To me, this is the race that we should be talking about. There were 8 horses that had run faster than Runhappy coming into this race. He should have went off at 25-1, yet only went off at 11-1. Any thoughts? Also, there were some decent sprinters in here, but 2 of the slowest horses in the race shipping in from Ellis Park run 1st and 2nd. What are the odds of that? If someone would have given me Private Zone, Flintshire and Keen Ice, I still could not have come up with this one.
No mystery at all.
Put down your thorograph figures and open up the DRF pps and handicap the race. Horse was much faster on beyer and competitive.
90 percent of the public uses beyer figs.
Horse very usable on beyers.
No red board. I used TG and tossed the horse. Was with a group of 5 gamblers, none of them read sheets. 4 of the 5 had the winner on a spread ticket in the pick 4.
Rob
Its a TG board, so most handicapping analysis pertains to the TG figures.
I use TG sporadically, and another product for daily play. On my other data, the #11 Runhappy had certain pace advantages that would have made him playable.
Paul
Well aware it is a TG board.
The poster was questioning how the horse could only be 11-1 off \"slow figs\"
While a TG board, we don\'t set the odds, mostly the general public does. This horse looked better on other data.
Not saying what was \"right\". But 11-1 not a surprise. At all.
Rob
Thanks for the feedback. Good call btw on Flintshire. Hope you made some money. I used Flintshire, I just didn\'t have the nerve to single.
Patrick
My money was on Holy boss in the horizontals ( and a little on watershed in case he was a freak) but I don\'t think either of those two were impossible on TG. Both of the two I mentioned had question marks (bounce and/or distance) with the rest of the field being fairly level in terms of projected numbers imho. Alan actually said Limousine liberal was a use and Runhappy had paired up his last two suggesting a forward move was possible.
I already posted the answer in another thread earlier.
\'They\' owned the pool.
Rob,
We must love to disagree but I do respect any opinion backed up by a valid argument.
His high Beyer is a 98 earned on a muddy track, a horse with a 442 Tomillison on an off track. His next highest Beyer for all the toilet paper they are worth is a 94 which is 7th fastest of the 11 starters?
This was a good Old Fashioned put over on a day with lots of $$$ in the pool.
Vini Vedi Vici:
They came, They took the purse down and a couple of empty suitcases went home full. Maria Borell is the highest % trainer in the country!
Frank D.
Wire to wire winners back to back. Guys, see Frank D\'s post about the track treatment. I have more I could add but I\'ll just ask, is Runhappy deserving of a better figure than Private Zone? This is where TGJB was ahead of the curve with figure making. (Real interesting how this shakes out fig wise.)
22.43, :44.54, 1:08.17, 1:20.54, Race 8, Runhappy
22.67, :45.10, 1:08.53, 1:21.09, Race 9, Private Zone
I remember your post, I just don\'t remember who \"they\" were.
As Frank D posted just now simultaneously, they be the guys with the bulging suitcases.
Thanks for the information. I enjoy reading your insights and analysis. Keep up the good work.
Patrick
Frank,
I am not keeping score, but u aren\'t doing too well on our disagreements...... I was given a win on the upstart discussion and the pick 4 played out about as expected in the middle legs.
Should u ask for a recount on the Violette discussion based on today\'s non-performance?
U can excuse the figures, but a 94 - 98 beyer pattern was solid here.
This was no put over. Lots of people bet this horse in the place I was at. Just not me.....
Rob
ringato3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Paul
>
> Well aware it is a TG board.
>
> The poster was questioning how the horse could
> only be 11-1 off \"slow figs\"
>
> While a TG board, we don\'t set the odds, mostly
> the general public does. This horse looked better
> on other data.
>
> Not saying what was \"right\". But 11-1 not a
> surprise. At all.
>
> Rob
That came out wrong.
What I meant to say, is that I don\'t want to come on this board and talk too much about other racing products. Wanted to keep it brief.
