That's quite a horse that won today

[smithkent]

Even after California Chrome convincingly put away the field, there are still doubters.  I mean, that performance gave me the shivers, same as when Barbaro won.

I respect all the knowledgeable folks here, but that horse was clearly the class today.  So much of the discussions on this forum in the past week were attempts to explain why CC couldn\'t or shouldn\'t win.  He DECIMATED the field when they made the turn

All the doubts about his numbers being valid, his breeding being suspect, his ability to cope with the different track at Churchill, only facing California opponents,  his trainer and owners being outsiders, his workouts this week looking poor...

He answered them all, definitively

I think folks here can\'t accept great horses from the west.  If CC started his career in Florida or New York, it would be OK.  but from California, no sir.

Sometimes the answer is sitting in front of your face, and it\'s the hardest thing to see.  If you watched CC in his last few months, you can\'t see he is the real deal.  On to Baltimore

[jp702006]

Agree! Lets hope he comes out of the race well and has another good one left in the tank.

[Rick B.]

smithkent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think folks here can\'t accept great horses from
> the west.  If CC started his career in Florida or
> New York, it would be OK.  but from California, no
> sir.

He damn well better win The Preakness, what with that
kind of snark salvo fired across the bow.

You DO know that CC is only the 4th Cal-bred to win
the Derby, right? Compared to what, darn near every
other year where we have to listen to endless prattle
all spring about \"the Next Big Horse\" bred in Cali?

The suspicion was well-deserved, IMO. Deal with it.

[TreadHead]

Well, that\'s what makes racing great I guess.  People can feel they got the race \"right\" for tabing a $7 winner, while other people can feel they got the race \"right\" for tabing a $31 place horse and likely making a lot more money than folks who used the winner.  They can keep the satisfaction of picking the winner, I\'m better with the satisfaction of making more money.

[moosepalm]

TreadHead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, that\'s what makes racing great I guess.
> People can feel they got the race \"right\" for
> tabing a $7 winner, while other people can feel
> they got the race \"right\" for tabing a $31 place
> horse and likely making a lot more money than
> folks who used the winner.  They can keep the
> satisfaction of picking the winner, I\'m better
> with the satisfaction of making more money.

How about the satisfaction of cashing a $340 exacta, which I can only wish I was feeling now?  Why does a horse get dismissed outright for value purposes for being 5-2?  Is it written somewhere that the only way you can bet him is to win?  He topped a super that contained the second and third favorites, and the horse that the guy who runs this outfit was absolutely gushing about, and it paid over $7K.  If you flat out didn\'t like the horse at any price, that\'s one thing, but if you didn\'t like him simply because he was 5-2 in a race like the Derby which meant you didn\'t see the value, then check out what\'s been done on other occasions with a short priced horse on top.

And congrats to Miff, whom I\'ve disagreed with, and whose balls I\'ve probably busted over the years, but he\'s forgotten more about this game than I\'ll ever know.  He stood in there with a horse that may have been 5-2 on the tote, but would have been no better than 10-1 on this board.  Same for Jimbo.

[TreadHead]

I disliked him for more than just the odds, but that\'s not the point.  It\'s ridiculous to think that people need to feel less satisfied just because they didn\'t like the winner of a race.  If I can get $31 place prices, I dont care if I ever pick another winner in my entire life.

Backers of either can feel good about the race.  Heck, show bettors of Danza can feel good about the race if that is the only wager they made.  It\'s not a contest to see who should feel better, multiple people can feel good for multiple reasons.

[moosepalm]

TreadHead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I disliked him for more than just the odds, but
> that\'s not the point.  It\'s ridiculous to think
> that people need to feel less satisfied just
> because they didn\'t like the winner of a race.  If
> I can get $31 place prices, I dont care if I ever
> pick another winner in my entire life.
>
> Backers of either can feel good about the race.
> Heck, show bettors of Danza can feel good about
> the race if that is the only wager they made.
> It\'s not a contest to see who should feel better,
> multiple people can feel good for multiple
> reasons.

I get that, but let\'s be clear.  I was responding to your comment that \"people can feel they got the race \"right\" for tabbing a $7 winner, while other people can feel they got the race \"right\" for tabbing a $31 place horse and making a lot more money than folks who used the winner.\"  My point was that it\'s not that simple, and in fact, pretty myopic if you think that liking a $7 horse is going to limit your return to seven dollars on every two that you bet.  I\'m glad you had a score and feel good about it, but there were some people who loved CC and absolutely killed it yesterday, so I don\'t think sweeping generalizations are warranted.  As you say, it\'s not about feeling \"right,\" it\'s about wallet scoreboard.  More often than I\'d like to remember, I\'ve turned 10-1 horses that I absolutely loved into 2-1 payouts because I didn\'t know what to do with them.

[P-Dub]

moosepalm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TreadHead Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I disliked him for more than just the odds, but
> > that\'s not the point.  It\'s ridiculous to think
> > that people need to feel less satisfied just
> > because they didn\'t like the winner of a race.
> If
> > I can get $31 place prices, I dont care if I
> ever
> > pick another winner in my entire life.
> >
> > Backers of either can feel good about the race.
>
> > Heck, show bettors of Danza can feel good about
> > the race if that is the only wager they made.
> > It\'s not a contest to see who should feel
> better,
> > multiple people can feel good for multiple
> > reasons.
>
> I get that, but let\'s be clear.  I was responding
> to your comment that \"people can feel they got the
> race \"right\" for tabbing a $7 winner, while other
> people can feel they got the race \"right\" for
> tabbing a $31 place horse and making a lot more
> money than folks who used the winner.\"  My point
> was that it\'s not that simple, and in fact, pretty
> myopic if you think that liking a $7 horse is
> going to limit your return to seven dollars on
> every two that you bet.  I\'m glad you had a score
> and feel good about it, but there were some people
> who loved CC and absolutely killed it yesterday,
> so I don\'t think sweeping generalizations are
> warranted.  As you say, it\'s not about feeling
> \"right,\" it\'s about wallet scoreboard.  More often
> than I\'d like to remember, I\'ve turned 10-1 horses
> that I absolutely loved into 2-1 payouts because I
> didn\'t know what to do with them.


Couldn\'t have said it any better.

I have 2 friends that crushed the race. They hit the ex/tri/super several times. They bet large amounts consistently, and aren\'t amateurs or whatever other type of player a guy like sekrah wants to label them.

These guys had an opinion, backed it with their money, and found value in the race. I\'ve never found much value in a losing ticket, despite what some people said about those that played California Chrome.

There was more than one way to hit this race, and more than one horse to key on. Congrats to Treadhead for his score, and others that cashed.