it. I know its a Thorograph board. I was responding to a post from Slewzapper, who introduced non-TG analysis into the conversation. I just added 50 cents to it.
Mike,
He was a slow rat going in. (My favotite description I\'ve ever heard, a little nicer than pig). I am not disputing that. I\'m just saying that there are alternative ways to handicap a race. These people had it. Those of us that use Thorograph didn\'t.
I go to the races with people that use the DRF. Thats all they use. I was in Reno this weekend with some friends. We\'re handicapping the races Friday night. We\'re talking about the 6th race and I tell them I really like Accredit. One mentions Sok Sok. I said I didn\'t like him. They jumped all over me. Another mentioned Kodiak Kowboy. Said I hated him more. You should have heard the next 5 minutes. They thought I was nuts.
Next day, I bet Accredit. I\'m the only one yelling at the end. They told me nice hit. They didn\'t say it was a fluke, I was lucky, etc.. They moved on to the next race.
I\'m not disputing any of the facts being mentioned around here. I\'m just not one who dismisses other people who hit a race that happen to use an alternative method. Thats it.
Point taken JB. I honestly didn\'t realize the comment was that offensive. Please accept my apology, and Silver......I apologize if that comment was construed as offensive. But you did kinda act like 1 of the descriptions I mentioned. I just thought you jumped the guy pretty good. Thats all, I have no personal dislike for you.
Yes, it does heat things up. I could have left out the comments.
I\'ll watch it. Thanks for letting me know.
So did MTB get somewhere in the 0-2 range for his number in the Derby?.....sorry if it\'s hidden here in the thread but can\'t find it
The race behind was an 04 derby rerun. But the winner ran in a different race, literally. He ran past all the compromised horses in that race but he was never in that race himself, else he would\'ve been compromised also. Seminal ride.
He got horse racing its first SI cover since Smarty Jones and its 4th in the last 30 years, so it can\'t be all bad from a PR perspective, considering at this time last year, Eight Belles and PETA were in the headlines.
http://www.ntra.com/content.aspx?type=news&id=39274
Despite what the chart says, Whirlaway actually came home in 24 flat. If you watch the replay, you\'ll see he\'s on the lead at the quarter poll. The voice-over even says 24-flat (cut to the 1:54 mark). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzMoS22nePA
MTB\'s final quarter was the fourth fastest in Derby history and second fastest among the 135 winners (Secretariat).
Too easy and, more importantly, wrong.
MM 83%
DUNK 66%
DP 66%
POTN 62%
HMB 60%
FF 57%
MTB 50%
2nd fastest closing speed to Secretariat. If that is not a crazy stat, I don\'t know what is.
And it isn\'t like the pace was dawdling. I haven\'t seen pace figures, but it seemed like an average early pace, which would make that closing kick incredulous to me.
Jim, MTB ran 6F in about 1:15. Like P Eckhart says, MTB was running a different race. He was detached from the field.
Enough already! All this talk about the predictability of his win in the KDerby is pure, unadulterated bloviating. The real question is how is he going to run in his next race. Lets move on. Onwards and upwards to the Preakness!
If it\'s wet & there\'s a gold rail he will win or be close. If it\'s dry & fair, or worse if there\'s an outside bias, he turns into a pumpkin.
I noticed on the replay that Borel had MTB so tight on the rail, he was running in ground with no hoofprints on it.
Edit: I was talking to some backstretch folks at CD - they said MTB was doing well in his works - galloping very long distances and not being winded, and after his last work (unremarkable time) continued a very strong gallop out. They made note of the horse.
I missed it completely. I think next year, I spend Derby week at the track, doing my own works recon in the am
Even more amazing to me than the Bird\'s flight is the whining from so many supposed sophisticates about it.
Anyone that\'s been around for more then 3 weeks knows crazy things happen with some regularity. Especially on off tracks.
Now if you think the Derby should somehow be immune from weirdness by edict , then so be it.
Horse was going forward at the right time and Borel has mojo (profoundly underestimated by handicappers) , and supposedly Bird has a good mud foot (this being first time wet). If he moves up 2 points on wet and was a natural 2 point move off the 5, + a gold rail , that about does it. Not easy to predict, especially with a \'who?\' trainer.
The others stunk up the place at best.
For the record, I did not introduce non-TG analysis into this thread. It wasn\'t there in the first place.
The Derby attracts a lot of money from casual, indifferent and unsophisticated fans. It also draws in a lot of dumb money from otherwise sophisticated handicappers who should know better than to play a race large with so many poorly predictive and chaotic factors going in, and this Derby had those in spades.
This race outcome was the handicapping equivalent of a black swan. As TGJB says, it happened, get over it. Just remember next year that you\'re betting a race where no entrant has established form over the conditions of the trip. Chaotic results are more probable than most races handicapping regimens are applied to.
SC, if you seriously feel that the win pool on MTB was suspicious, perhaps you can spell out for us occasional, amateur posters as to what you think went down. That would be more enlightening then the condescending flippant reply to the direct question you gave instead. And I\'m asking in earnest.
I subscribe to a pace program that actually had MTB with the highest pace number off his last 2, its underlined and hi-lighted, his performance numbers were on the rise, of course, I disregarded.
RICH,
Same here, had him in the 3 hole on 6 tickets despite that data. It didn\'t seem to make sense.
slewzapper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For the record, I did not introduce non-TG
> analysis into this thread. It wasn\'t there in the
> first place.
>
slewzapper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FWIW, the number 8 is considered good fortune in
> Asian cultures.
>
> He\'s also the Canadian two-year-old champ....post
> 8 has had the most Derby winners I
> believe....Birdstone won the Travers in the
> slop....Borel...
>
> It obviously wasn\'t based upon speed figure
> handicapping. That group was diluted in the
> betting pool.
Slew,
I wasn\'t being critical of you when I said non-TG info was mentioned. But c\'mon. You mentioned the following as reasons some may have bet MTB:
- Canadian 2YO champ
- the #8 is considered good fortune in Asian culture
- post 8 has had the most Derby winners
- Birdstone won in the slop
- Borel
Are you telling me that these are key indicators found using TG methodology?? The next time Borel is on the 8 horse in the slop, the rubberband comes off.
\'course not.
But who knew that the little old lady who was randomly punching out combos at the self-service machine (while all the serious figure guys behind her in line was snickering and swearing under their breath) had the race nailed?
Next they\'ll be taking over Fed Reserve policy meetings.
Looking back at this race is kind of like investigating \"why the plane went down\". I think I\'ll just move on.
Silver Charm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well I will give you this, he certainly provided a
> lot more value than Fraudulant Fire
>
LOL, Why? because FF practically had his hoof torn off in the first 100 meters, this means he was a fraud?
Are you serious?
Raggie Richie tells me that MTB got a 3 on Rags which equates to a TG neg -1/2 and confirms that TG, Rags and Beyer saw it virtually the same.
Mike