In no way did I intend for it to sound like that. My apologies.
It was not a big shock and it was not a putover in the classic sense.
But it was a loaded race, at least on paper, and by my analysis, the public has the horse at 20-1.
The 10-1 was from concentrated betting by a VERY few. Trust me.
Patrick
Wasted Flintshire. Tough game to be stubborn with. Invested 300 bucks in pick 3 ending in travers. Singling private zone and Flintshire. Then 150 dollars to Texas red, 90 dollars to frosted and 60 dollars to upstart.
Figured if the two chalks won and somehow pharaoh stubbed his toe I \"had to cash\"
A Buddy said he was going to do something similar but was adding keen ice. Suggested shouldn\'t I just add $30 or something on the \"only other\" horse that could win.
My \"know it all\" response was \"keen ice is a slug, too many fast horses would have to not show up for him to win. I don\'t want to waste a nickel on a slug\"
Famous last words.... $30 bet about 6k.
Rob
Nor I Rob, you could have given me a truck load of rubles, shekels, yen, euros or any other currency de jour and I could not have bet this horse.
As for Sr.(top shelf) Violette go to the NYRA media guide and he lists his career highlight as winning a pair of Grade III\'s with Samarat !!!
Be well my friend as I\'m working on tomorrow cause I got F\'in crushed today!!!
Frank D.
Boscar,
I don\'t \"trust you\". No offense.
It wasn\'t a loaded race. I posted that this morning when frank d posted his pick 4 ticket. Good race to take a stab. Competitive edge over rated and maybe off form and holy boss, while fast, was going 7 furlongs (and sure enough he flattened out the last furlong)
They bet a horse off a maiden win down to 7/2. Silly and a sign the race was anything but loaded.
If holy boss didn\'t get the 7 furlongs, anybody could win. He didn\'t And they did.
Rob
I\'ll let Boscar and Mathcapper explain what the odds on the Ellis Park horses should be based on the multi payoffs and double will pays. But based on the win odds which one should have paid more?(or what would you guess)? More sharpies in the late pick 4? Or Runhappy was way longer in the stakes pick 4?
Check my math but....
Races 8-11, 41 horses in sequence
$24.60 (11) 7th choice
$5.20 (12) Favorite
$4.00 (8) Favorite
$34.00 (10) 5th choice
Pick 4: $9,500.00 for $2.00
$2 parlay $2,174.64
Races 10-13, 39 horses in sequence
$4.00 (8) Favorite
$34.00 (10) 5th choice
$17.00 (9) 6th choice
$21.40 (12) 6th choice
Pick 4: $6237.00 for $2.00
$2 parlay $6184.60
Thanks paul.
Understand your point.
On your other point, have a feeling u are right and we don\'t see AP again.
No great choices. Train for 9 weeks into a 1 1/4 mile race? Eh. Squeeze another prep into what looked like a tired horse. Double Eh.
Rob
Fairmont,
Your crystal ball does not need cleaning!!!
I had this very conversation with Rocky (mathcapper) YESTERDAY in the back yard about multi race payouts being skewed by 1/2 or less shots either in or out of it.
I\'ll let Rocky answer.
Astute observation, please don\'t make it a tenet!
Frank D.
Late pick 4 paid poorly. (Different point than u are making). With AP beat, now way it should pay parlay.
$17.00 was 7/2 ML
$21.60 was 5-1 ML
That has some impact. But late pick 4 was weak.
Rob
FrankD.
Are you taking a shot at the pick 6 tomorrow?
Fairmont,
I\'m not a pick 6 player. I used to be in a syndicate that pumped a lot into 2 plus day carryovers. We had ups and downs, some issues with who took the IRS hits etc...
I stay with pick 3\'s and 4\'s occasionally 5\'s, the rainbow 6, reasonable amounts.
