Gotham

[bobphilo]

Mike,

Agree absolutely. He just wasn\'t himself after that awkward start. I think he just banged a leg, like or or I might when playing soccer or basketball (at least when we were younger, LOL) and was sore for a few minutes. Not something that would show on X-rays or bone scan, which were negative. Just painfull enough to keep him from extending himself that day.

Bob

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> \"The question which has not been addressed (and
> might not be answered honestly) is how Achilles
> warmed up for Dominquez\"
>  
> Rich,
>
> I agree that the truth may never be known. Ernie
> Pag took the time to address the various comments
> about himself and the performance of AOT.I can
> only say that the performance of AOT was so far
> below this horses ability that it seems logical to
> think that he was not 100% himself yesterday for
> some unknown reason. His trip was ugly but this
> horse is too talented not to even make a run.
>
> As far the gate break et al mentioned by Ernie, it
> just seemed that AOL was totally empty yesterday
> and just threw a clunker.If AOL is really ok, I\'m
> sure we will see him soon.
>
> Mike

To follow up on Achilles effort, lets not forget he broke last and was only beaten 6 lengths. Additionally, he had not faced the caliber of horses before he faced Saturday. The horse that outran him for fourth, finished just in front of him once before as well. With a good break, its quite possible he hits the board, but the numbers I\'m looking at said that Sweetnorthernsaint was as good a horse and if you look real hard at their respective races from January 7th, you just may reach the same conclusion.

The folks here seem distraught he didnt win. I tend to think Ernie P. summarized it pretty well. He ran into trouble and he may have run into horses he can\'t handle easily. We won\'t know that for sure or not until the next round. But, I tend to think two that beat him, hes gonna have big trouble with.

Lastly, we witnessed a clash between two influential people in the industry with the kind of egos that go with influence and success. Good luck to Super Frolic, who in my opinion has a Negative 2 or thereabout in him for 10 marks. He certainly has a good chance.

[NoCarolinaTony]

Dear TG Board:

I\'ve never seen such energy over a horse running a bad race and with such malice.  The energy between Ernie and Jerry aside, lets face it Achillies of Troy is a very nice NY winter stakes horse, one which I would love to own, but it\'s was not the second coming of Smarty Jones. The horse was over hyped. AOT looked great beating non descript black type horses. Remember how bad Birdstone ran in the Turfway Stakes  (Jim Beam Spiral or whatever it is today)race prior to the Derby? Horses throw bad races every now and then for many many reason. Most of you should know it by now. This is not a case of Marty Wygod vanning the horse off track late at night to get scanned before the SA Derby. Now that was unscrupulous. Looking at the most recent workouts for AOT, they were on the slow side,perhaps indicating the horse may not be on the top of his game. The horse threw a cluncker. Get over it.

I hope the horse is ok and will be able to comptete at Graded stakes level.

Good luck to Jerry and Super Frolic in Dubai. Hope you like the food.

NC Tony

[bobphilo]

I woudn\'t consider a horse who consistently ran the highest figures at the distance in the field while winning by 15 and 5 lengths geared down to be over-hyped. I don\'t care if he beat a pack of mules, those were solid races. The only other Derby contenders I\'d place above him are Lawyer Ron and Brother David. Keyed Entry was favored over him in the Gotham at his own home track based on one race. That doesn\'t sound like an over-hyped horse to me.
I don\'t know how people can hold a race where he had to be vanned off after banging his leg up leaving the gate against him. Watch the replay and you\'ll see he was striding like a hurting horse every time he tried to extend himself.
I knew this was a top horse before the so-called hype began and will be formidable in the Wood, though Sweetnorthernsaint and Keyed Entry will be a stern test.

Bob

[NoCarolinaTony]

Bob,

You and I will never agree on the color of the sky.

If you really read my post, I said the horse threw a bad race for whatever reason. But I also said the horse was over hyped and thus over bet. he has yet to beat anything of quality. Once  (if) he wins a graded race, I\'ll reconsider. Until then, he\'s a nice horse that needs to be spotted well. The jury is out in my book.

NCT

[bobphilo]

LOL Tony. At least not initially, but we often come to a comprimise because we understand that the point is not winning a debate but getting at the truth. We make better philosophers than lawyers, but that\'s a very good thing.

Bob

[SoCalMan2]

Dear Congaree1,

While I freely admit that I could benefit from smartening up (I am obviously already \"smarting\" as you put it), I do not think my play on AOT is an example of where I need to improve my game.  

I am a very serious sheetplayer and usually am looking for ways to beat heavy chalk.  When TGJB invited me to do the ROTW for the General George last year, I very strongly picked an 8-1 ML horse and advocated throwing out the horse that ended up being the favorite (and winner).  Of course, I did not cash anything, but that is besides the point (I suspect Unforgettable Max did put forth a much better effort that his finish demonstrated).  If you search my prior posts on this website, you will see my style of play and sheet analysis. I am not what you would call a heavy chalk player.  I have to be honest, the innuendo in your message that I am somehow unaware of how to play this game is insulting. TGJB invited me to do a ROTW analysis because he was impressed with my sophisticated comparative sheet analysis of Musique Toujours under Thorograph versus Ragozin.  I like to believe that my ROTW analysis and posts on this site are a sign of erudition rather than idiocy, but who knows -- sadly it is a debatable point.

