Crist Blog | May 05, 2008
Afternumbers
Life goes on:
--Big Brown received a Beyer Speed Figure of 109 winning the Kentucky Derby, which means that runner-up Eight Belles (beaten 4 3/4 lengths) received a 102 and third-place Denis of Cork (beaten 8 1/4) got a 97. The chart below shows how those stack up with the other Derby 1-2-3- finishers of this decade:
It was a slightly tricky figure to make because there was a strong headwind that horses had to race into twice in two-turn races, and the Derby horses did so for 3/16ths of a mile longer than the horses in the day's two other dirt routes, both at a mile and a sixteenth. Those who like to see speed figures adjusted for ground loss will further upgrade Big Brown's performance since he was wide on both turns. Big Brown fans will also point out that he did all this with seemingly disdainful ease in just his fourth career start.
--The decline in this year's Derby betting -- 3.2 percent on the main event and 2 percent on the overall Derby Day card -- involved a number of factors: the lack of signal and/or wagering through some account-wagering companies (though there were similar issues last year), a decline from 30 to 22 in the number of starters in the three stakes preceding the Derby -- and a single late scratch in the 11th race. As the chart two posts down illustrates, betting was up as much as 16 percent year-over-year early in the card, then began to slip on the three short-field stakes, and then fell off dramatically in the 11th race before rebounding in the finale. In the 11th, the late scratch of second choice Solemn Promise prompted massive refunds, causing year-over-year declines of 25 to 45 percent in the intrarace (exacta, tri and super) pools.
Also, nearly a third of the gross full-card decline was due to a drop in pick-six betting from $1.42 million to just over $676,000, probably a function of there having been a $300k carryover last year and none this year.
--Speaking of pick-sixes:
*That $676k invested on the Derby Day pick-6 did not include a correct 6-of-6 combination, so there's a $410,599 carryover when racing at Churchill resumes Wednesday. The lineup:
Race 4: 3+F AlwC/OC100k 6f (field of 7)
Race 5: 2yo MdSpWt (8, including 6 firsters)
Race 6: 3+F Clm50k 1 1/16m-Turf (8)
Race 7: 3+F Clm10k N2L 6f (10)
Race 8: 3+F Alw N2x 1m-Turf (7)
Race 9: 3+M MdClm15k 6f (12+4 AE's)
That full field of maiden claimers in the finale will be the decider of two big carryovers -- there's also $331,928 in the Super High Five pool, which went unhit on the Derby.
*Belmont's Sunday card included $23.40, $54.50 and $22.80 winners in the pick-six sequence, so there's a $48,557 carryover into Wednesday.
*At Hollywood Sunday, a $387,386 carryover attracted an additional $1,57 million and one heavy investor took it down for $1,262,507 on a $24,192 ticket purchased at Santa Anita. After withholding, the poor whale only got about 38-to-1 on his money -- or less, if that was only his main ticket. Or maybe just a backup.
--Z Humor scored a mild upset winning the Longest of the Long honor at the mutuel windows, going off as the biggest price in the field:
63.60-1 Z Humor (14th)
53.90-1 Anak Nakal (7th)
49.00-1 Recapture the Glory (5th)
If there had been trifecta betting on this curiosity, the payoff would be inflated due to the absence of Big Truck, the lone 50-1 shot on the morning line and a seeming cinch to be one of the three longest shots. Instead, the 18th-place finisher inexplicably went off at only 28.60-1, the 10th rather than 20th choice. The best theory I've heard is that some julep-swilling patrons got their Bigs mixed up and thought they were betting on Big Brown and not Big Truck.
Posted by Steven Crist May 5, 2008 11:22:39 PM | Permalink
Keywords:
Comments
wayne_c says:
"This is an example where the Beyer doesn't properly justify or measure the level of performance......."
Silver Charm,
No sophisticated handicapper looks at Beyer figures and stops his analysis there.
Beyer himself has devoted an entire book to trip handicapping and relating trips to figures.
Every experienced handicapper that uses Beyer figures knows that BB's effort was better than it looks because he lost so much groud. What they might disagree wih is objectively adding 7 lengths to his figure because of that ground loss.
