First Saturday in May

Doing a little clean-up and look back on a few things:

Pool 1 - 141st KY Derby Future Wager (Closed 11/30/2014):
#1 American Pharoah - ~12/1 - $2 payoff = $27.60
$2 Exacta #1+#24(Field) = $58.00
----------

Pool 2 - 141st KY Derby Future Wager (Closed 2/8/2015):
#1 American Pharoah - ~10/1 - $2 payoff = $23.00
$2 Exacta #1+#8 (Firing Line) = $658.80
----------

Pool 3 - 141st KY Derby Future Wager (Closed 3/1/2015):
#1 American Pharoah - ~8/1 - $2 payoff = $18.20
$2 Exacta #1+#10 (Firing Line) = $508.00
----------

KY Oaks Future Wager (Closed 3/1/2015):
#13 Lovely Maria - ~39/1 - $2 payoff = $81.60
$2 Exacta #13+#20 (Shook Up) = $8060.60
----------

Pool 4 - 141st KY Derby Future Wager (Closed 3/29/2015):
#1 American Pharoah - ~5/1 - $2 payoff = $13.00
$2 Exacta #1+#12 (Firing Line) = $109.80
----------

According to Blood-Horse Churchill is reporting that the wagering handle for this Derby set a new all-time record, wagering on the Derby day card was a new record high as well, and the on-track attendance of over 170,000 was also a record high.

CDI Reports Record $194.3M in Derby Day Bets

Read more on BloodHorse.com: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/91773/cdi-reports-record-1943m-in-derby-day-bets#ixzz3Z3J1haQX

Quote: kenarman

Your quote should be in Ontario not in Canada. Pretty much every casino and a few bars in BC have offsite track betting. Online you can also bet other sports.

this says otherwise

http://thebettingcompany.com/horseplayer-interactive/hpi-info.html

I hit a $2 exacta 18 with all for a $72 payout I think it was. Also hit a .50 cent trifecta, I took 18 with 8,10,15,5 with 8,10,15,5. Total bet $8 paid $50. My friend hit the superfecta for $1. We were going crazy thinking he won thousands of dollars. Very disappointed when he only got $635. He made quite a few superfecta box bets though so only profited about $400. Making money was good but I really felt like my dog had been shot after such a low super payout

Quote: ontariodealer

this says otherwise

http://thebettingcompany.com/horseplayer-interactive/hpi-info.html

I stand corrected. BC Lotteries doesn't advertise the HPI name anywhere and only brand everything with BCLC and the "Racebook" logo in the casinos.

What a horse. The race went pretty much as most people predicted. I know playing the favorite doesn't get you much respect anywhere. This is the 3rd year in a row the favorite has won. But out of the three, I don't think there is much debate that this is the best horse. And I know the best horse doesn't provide value, but I just couldn't pick against who I thought was best.

I'm stupid for being too stubborn to bet more than $10 on Pharoah at 8-1 8 weeks ago. I told my friend we'd split $100 on him if he was 9-1 (So we'd get $1000 total). My friend is not too happy with me today.

After totaling all my Derby bets, I pretty much broke even. The Oaks / Woodford / Derby Pick-3 is what killed me. I really thought there'd be an upset in the Oaks or Woodford. So I actually lost money on that winning bet.

Pharoah was the best horse, and the best horse won. Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't. I actually think the Preakness will be harder for him to win than the Derby. But I will say right now, if he wins the Preakness, he's winning the Triple Crown. Although Pletcher's duo will provide his biggest challengers.

This was rambling, I know, but it was an exciting race and I am real excited about the chances for a triple crown.

Quote: FinsRule

As for the Derby, the winner is either based out of Cali, or is going to be a big surprise. I'm really anticipating American Pharoah's debut. If I had to pick a winner right now it's him, but just because no one else has impressed me.

This one is from March 1. This is the good one. Cali ran 1-2-3!

Quote: FinsRule

The Derby has been nice and easy to hit the last two years. I think this year is going to be much much more unpredictable. None of those horses in the future wager impressed me at all. The Derby winner has probably won, and someone I'm sure has some money on him, but he's not someone a lot of people are talking about. We'll check back in 4 months and see if I'm right.

This one is from January 2nd. Not so good. In all fairness, Pharoah was having foot problems and no one was sure if he'd be ok.

Seems like Mubtaahij is remaining in the USA, skipping the Preakness and heading for the Belmont.