My view of the Gotham was very similar to the Thorograph ROTW analysis.  I thought AOT was very likely to run a zero or better, plus I thought he was likely to get the best trip of anybody (I thought he would get to the rail and sit tight behind a strong pace around the first turn and that Dominguez would be able to pick a good spot to make a move later in the race).  I thought there was a chance that KE might not fire for a number of reasons (more than are listed in the ROTW analysis), and I thought SNS might get a bad trip from the outside post.  I thought there were a lot of horses (e.g. Like Now) who could get into the super and make a nice super payout.  3-2 on AOT was not terrible appetizing, but the superfecta presented what I thought was an interesting opportunity.  By singling AOT in the top spot, I was shooting to win money which included all the money in the pool from people who put AOT in lesser positions (people tend to over play low price horses in lesser positions in big exotics like the super (or play boxes when a sophisticated key or wheel may make more sense) and that makes the prices, when the heavy favorite comes out on top, better than they should be normally).  Also, while I was including KE and SNS, I was not keying them and there would be a lot of money out there if either or both of them ran out of the super.  I played the super with AOT keyed in the first position and various combinations underneath including the horses that did run 1,2,and 3.  Although my ticket was expensive, it would have paid significantly more than the 3-2 win bet if AOT had run first over Like Now and SNS and KE.  Also, I had the chance at a really significant score if box cars like Like Now filled out the rest of the Super.  In general, it was a play I have done a lot and have had success with.  While my Sweet Catomine play was significantly more complex and diverse, the same type of reasoning went into it.  

When confronted with a heavy favorite, in my view, there are only two ways for a race to be playable -- keying the favorite in first and trying to make some money against other played horses underneath or else throwing out the favorite entirely.  I think that the crowd overbets heavy favorites in lesser positions and it is senseless to bet them to come in second or third.  Of course, I prefer to throw out favorites entirely, but that is not always prudent (and I did not think would be prudent with AOT).  Often these races can come up like passes, but I decided to take a chance on the Gotham which brings me to your main point.

I am very well aware of what gambling is and well aware that anytime I make a bet there are a host of reasons I might lose.  I have written extensively about this.  I do not curse fate becasue my horse had a bad break, a bad trip, or took a bad step.  That happens all the time and that is why it is gambling.  The point of my earlier message was that there have been posts suggesting that AOT should not have been entered in the Gotham and many people were aware of this (see e.g. John T Chance\'s post above).  While I think it is fair for the horseplayer to bear all sorts of risks, I think it is important that everybody have equal information when they are evaluating what to do.  What I think is unfair is if some of the people I am competing against are able to unfairly get information that I am denied access to.  

So, I felt like a chump not because I lost playing heavy chalk but because many of the people I was betting against had better information than me before the race.  I said I felt like a chump, not a nimrod.

SCM2

[marcus]

Had AOT been well , a new top or pair probably was  next - he did manage to maintain the level he established at 2 yo , maybe he does it again at 3 yo . I didn\'t like prices for either horse in the Gothem . Your handicapping and wagering strategies have demonstated success and common sense and although I\'m no chalk player , I can still say this  - one should try ( if possible ) to hook them up if the play is warrented in order to get some value   .  Who\'s that guy think he\'s kidding ? ...  

[basket777]

sorry  but this one was on the side of caution.  you have a horse that ran a 8 point top in a span of 5 months. in fact it was a - 0 which on a young 3 year old is enough. then a small regress. on top of that a trainer change (from one who had been suspect warm) in a race with a few horse who look like there going forward. You get what matbe 8/5 in what 10/11 horse race?  sorry  thats not what using the sheets is all about.  write what you want but that is not a good long term play

[SoCalMan2]

Dear Basket777

Fair point.  I also appreciate you making arguments rather than just saying I am stupid.  While I understand what you are saying, I still believe my play is a case of what using the sheets is about. One of the beautiful things about horseracing is that reasonable minds can genuinely differ.

Here is what my thinking was --

First, you cannot really say whether the \"0.25 h?\" was a regression due to (a) the \"h?\" and (b) the fact AOT a young 3 yo.  If there is ever a time you are saving a horse for a later race it is now.  

Second, these are top 3 year olds.  Sure horses bounce, but high quality three year olds early in the season are much less prone to bouncing to many other times of year and circumstances.  