Many handicappers believe that not all ground loss is the same.
If the front runners kill themselves in a duel and an outside closer loafs up to them while wide, that is a lot different than if they went slow early and he is straining to keep up with them on the turn while wide because the pace is just starting to pick up.
In addition, some turns are tighter than others or banked differently. Sometimes the inside paths are not as fast as the outside paths or vice versa.
IMO, it is easier to think of the trip as a seperate component of the performance than to try to combine it into 1 figure.
IMO, the outside paths were not a huge disadvantage on Derby day. The rail was not "dead" per se, but lots of horses were rallying wide on the turn and doing just fine. So if you ask me, BB's performance was better than his Beyer, but not nearly a full 7 lengths better because of the ground loss.
Posted by Wayne C May 8, 2008 12:22:17 PM
steven_crist says:
so_close_today,
Sorry, I never looked at willpays or whther they were available. Nice handicapping to use Adrhythm($20.80) and appellate ($29.00) to get that far, and three consos at $3065 apiece beats a poke in the ey with a sharp stick.
steve_v,
My "theory" isn't a matter of saving "some $" but to make an otherwise completely unaffordable play affordable by reducing the cost by a factor of 10 or more. Additionally, it allows you to go deeper than your maximum of four horses per race, which I would guess is why you "haven't been very successful." My experience has been that pick-six scores are made when you can go deeper than four in one or two spots, and the only cost-effective way to do that is by playing multiple tickets that open you up to those horses if you're right elsewhere. The problem with caveman tickets is that you're valuing every horse on your ticket equally and rooting for the longest shot you used in every race rather than recognizing that some horses you use are much likelier winners than others and leveraging that knowledge.
Posted by steven_crist May 8, 2008 1:41:18 AM
steve_v says:
Hey Steve C.,
Is there a simple answer to this question: Why do you feel that playing Pk 6's w/ your A B C theory is clearly the way to play the bet. I am kinda new to playing them, and I love them. But, I would hate it if I had all the selections to a big score but didn't put them together on one single ticket to hit the bet. I'm sure you get this question a lot, but I haven't figured out the answer to it, other than it will save you some $ on your multiple plays. I usually play a "caveman" ticket where I try to find atleast 1 single and use between 2 and 4 horses in the other legs. I haven't been very successful, although I've been very close to some big scores- Please let me know your thoughts.
BTW, I think we are going to the True North w/ Bustin Stones on the undercard in what should shape up to be one hell of a Belmont Day.
Posted by Steve V. May 7, 2008 10:04:32 PM
utah1100 says:
Keeneland, an unimportant 4 week meet.....If this is the stuff that gets through, I would pay to read the stuff you filter out..Also, listen up you braindead freaks, Cosmic will spoil Big Brown's shot at glory on the Big Sandy......
Posted by utah1100 May 7, 2008 10:00:20 PM
so_close_today says:
Steve -
By any chance do you know what the will pays were to number 2, 7 and 11 at Churchill on Wednesday. I was live to those and the 6 came in and paid 1.1 million. HRTV, Churchill Downs web site and my online betting service gave no information.
Posted by so close today May 7, 2008 8:21:31 PM
john_strongosky says:
Couldn't agree more with arcstats comments...Not to take anything away from Dutrow but how many times has he been suspended in NY?A friend of mine who owned cheap claimers ,when i asked him what does a trainer actually do, his reply was set the training regime check horses soundness, feed regiment,and most importantly find a good Vet and Chemist.
The Demoted Private John
Posted by John Strongosky May 7, 2008 10:38:00 AM
andyscoggin says:
hay_oats,
Good point about the winning percentages for a Lukas or a Mott! The high percentage trainers have always happened but they tended to disappear...
I owned a horse at Philly, and he won a race for us. He got claimed away and then claimed again. On the second claim, the horse suddenly started to climb the ladder while winning 4 or 5 races in a row in a very short period of time! On the next claim, the new trainer had to put the horse down because he was in such bad condition! Did that winning trainer (Keith Labarron) know something we didn't know, of course not!