I think he has a better chance of competing there as he is a smaller, less muscled type who could move well over the surface but I'm just an interested bystander this time!

I think betting the favorite in this race is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, or not. If it is the right favorite at the price, or not. Favorites win this less often but also tend to pay more on average than in other races, as they should on both counts in a large field. 5/2 on a very popular horse compares to looking at even money-ish in other events. It depends. I buy chalk all the time. And also bet against it.

This event has changed recently and I have to consider the growing probability that the changes might be long lasting. Some methods of evaluating the likely ability of a colt to stay the distance based on some intrinsic characteristics of the horse may no longer be as effective.

The new points qualifying system invented by Churchill Downs, Inc. may have had the side-effect of taking much of the pace out of the race. This year the slow final time of 2:03.02 came after a modest 3/4 mile fractional time of 1:11.29. Last year they also dwaddled around in 1:11.80 and 2:03.66. Other Derbys in this decade have been out to 6 furlongs in 1:09.80,1:09.80, and 1:10.58. If run at something closer to 1:12 than 1:10 it is a different race. This year the final time got a BSF of 105, which is not great but not awful either. Last year was awful.

And there is the major but difficult to quantify effect of some trainers known among those following closely to be making a career of running a step and a half ahead of anti-doping tests with the use of cobalt type substances and synthetic hormones, imparting artificial stamina to speed horses that naturally have none, which is particularly significant among some trainers based in some racing jurisdictions, especially California.

The William Hill line on Triple Crown yes/no is currently at +190/-220. I may check the line on that at Wynn and/or Westgate next week. Each year at this time my choice on that is to bet "no" or to pass on it, and to re-evaluate again after the Preakness. I have ended up buying the "no" about 60% of the time, and have not yet ever seriously considered the "yes" side as a reasonable option.

In order to play that proposition now I would need to study a lot more about the durability of the effects of certain substances and the specifics of the differences in current detection methods among racing jurisdictions, especially New York. I'm not going to do that, so I don't expect it is likely that I will play the prop this time. But if the "yes" did come in this year, I would feel sad about that, just from the personal point of view of one who appreciates the animals and enjoys the sport. On the other hand, there are some sponsorship tie-ins that would be natural if that is what this is to become: "The Triple Crown, brought to you by Pfizer, Eli-Lilly, Merk, Novartis, and Astra-Zenica!"

Good luck to whatever others want to do about that, with the luxury of saying it sincerely since I probably won't have anything on that.

I think Frosted, Danzig Moon, and Mubtaahij each may have some reason for optimism in other races, with continued development. Maybe also Materiality, but I'm not yet sure what I think of his trip. As far as I can tell, Carpe Diem just didn't have it. After the race, Baffert got around to mentioning that Dortmund had what was descirbed as a "minor" bout of colic between the Santa Anita Derby and this race.

I see no value in +190 even if you believe AP will win the TC. Better to bet the low odds on him in the Preakness and then decide to bet him in the Belmont if you think he can do it. Am I correct on this?

Bovada is +220. Seems fair, but why bother? +190 is a bad price.

It's amazing that Baffert decides to tell the betting public about the colic only after he had run......Kind of like Manny telling everyone after the fight he wasn't allowed his injections for his shoulder?

It is amazing to me how punters get treated like pond scum (what is lower than pond scum I wonder) but yet we are a large part of what keeps this industry afloat.....

Anyway, that is another rant for another day!

AP should be real short in the Preakness but I won't have him at Belmont, no sireee bob

Quote: Tomspur

It's amazing that Baffert decides to tell the betting public about the colic only after he had run......Kind of like Manny telling everyone after the fight he wasn't allowed his injections for his shoulder?

It is amazing to me how punters get treated like pond scum (what is lower than pond scum I wonder) but yet we are a large part of what keeps this industry afloat.....

Anyway, that is another rant for another day!

AP should be real short in the Preakness but I won't have him at Belmont, no sireee bob

Your thinking history and makes betting sense, but it will change one day. Is that day this year? If I knew that I wouldn't be posting it here.

In the case of a Belmont Stakes potentially completing a Triple Crown, if I thought I had very good reason to be confident of the most likely result I wouldn't feel any reluctance to say so here, in as much detail as I happened to feel like going into, because it is inconceivable that it would have any effect whatsoever on the odds in the pari-mutual pools given the enormous wagering volume on that event, and where it comes from. The handle on the race last year was $150,249,399. On-track attendance alone was over 100,000 people, about 80-90,000 of them most likely insta-fan folks who went to no other races that year.