Third, I did not think the numbers he had ran were so beyond the pale huge that a bounce was inevitable....he is a horse that has never reacted (or only had just reacted to the negative number by a fraction of a point if you disagree with my reasoning under my first point).  At seminars, Len Friedman use to always say he does not give a horse a reaction until the horse gives you one first.  In my book, AOT had never given a reaction.  On a horse like AOT it was hard to really say what a baseline is for judging when a jump up is just too much. If you ascribe to your theory, you have to throw out Like Now.  He had reacted to an \"11\" as a 2 yo and was coming off a \"2\" just a few months later.  I am not saying that Like Now was a throw out, I am just saying that these sorts of horses run their numbers a lot and it is not a good time to be applying normal bounce theories (although i was doing exactly that with Keyed Entry....although in my view the circumstances with KE were different...also I did not throw him out...i just made sure that he would not ruin an otherwise good ticket if he came in the super with a nice price horse).

Fourth, my play was not 8-5.  I did not bet him to win.  I bet superfectas trying to get a better effective price because the sheets told me that some good prices could come in underneath (and some short horses might not run). If you do some research, you can find that you can get some very nice supers with 8-5 shots on top as long as the field is large and you have some big price horses coming in underneath.

Fifth, normally, the trainer change would give me pause, but with this particular owner and this particular trainer, how do you know what to make of it?  I just assumed it was par for the course drama with them and whoever the trainer is would be irrelevant. I think I recall reading somewhere that Amonte (or Paragallo) had basically been the trainer since December anyway.

Sixth, while passing the race may have been the best call, I think a player (who had no reason to think that AOT\'s foot was warm or that the exercise rider had said he was not himself on the Friday) who wants to make a play has to take a position on AOT.  Either he runs his race and wins easy over these or he runs out.  I was certainly not comfortable with throwing him out.  I was tempted to pass, but thought there was a very good chance that the Super with him on top could pay well.


Look, the results are what the results are, I lost.  If he was not already injured before the race, I lost fair and square and I have no beef with that.  It happens all the time, and my bet assumes it would lose more than two thirds of the time anyway.  I do not think it is fair to say that a person is not using the sheets correctly if they use a heavily favored horse in the first position.  I think the sheets are about looking for value and I think that this sort of play does tend to produce value.  If you and others disagree, then that is fine.  It just means the inefficiences that I seek to take advantage of will not be corrected by the marketplace.  In any event, I do appreciate that your comments were in a reasoned form, and I believe that this is something on which reasonable minds can differ.

SCM2

[richiebee]

Basket:
 
      I respectfully question your analysis. The sheets clearly made the 3 horses who were bet ... Achilles, SNS and Keyed Entry as fastest. The winner was arguably fourth fastest and you can thus say a big price at >30/1.

      You mention a 10 horse field, but even if the top 4 went backwards, none of the other 6 could move forward enough to threaten them. I think the chart of the race proves this. Its not like it was a 10 horse field where 6 or 7 of them stood a fair chance to win.

      I read no analysis on this board or in the press that didn\'t point out the abundance of speed in the race; as it turned out, Like Now was given an Inner Dirt EZ Pass. I don\'t think there was anything in the Sheets that gave one the knowledge that LN would get a clear top under a snug hold; that was really the knowledge that was necessary to have the winner of the Gotham.

      My analysis of the race after looking over TGs and Form was that the 3 favorites looked clearly fastest. I went to Keyed Entry (knowing well that KE didn\'t need the graded earnings as much as others and a rating lesson was possible). I preferred Team Pletcher to Team Paraneck (kind of like comparing the dominant Yankee teams to the Bad News Bears).

      The effects of the \"bomb\" were compounded by fallout 20 minutes later when Crop Buster ($23) took the finale, as I had CB with KE in doubles, P3s and P4s. Ouch.

[BitPlayer]

In enjoyed your responses to both Congaree and Basket.  Good handicappers explaining why they did what they did, even when it didn\'t pan out, is always good food for thought.

I\'m curious about your statement that favorites tend to get overplayed underneath in exotics.  Have you seen data to that effect, or is that your own observation?  I\'ve often wondered whether there are betting patterns in tris and supers that might offer value.

Respectfully,

BitPlayer

[basket777]

sorry i have been using the sheets since King T taught me as a youngster in the MD curcit. He always said the past fastest horse is a starting point in a race. however in betting horses you don\'t look for the past you look who will be the fastest in the race your betting. I agree that looking at the sheet numbers the 3 horses you mentioned had the lowest number for past races. great womnderful fantastic. that was a tuff one. but as i was taught that was yesterday. today is about profit. which horse at what odds had the best chance to win a profit. a top top 8 point move horse which regressed a tint bit is not what anyone would call a value play.  It was a fun day spent my 120 for the whole set of sheets. made 18 bets the entire day. One was the gothman winner. opps along with perkins in the pick 4. of which one might recall paid 12,000 and change. looking for to next sat and buying all the sheets buying one 1000 voucher and seeing what i can. what a country.

[basket777]

will there be any for the card?

[basket777]

you do write well     glad to have your thoughts all for the greater good of winning