If I bet into a 3rd day of a carryover be it 2, 3, or 5K I\'m wasting my money against the big boys unless I have a strong opinion in 2 races for a possible single or at least a strong A ticket. I can\'t compete with the guys that put 20K or more into a sequence.
Private Message Belmont 3 if your interested in getting involved in a small piece of a large syndicate. He plays in one that is capped by a very notable TG player.
Frank D.
Boscar Obarra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As Frank D posted just now simultaneously, they be
> the guys with the bulging suitcases.
I will, on occasion, track double probables, and I did so today. The money came in on this horse in waves. Nothing else remotely close to it, the rest of the day. Turned out to be useful information, but that is not always the case. With sizable pools, today, it was not easy to move the chains as much as they did. I did a little redboard due diligence on Maria Borell. She\'s been in the game for twenty years. Worked for Tagg, among others, and also as a vet technician. TG has her for 25 starts, and a 12% win rate. There\'s an interesting back story here, and that\'s simply because it\'s an unusual confluence of variables and circumstances.
All from Bloodhorse article: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/94030/runhappy-romps-to-record-kings-bishop-score
\"We were pretty confident going in,\" Borell remarked. \"He couldn\'t have been training any better and we wouldn\'t have spent the money to come up here if we thought he couldn\'t win. I was a little nervous at the early fractions but I knew he could do it. We really prepared him well at home. I knew he was good, but that was really good.\"
Runhappy, who races without the anti-bleeding medication furosemide, was ridden by Hall of Fame jockey Edgar Prado as part of a 117-pound impost and returned $24.60, $13.80, and $6.70 at odds of 11-1.
\"I don\'t like drugs and I don\'t want to run on Lasix if a horse doesn\'t need it,\" Borell told the Saratoga Special in their Aug. 29 edition. \"Runhappy doesn\'t need it and he\'s run Lasix-free in all of his starts.\"
\"The plan was to break good out of the gate,\" Prado said. \"He was doing everything so easy and I was very confident in him going into the first turn. When he started pricking his ears and looking for competition, that made me feel good. When I asked him on the top of the stretch and he picked it up, I knew we were in good shape.\"
\"I\'m overwhelmed,\" Borell said. \"I knew he was a good horse or we wouldn\'t have bought him up here. I\'m just so lucky to have this opportunity now with this horse. I\'d like to thank James McIngvale and his racing manager Laura Wohlers. He\'s just an amazing horse.\"
_______________________________
McIngvale is a previous Baffert owner who a decade ago or so filed suit against Baffert and bloodstock agents. Google it if you are interested in more details. I believe he owned Wimbledon, a Baffert Derby starter if memory serves.
interesting she\'s been in the game that long--if she\'s the same person who comes up when you google her, she looks like she\'s in her 20s. Was very forthright in what I\'ve read about not using Lasix. anyway, I use another product but the horse did not look like a toss, nor did Limousine Liberal. That doesn\'t explain why the deflated odds relative to the morning line on either of them--and LL was 30-1 on the ML and bet down to 15-1 at post time. Interesting!
I looked her up pre race and found enough info to make this an interesting prop. That\'s the beauty of Living Room Downs.
Post race forensics seem to reveal the owner as a man for whom betting 100k would not be a problem.
ringato3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If holy boss didn\'t get the 7 furlongs, anybody
> could win. He didn\'t And they did.
>
> Rob
Usually, when anybody can win, they don\'t set a stakes record.
Not sure what about my analysis you\'re not trusting. The price, the time , or the result?
This is a very difficult game, especially predicting things. But if you\'re not going to accept what actually happens on the track and at the windows, and prefer to keep to some preconceived notion, you have no shot.
Boxcar,
You made a major assertion which was so unprovable, it is funny. \"The horse was 20-1 by the public and made 10-1 by a select few. Trust me\"
Sorry, a dumb statement.
U and I don\'t know who bet what.
As for the lecture on accepting results vs preconceived opinions, save that lecture for somebody who needs it.