In fact I did have quite a bit to say about my opinion of the prospects of Tonalist (and relatively poor prospects of California Chrome) on another site in the week leading up to that race in 2014, and was more than pleased to be able to take 9/1 on him after the negligible effect of doing so. Some other race ten days later could be another matter.

And if it is something that amounts to nothing more than "wow ABC is such a great horse he's beautiful & I love him so much!" and "XYZ is a dog & I hate him!" then it is nothing but a droplet in the waterfall of meaningless background noise that always exists and is universally ignored several hundred times a day on about 300 days a year.

Quote: Boz

I see no value in +190 even if you believe AP will win the TC. Better to bet the low odds on him in the Preakness and then decide to bet him in the Belmont if you think he can do it. Am I correct on this?

I've never come close to buying the "yes" side on this proposition, but you got me curious so I did a little simple arithmetic on a parlay of individual wagers involving last year's final pari-mutual odds.

Chrome paid $3.00 (per $2) to win the Preakness, and went off at 0.85/1 in the Belmont. So if one parlayed the individual races by simply betting $100 on him to win at Pimlico, then used the resulting $150 payout for a win bet at Belmont Park, if he won you'd be looking at a total of $277.50 from your initial $100 for a net profit of $177.50. That's equivalent to getting a little less than the current line on the prop at this time in this year, but not by a lot.

However, that little calculation could be highly misleading for a number of reasons, perhaps most significantly because a major part of the risk on the "yes" side of such a prop is the very real possibility that he doesn't make it to become an official starter in one of the races for any of a myriad of reasons. If you are parlaying individual bets on raceday(s) you obviously will not be betting and losing your intial hundy or your later Benjamin and a half if he doesn't make it to the race, or your wager will be refunded if he is a late scratch. You could even profit while failing in the overall parlay attempt. If the same thing happens after buying a "yes" ticket in the prop, what your wager gets you is: "Thank-you for playing; would you like a drink ticket?"

In case anyone is not aware of this: If the horse does not complete the task of being declared the official winner of all three legs for any reason, including illness or injury leading to not running in one of them, the "no" side is not a "push" that is refunded; it is a winner.

If I liked the horse for the Triple Crown, I don't think I would like +190 for this prop.

With time to look at it more closely, I've changed my mind about the TC prop and will be playing "no" again this year. This was a particularly weak Derby win, tracking a slow lightly contested pace and finishing in mediocre time, with the 4th and 6th place runners Frosted & Materiality having especially strong finishes after severely compromised trips, and any of the first six could be a likely winner of a hypothetical rerun depending on trip and pace, with none deserving retrospective odds under 7/1 to do so. I'm willing to disregard uncertainty over the unknowable properties of Baffert's latest version of magic sauce; he is very unlikely to get through the Belmont. I'm just not sure how much I want to allocate for locking it in during the immediate post-Derby period vs. after the Preakness for a better price closer to even money if the hype machine is in order and the usual impetuous chumps are buying. The line has moved a bit from Wm. Hill as apparently they are getting unbalanced action favoring "no." I'll be checking other lines for it in the coming week.

The money has obviously been coming in disproportionately on the "no" side of the Triple Crown prop at the opening prices, and those offering the wager are apparently begging for action on Pharoah. William Hill's line has moved twice this week and is now at +230/-270, while both Wynn and Westgate have moved to +220/-260.

Also, I found the terms of the prop from these two major brick & mortar Las Vegas books stating: "Must run in Preakness to have action." Maybe it is just my faulty memory, but I don't recall that condition from prior years of wagering on this prop. It is a difference that matters, "stuff happens" is a major part of the game, and though it does not extend to taking out the "stuff happens" in the interval between the Preakness & Belmont, this stipulation still does reduce the desirability of taking the "no" by a few percentage points a week before running at Pimlico. My opinion estimates A.P. at about 55% to win the Preakness, and if he does so then 38% to make the Belmont and win it, for a little over 20% chance (0.55 * 0.38 = 0.209) of cashing on "yes" and a bit less than 80% on the "no" side winning. I expect this is a considerably lower estimate than what some who are more enthused about the horse would come up with, but where my money is concerned my opinion is the one that matters. This leads me to:

YES: $100 + $220 = $320; and $320 * 0.21 = an expected value of $67.20 from a $100 wager, and "yes" comes out as a horrible bet to me, and is strictly a vehicle for fans to pay to express themselves, given my opinion above. It would have to be priced > +500 for me to consider it to be approaching fair value territory, and I still wouldn't be interested with this particular horse this year.