Posted by AndyScoggin May 7, 2008 9:40:59 AM
arazi says:
don_reed,
"Kudos to Todd, who now has run the Dead-Last Derby horse three years running .."
Interesting insight.... If there was a bet to pick a horse to finish last, I would've been the winner as I bet Monba to win the derby. That finishing last hedge bet would've paid much much more than my primary bet ** sigh **
Posted by Arazi May 7, 2008 7:31:38 AM
arazi says:
RE: greg, cayman01
There're horses who have pre-cushion track dirt experience but then there are some who never ran on the dirt. Also, there are California trainers (Richard Mandella, John Sherrifs etc) and then trainers with multi-state operation (Todd Pletcher, Bobby Frankel).
Trainers like Todd and Bobby has the great advantage of moving around their horses. So it would be unfair to label their horses as California-based horses such as Giant Gizmo or Ginger Punch who ran primarily in NY last year - that's just my opinion.
What I find intriguing is how, in the future, full-time California-based horses will perform, especially in the route race. It's still to be seen as how SA Oaks will be looked at if it fail to produce a winner in next five runnings of Kentucky Oaks or SA Derby winner not winning the Kentucky Derby during the same period of time. Along the same lines, some other major and historical dirt stakes races of great stature I can list are Travers, Haskell, Alabama, JC Gold Cup, Whitney, Test and many others. In the past, California horses always shipped out to the east and won many of these prestigious races, how often will that happen now? We'll just have to wait and see.
It may sound like I'm east coast biased but it's actually the other way around. I only started playing NY circuit three years ago. Before that, CA circuit was MY circuit. It saddened me to witness the demise of racing in California over the years and I believe state-mandated artificial surfaces is not an answer because it will, in the long run, bring the quality down. I remember Bob Baffert in the late 1990s saying about east and west coast horses:
"They have the quantity, we have the quality".
Guess it has changed now. It's still hard for me to figure out why CA dirt tracks couldn't be made safer like Belmont, CD or Saratoga? Is the track science different in CA than other states? If so many other major tracks can provide a safe running surface, why California tracks couldn't?
Posted by Arazi May 7, 2008 6:59:23 AM
reinier says:
Funny Cide faced tougher fields. You can't look at the fields Big Brown is facing and think...oh he is much better than Funny Cide was at his peak. Beating Eight Belles and Denis of Cork is very different than having Empire Maker breathing down your neck. Big Brown only looks good because no one else is this year.
Posted by Reinier May 7, 2008 4:45:47 AM
daniel_fink says:
Though it ought to be obvious to any handicapper beyond the novice, who witnesses the fluctuation of individual horses' speed figures on a daily basis, I am still amazed that the overwhelming majority of horseplayers allow figures, however they come by them, to represent a horse's objective ability rather than objectively represent the trip he encountered.
When such players do begin to subjectively interpret the figures, they never get beyond gross oversimplifications. There are enough challenging and fascinating aspects of a horse's trip regarding pace, position on the track, competitor's ability and running styles, etc., without ever having to resort to explaining variations in performance on 'polytrack vs. dirt", etc.
And these aspects are so much more subtle than the commonly understood notions of pace and position on the track. After years of practice, with much more to still learn, I've realized the starting point is to accept that something beneficial happened for a horse to earn a larger figure than one who didn't.
For example, Big Brown earned a pair of 106 Beyer's most recently. Were the performances identical? Assuming, for starters, that the runnerups in both races had trips reflecting their final figure, Smooth Air (98) had a much better trip (near rail to midway far turn, with Big Brown doing enough early vs Nistle's Crunch to ALLOW Smooth Air to close in) than Heaven's Awesome (low 80's) when he faced Big Brown on March 5th. Thus, Big Brown actually overcame a bit more difficulty earning his most recent 106 figure. Of course, it is in approaching more than one of a horse's recent races in similar fashion that one confirms his initial judgement of a horse's trip.