U said it was a \"loaded field\". It wasn\'t. I said that before the race. Said the favorites were very beatable.
I didn\'t have the winner and he ran a hole in the wind. I saw it and respect it. The conspiracy theory bullshit is for losers who need excuses to feel better. I don\'t. I didn\'t have the winner. Period.
Rob
FrankD. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rob,
>
> We must love to disagree but I do respect any
> opinion backed up by a valid argument.
>
> His high Beyer is a 98 earned on a muddy track, a
> horse with a 442 Tomillison on an off track. His
> next highest Beyer for all the toilet paper they
> are worth is a 94 which is 7th fastest of the 11
> starters?
>
> This was a good Old Fashioned put over on a day
> with lots of $$$ in the pool.
> Vini Vedi Vici:
> They came, They took the purse down and a couple
> of empty suitcases went home full. Maria Borell is
> the highest % trainer in the country!
>
> Frank D.
Bet Runhappy -- not with all-out gusto, but I played him. One of the three Twitter guys I\'ll follow virtually-blind on true price horses was all over him. And, yes, I\'ll acknowledge it didn\'t look good, turning for home. But then, the afterburners fired . . . They must have won the world.
I consider myself duly chastised and appreciate the lesson in humility,
I\'ll try to do better.
Boscar
Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I\'ll let Boscar and Mathcapper explain what the
> odds on the Ellis Park horses should be based on
> the multi payoffs and double will pays. But based
> on the win odds which one should have paid
> more?(or what would you guess)? More sharpies in
> the late pick 4? Or Runhappy was way longer in
> the stakes pick 4?
>
> Check my math but....
>
>
> Races 8-11, 41 horses in sequence
>
> $24.60 (11) 7th choice
> $5.20 (12) Favorite
> $4.00 (8) Favorite
> $34.00 (10) 5th choice
>
> Pick 4: $9,500.00 for $2.00
> $2 parlay $2,174.64
>
> Races 10-13, 39 horses in sequence
>
> $4.00 (8) Favorite
> $34.00 (10) 5th choice
> $17.00 (9) 6th choice
> $21.40 (12) 6th choice
>
> Pick 4: $6237.00 for $2.00
> $2 parlay $6184.60
Fair,
Runhappy was 13-1 in the Will Pays, which was pretty much in line with his morning line (12-1) and final odds (11-1). Have to say that based on the 12-1 morning line, I didn't see the so-called "smart money" in play on this horse as has been suggested, unless Eric's line was off and the public really should have had him 20-1 or so as Boscar suspected.
The other Ellis Park horse did get significant play in all the pools. Btw, the all-Ellis exacta ($358) came back right about as expected ($374) based on the two horses' win odds using discounted Harville approach.
As for the Pick 4's, at NYRA tracks they should generally pay around 1.53x the parlay because of the fact that you only get hit with the takeout once.
The stakes sequence (R8-R11) came up much higher than expected (4.37x) as you noted. Some could argue that a lot of players singled AP, which created a big overlay when KI KO'd him from the sequence.
But let's suppose for a moment that Private Zone, Flintshire, and Keen Ice were all bet in the Pick 4 in the same proportion as their win odds. That would imply that Runhappy was 34-1 in the Pick 4. What's more likely is that Runhappy was somewhere between his 13-1 tote odds and the 34-1 implied odds, and that some or all of the other three horses were also slightly underbet in the Pick 4 pool vis-a-vis their win odds.
The late Pick 4 sequence (R10-R13), at $6,185, only paid 1.01x the parlay, which is actually quite a bit less than the 1.53x ($9,440) expected payout. And since this sequence also included the Travers, it\'s unlikely that AP getting knocked out of the sequence was the sole cause of the overlaid earlier Pick 4 payout.
The main cause of the underlaid payout in the late Pick 4 sequence appears to have been some combination of Dacita and Foxhall Drive being bet a little closer to their morning line odds than their final odds (both went off at significantly higher odds than their morning line, as Rob noted).