The best horseplayer I ever encountered in print is Andy Beyer's "Charlie", mentioned in Beyer's "My $50,000 Year..." and "The Winning Horseplayer". As I frustratingly tried to convert analytical data into a visual impression, I began to sense that Beyer's description of "Charlie", that he could immediately grasp the significance of all the subtleties of trips in one minute and ten seconds with only visual tools, was largely embellished. Whether or not, for me the principal is beyond questioning. Horses' figures are determined by what occurs with every stride of every race. Relying on generalizations cannot truly explain a horse's performance with any detail and confidence.
Posted by Daniel Fink May 7, 2008 2:11:12 AM
george_quinn says:
Giant Moon entering the Preakness? He could not beat me if I broke in a tangle. It is turning into a country fair versus Big Brown. I mean Giant Moon? Really? The same Giant Moon that I saw race in New York? That Giant Moon trying the Preakness? I gotta find another sport.
George in Lexington Ky.
Posted by george quinn May 6, 2008 11:22:31 PM
george_quinn says:
Frank Stronach getting clobbered finanacially! I made 75k last year working two jobs, I will trade with him.
George in Lexington Ky.
OH trading with him means I have to be FRANK STRONACH? I pass.
Posted by george quinn May 6, 2008 11:14:05 PM
zarpo says:
For those who were wondering where Flip is the last couple of days. I saw him before the derby and he said win or lose he would not be posting for awhile. So he did not dissappear because CV lost.
Posted by zarpo May 6, 2008 10:42:31 PM
greg says:
Arazi,
I don't think it's fair to assume that at all. Just this spring, Gayego, Tiago, Monterrey Jazz, Giant Gizmo, Intangaroo, and Behindatthebar have shipped out of Cali to win Graded Stakes. I'm sure there are several other examples that I am missing.
Just because Colonel John didn't run well in the Derby doesn't mean that an entire region of racing should be downgraded. Besides, the Kentucky Derby is such a unique situation (20 horses, first try at 10f for 3yos) that I don't think it's fair to draw any conclusions about synthetic surfaces from that race. And I think the performance of Cali horses elsewhere this spring should speak for itself.
Greg (not the same Greg from the Denis of Cork post above).
Posted by Greg May 6, 2008 10:23:44 PM
hay_oats_water says:
arcstats got it right. the vets train these horses today. performance enhancing drugs have ruined human sports. if you believe that to be true, how can it not be the same for horse racing??? lukas at the peak of his career was 17-18% trainer. that stat is much lower than the top "trainers" today.
Posted by hay oats water May 6, 2008 9:38:17 PM
don_reed says:
And in other news...
Frank Stronach's lost another $40M (projected 2008 loss: $160M, on top of an already $-520M).
And what's worse, the public's moribund interest in a three-horse 2008 Preakness could result in a $650,000 race handle on May 17th at Pimlico.
We could pay for a brand-new Gulfstream Park, in part, by holding a national lottery.
A per-person $20 entry fee could fund it.
The winner will be awarded the privilege of pushing the plunger - at a considerable distance from the then-ignited dynamite that will take down the worst race track ever constructed.
If there's a Hall of Fame for Florida real estate white elephants, GP's a lock on the first ballot.
However, the debate will continue. Did Frank do a worse job of it than the immortal Joe Smoot?
Joe was primarily responsible for $4.5 million (in 1952-53 dollars) spent on a new Las Vegas race track, which then ran for a total of 13 dates before going bankrupt (nice article by Rob Miech, 04/29/08; recently featured in Equidaily).
(If anyone has an inflation-index handy, it would be appreciated if that 1952-53 sum can be converted into 2008 dollars. Thanks.)
Where's Flip? Hey, go easy. We all back losers (Court Vision was also one of my Smoot-Braille picks).
I predict that before long, he'll be back, with his intrepid Preakness and Belmont Stakes selections.
My theory is that he's really That Wonder From England, "Muttonchops."
(But my secret apprehension is that he's really Bob Neumeier.)
Kudos to Todd, who now has run the Dead-Last Derby horse three years running (can the racing writers vote for a Reverse Eclipse Award?).
If there's a logical reason for this, it's got to be in another universe, where Frank's currently lining up financing for his new race track in Newfoundland.
Posted by Don Reed May 6, 2008 8:56:16 PM
silver_charm says:
This was not an easy win but a very professional win. Something that a horse with only three starts in a 20 horse field was a concern for some handicappers. I was one and he put those to rest.
This is a "really good horse".
This is an example where the Beyer doesn't properly justify or measure the level of performance.......
Posted by Silver Charm May 6, 2008 8:13:59 PM
jcp says:
Phila Inquirer today points out in an
editorial that Turfway fatalities went from 24 to 3 on artificial surface and California fatalities are down 50%...we might need more than one year of history, but how much longer do we (especially owners) have to wait before everybody switches over?
Posted by jcp May 6, 2008 7:43:20 PM
larry_thiel says:
There was a lot moaning before the derby about not knowing how polytrack performance would translate to the dirt. But I don't think it's such a bad thing.
I have no idea how to bet on polytrack races.
I'm losing my ass on polytrack races.
But I think it's a great time to be a horse player.
Because somebody's going to figure it out.
And whoever gets there first is going to make a fortune.
Posted by Larry Thiel May 6, 2008 6:21:14 PM
cayman01 says:
Arazi,
You must be kidding. In the last six weeks the following horse have come East and won stakes on dirt:
Intangaroo
Monterrey Jazz
Gayego (3rd and 4th horses
were Cali)
Sierra Sunset
Zenyatta
Tiago (w/ Heatseeker 2nd)
How many horses have gone west and won? Zippo.
Remember, it was not the choice of the tracks to change to synthetic surfaces.
It was mandated by government.
They have no choice.
I'll put it to you that the horses out west are getting a better foundation and more stamina running on the cushion tracks and that's why they are doing well when coming East.
As for the Derby, so what! Colonel John got boxed around at the break, Gayego got squeezed in the first couple furlongs and there's speculation he wasn't right anyway because he didn't train much the few days before the race. And Bob Black Jack proved he's good for about a mile. It's only one race.
Posted by cayman01 May 6, 2008 6:13:22 PM
mlnj says:
Keeneland runs six weeks a year with 31 dates, I think. Suggesting that it is an unimportant meet is absurd. During those six weeks when it runs it is the premier meet in the US.
Posted by ml/nj May 6, 2008 5:53:29 PM
houstontris says:
Steve,
Was in Vegas Saturday. "Entire Strip" was down for betting until Race 5 at CD. Don't know the accuracy of the rumor, but Imperial Palace was out until Race 5.
Posted by Houstontris May 6, 2008 5:13:56 PM
george_quinn says:
Steve, Are you with me in saying the under over wager that Churchill continues to tout is quite possibly the worst thing you have ever seen other than the infamous show cop rock? One bet usually pays 2-5 and the other around 1-1, then if you catch it right on the number you can get upwards of 5 or 6 to one! What is happening to our world with this lunacy?
George in Lexington Ky.
P.S My guess is Churchill is way to top heavy with administration, one to many meetings I think.
Posted by george quinn May 6, 2008 4:47:50 PM
unitas says:
I can envision Pimlico suspending show wagering if there are fewer than seven betting interests entered in the Preakness( they do not want a minus show pool)...If indeed Big Brown stays healthy(and keeps winning!) and his connections decide to continue racing him late into his 3yo season, I do not see him facing Curlin until the Breeders Cup Classic, as long as both connections feel confident running on the sybthetic surface @ Santa Anita.
Posted by Unitas May 6, 2008 3:20:10 PM
robert_finch says:
I have always felt that shoes play a large role in the catastrophic break downs that so plague this sport. So perhaps horseshoes are a necessary evil but front toe grabs aren't. Outlawing front toe grabs is a cheap quick and painless first step to eliminating breakdowns. In the days when dirt tracks were actually dirt not the predominantly sand tracks now found everywhere conditions such as slow or heavy tracks may have necessitated some kind of sticker but with realy only two track conditions on the sand surfaces,that being fast or sloppy, seems to me that front grabs need to go.
Posted by Robert Finch May 6, 2008 3:10:20 PM
arazi says:
These thoughts are in strick context of California racing. Of all the tracks using synthetic surfaces, CA tracks are the most important ones. Since Keeneland runs only 4-weeks in a year, it has less significance.