Rocky R
Mathcapper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fairmount1 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I\'ll let Boscar and Mathcapper explain what the
> > odds on the Ellis Park horses should be based
> on
> > the multi payoffs and double will pays. But
> based
> > on the win odds which one should have paid
> > more?(or what would you guess)? More sharpies
> in
> > the late pick 4? Or Runhappy was way longer in
> > the stakes pick 4?
> >
> > Check my math but....
> >
> >
> > Races 8-11, 41 horses in sequence
> >
> > $24.60 (11) 7th choice
> > $5.20 (12) Favorite
> > $4.00 (8) Favorite
> > $34.00 (10) 5th choice
> >
> > Pick 4: $9,500.00 for $2.00
> > $2 parlay $2,174.64
> >
> > Races 10-13, 39 horses in sequence
> >
> > $4.00 (8) Favorite
> > $34.00 (10) 5th choice
> > $17.00 (9) 6th choice
> > $21.40 (12) 6th choice
> >
> > Pick 4: $6237.00 for $2.00
> > $2 parlay $6184.60
>
> Fair,
>
> Runhappy was 13-1 in the Will Pays, which was
> pretty much in line with his morning line (12-1)
> and final odds (11-1). Have to say that based on
> the 12-1 morning line, I didn't see the so-called
> "smart money" in play on this horse as has been
> suggested, unless Eric's line was off and the
> public really should have had him 20-1 or so as
> Boscar suspected.
>
> The other Ellis Park horse did get significant
> play in all the pools. Btw, the all-Ellis exacta
> ($358) came back right about as expected ($374)
> based on the two horses' win odds using discounted
> Harville approach.
>
> As for the Pick 4's, at NYRA tracks they should
> generally pay around 1.53x the parlay because of
> the fact that you only get hit with the takeout
> once.
>
> The stakes sequence (R8-R11) came up much higher
> than expected (4.37x) as you noted. Some could
> argue that a lot of players singled AP, which
> created a big overlay when KI KO'd him from the
> sequence.
>
> But let's suppose for a moment that Private Zone,
> Flintshire, and Keen Ice were all bet in the Pick
> 4 in the same proportion as their win odds. That
> would imply that Runhappy was 34-1 in the Pick 4.
> What's more likely is that Runhappy was somewhere
> between his 13-1 tote odds and the 34-1 implied
> odds, and that some or all of the other three
> horses were also slightly underbet in the Pick 4
> pool vis-a-vis their win odds.
>
> The late Pick 4 sequence (R10-R13), at $6,185,
> only paid 1.01x the parlay, which is actually
> quite a bit less than the 1.53x ($9,440) expected
> payout. And since this sequence also included the
> Travers, it\'s unlikely that AP getting knocked out
> of the sequence was the sole cause of the overlaid
> earlier Pick 4 payout.
>
> The main cause of the underlaid payout in the late
> Pick 4 sequence appears to have been some
> combination of Dacita and Foxhall Drive being bet
> a little closer to their morning line odds than
> their final odds (both went off at significantly
> higher odds than their morning line, as Rob
> noted).
>
> Rocky R
Will only note that RH was 16-1 until deep into the wagering session . . . suddenly dropped to 12 with a few minutes left, eased slightly to 13, then closed at 11 . . . that was a signficant, concerted late move in my eyes, especially given the size of the day\'s pools.
Thanks Top - I hadn\'t been watching the late action on RH.
I often see significant late moves (as late as the backstretch) on a horse as they converge on their Will Pays-based odds, especially on favorites and major contenders.
When a longer-priced horse\'s odds are a fair amount above its Will Pays-based odds, and then those odds close below the Will Pays-based odds, as this one did, that\'s usually a strong sign that the horse is going to run big today.
Same thing happened a couple of weeks ago with Grand Arch in the ROTW, for reasons that were probably less suspect to TG players. ;-)