California runs the most graded stakes races in the country with majority of them on artificial surfaces now.
Since the installation of these surfaces, is it true to assume that California-based horses have had less impact on major graded stakes races outside CA? There are indeed few exceptions where some of the horses were able to transform their synthetic form to conventional dirt but most of them appeared to have failed to do so.
Should the trend continue, the graded stakes committe would soon be forced to consider lowering the graded-stakes ranking of major California races. Has someone seen it coming ?
Posted by Arazi May 6, 2008 12:31:39 PM
floppydog says:
The Beyers have made my handicapping life easier, I think they're great, especially when shippers are in play. But sometimes, in a tangential way, they just don't quite work for me.
I keep thinking of Funny Cide's big number in the Wood (113 or thereabouts) and his number in the Derby (109).
I have enormous respect for Funny Cide, the best and worst of, I enjoyed it all, I am thankful for him, I MISS him, but I can't imagine him beating Big Brown (106, 109) at any age, anywhere, anytime, on any surface, at any distance.
This is not saying Big Brown is great. In the end, he might not be, or he might. FIve weeks from now we'll have answers, maybe sooner.
But Funny Cide never had the arsenal of Big Brown. Not even close. So the Beyer comparison leaves me wanting answers---do any Beyer acolytes think the best of Funny Cide would have even the slightest chance against Big Brown?
Posted by Floppydog May 6, 2008 12:13:46 PM
beerbelly says:
2008 Denis Of Cork 97 BSF 3rd
2007 Curlin 98 BSF 3rd
2006 Jazil 97 BSF 4th
2005 Afleet Alex 98 BSF 3rd
2007 Curlin 2nd BEL by a head
2006 Jazil WON BEL
2005 Afleet Alex WON BEL
Denis Of Cork traveled from 0 to 6F in the Derby at 53.52 feet-per-second; closed from 6 to 10F at 53.42 fps. Extrapolating for the additional 2F in the Belmont at 53.32 fps he'll cross the finish line at 2:28:12.
Big Brown O to 6F 55.10 fps in the Derby followed by a 52.88 from 6 to 10F extrapolating to a 50.74 fps for the final two furlongs in the Test of Champions resulting in a Triple Crown winning Final Time of 2:27:83.
However the margin of victory is a heartstopping length.
Here's hoping Big Brown overcomes the Preakness safely without expending too much energy to set up one hell of a Belmont stretch run.
Posted by beerbelly May 6, 2008 11:02:54 AM
dan_baedeker says:
Steve: Many thanks, and most interesting!
1) Who knew that Eight Belles ran a faster Derby than Curlin?
2) That 2001 was such a
sensationally fast Derby?
3) That Monarchos and War Emblem have the highest Beyers?
4) That Proud Citizen ran a 108 Derby (and sired Proud Spell, Eight Belle's stablemate who won the Kentucky Oaks).
Interesting pedigree note: the top colt and filly of their generation (so far) each have 7 crosses of Nearco. Eight Belles is closely inbred to Mr. Prospector. Big Brown is even more closely inbred to Northern Dancer. Speed is the name of our game.
Posted by dan_baedeker May 6, 2008 10:52:10 AM
ljk says:
Dutrow can't even tell the truth about how much he bet??
Posted by ljk May 6, 2008 10:44:14 AM
greg says:
Giving Dennis of Cork an 98 BSF seems high to me. What did he stumble home in? 2:05?
Posted by Greg May 6, 2008 10:14:16 AM
arcstats says:
Assuming that Big Brown can make it physically through the triple crown grind (and that's a big if), and then their owners decide to continue to race him throughout the rest of the year (which is even a bigger if), what race on the calendar will Big Brown meet Curlin???
I find it so ironic that Asmussen and Dutrow, are the principals managing the two best horses racing today. Coincidence - I think not.
If Curlin and Big Brown ever race against each other, whatever race is selected must be renamed to The Pharma Stakes. It should also be mandatory that The Daily Racing Form print extensive profiles on the veterinarians' for each horse. In fact, if the Form listed the practicing vet in the past performance data for every horse, just about everything in this game would become crystal clear.
Posted by Arcstats May 6, 2008 9:43:41 AM
woodridgephil says:
steve, Is their any way to find out how the whale @ hollywood bet the pick 6 . thanks love the blog
Posted by woodridgephil May 6, 2008 9:17:09 AM
steve_h says:
I know why Big Truck was such short odds! It's because he had the longest morning line. It's leftover "Giacomo effect", where people overbet longshots in Triple Crown races, combined with a misunderstanding that the morning line odds are the same as actual odds. People who don't know better see 50-1 and think that's what they will get - and many of the the idiots who cover 3 races a year on the news perpetuate this by mentioning ML odds as if they were final.
Posted by Steve H. May 6, 2008 8:34:13 AM
seeking_the_gold says:
I was thinking that a lot of amateur bettors at the track just look at the program and decide to pick the longest shot on the morning line for there win bet thus causing big truck's odds to come down. The same thing happened in that breeders cup race where the claimer actually took money in the turf race.
Posted by Seeking the Gold May 6, 2008 7:56:24 AM
andyscoggin says:
Preakness and Belmont, 2 weeks, then 3 weeks. Good Luck to Big Brown!
Posted by AndyScoggin May 6, 2008 7:53:56 AM
arazi says:
Steve,
Your statistical analysis and reasoning has simply been perfect - just like Big Brown's record. There's nothing that could be added or commented about in your analysis. You left no room.
Churchill Down's decision to not offer a $1M guarantee was one of the bad marketing decisions which must've prevented big sharks from investing heavy in the Pick-6. I read it somewhere that CD official said they don't need the guarantee this year because last year, it exceeded well beyond $1M mark - he must've totally forgot about the carryover which you so precisely remembered.
These marketing folks should be reminded that when the word "Guarantee" is used, the adrenaline in handcapper's mind really started pumping.
Big Brown is no super horse as his 109 beyer seemed just about average. I just hope that some 3YO start improving and make the rest of 3YO races worth betting.
Posted by Arazi May 6, 2008 4:00:20 AM
crich says:
Steve,
Not that they should schedule cards for the purpose of speed figures, but maybe CD needs to switch the La Troienne (7F-3yoF-G3) with the Alysheba (8.5F-3upC&G-G3).
What is the purpose of having 3 one turn dirt stakes on one card when the signature event is 10 furlongs. The only two turn race were prior to the Derby was a MSW and afterwards a NW1.
Like you mentioned, BB's Rag/TG # must dwarf SS's rail skimming figure.
Do you think we will see another 1-9 shot similar to the 1979 Preakness (Spectacular Bid)?
Also, how big of a minus show pool will there be with a possible small field?
Posted by C.Rich May 6, 2008 1:27:57 AM
pru says:
Still can't believe that Big Truck went off at lower odds than the other Tagg trained horse Tale of Ekati. Looks like Harlem Rocker will be the only horse standing in Big Brown's way in the Preakness. I already have my tickets for the Belmont and what I consider my favorite race renewal of the year. I didn't think I would ever say this, but Dutrow might be the perfect Triple Crown Trainer. He is used to wheeling back horses on short rest, he will be able to handle the media circus, and he has that "magic touch". I thought he was going to bet BB big in the derby, but he told national tv he didn't bet a dime and I later saw he actually bet a mere $4000.
Posted by Pru May 6, 2008 12:01:50 AM
sfdan says:
Steve -
Regarding the Derby Day Pick 6 - Do you also think that the lack of a guarantee played any part in the reduced number? I think that maybe the mental note a player makes when he hears "$1M Guaranteed" incents them to throw in a little more cash. So part marketing and part potential for larger pool scoop?
Your thoughts?
Posted by SFDan May 6, 2008 12:00:21 AM
About
Steven Crist has been the Publisher and a columnist for Daily Racing Form since 1998. Previously, he covered racing for The New York Times from 1981-1990; was founding editor-in-chief of The Racing Times in 1991-92; and a vice-president of the New York Racing Association from 1994-97. He is the
author of several books including "Betting on Myself" and "Exotic Betting."