NO: $260 + $100 = $360; and $360 * 0.79 = an expected value of $284.40 from a $260 wager on the "no."

Though with this estimate of where things stand I think there's still some value on the "no" amounting to about +9% ROI following the line movements, it is considerably less attractive at this point than if I hadn't snoozed in getting the price locked in. I did buy a ticket last night at -260, but for considerably less than I originally planned. If A.P. does get through the Preakness, I hope he does so in visually impressive fashion, thrilling his fans & providing an opportunity to play "no" more heavily immediately afterward at a more rewarding price.

There's also a whole boatload of reasons I think it would be best overall for the sport and the future well-being of the equine athletes in it if this horse does not succeed in doing this, but I promise to do my best to paste a smile on my face as the fans cheer him, and to stifle my satisfaction amidst their grief if and when I cash on this.

Wynn also has a future book line specifically on winning the Preakness, and to show any line movements on the list for that below I've included the first odds at open, followed by the second line, followed by the odds being offered as of last night:

WAGERING INTEREST - OPEN - LINE#2 - CURRENT ODDS

American Pharoah 2/3 - 2/3 - 5/7
Firing Line 7/2 - 7/2 - 7/2
Dortmund 4/1 - 4/1 - 4/1
Carpe Diem 7/1 - 8/1 - 8/1
Materiality 9/1 - 10/1 - 10/1
Competitive Edge 10/1 - 13/1 - 14/1
Danzig Moon 16/1 - 18/1 - 15/1
Divining Rod 20/1 - 20/1 - 20/1
Mr. Z 22/1 - 25/1 - 25/1 [uhmm... ?]
Stanford 25/1 - 28/1 - 28/1
Bodhisattva 28/1 - 30/1 - 30/1
Tale of Verve 35/1 - 40/1 - 40/1
Grand Bili 40/1 - 45/1 - 45/1

The vig built into this Preakness line is over 30%. The juice in the 'yes/no' Triple Crown props is in low single digits.

EDIT: I don't know if they still have a line up and would sell tickets on them, but the Pletcher horses have been declared out of this, as has Mr. Z according to the owner.

^And re-edit. In something that is starting to become a little bizarre, after being declared out of the Preakness by the owner for whom he was named (Mr. Zayat of Zayat stables) Mr. Z has suddenly been sold to Calumet and is now said to be going in the Preakness three days hence, while remaining with D. Wayne Lukas as his trainer. One hopes the colt won't be feeling dizzy when they bring him to the paddock. If the day is Saturday, perhaps we are in Baltimore.

Am I allowed to think both of these thoughts?

- American Pharoah will win the Triple Crown
- +220 is not a bet I would like to make on AP winning the triple crown

Regrettably, yes. It seems you can. I want you to have to make a seven figure wager on it for thinking AP will win the Triple Crown, but so far I have been unable to find the law to make you do so. I'll keep looking.

I have seen some with the legitimate potential to be that kind, if. Barbaro was an example of one of those. And I initially thought Big Brown could also be, until I learned about Dick Dutrow's steroids and related funny business, which led me to get off the horse before trying to get through Belmont. But in that minority of cases where I thought it was 'that kind' I've never yet seen a price on 'yes' that was sensible enough to take considering all the circumstances and the full basket of factors leaning against it. The result for me in some years, when it involves what I believe is that kind, has been to simply pass on betting on the proposition altogether in about one out of three or four years, in contrast to the more common years when I bet "no."

For me this isn't the kind that leads me to avoid the bet on the usual 'no.' I'm sure I'll find that FinsRule compulsory bet law I'm looking for somewhere shortly.

Preakness and Black-Eyed Susan Brisnet pps can be found here (with a couple of clicks - PDFs):
http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/briswatch.cgi/Baffert/BAFFERT+BOB/9999/summary.htm
----------

I find it difficult to separate the top 3 from the Derby. Some thoughts about the Preakness:
-Dortmund apparently had minor colic and almost did not ship to CD. Did this have an effect on him?
-AP should have an easier time getting good position (or the lead) in here from the rail. This will be his 3rd race in 5 weeks and he was all out in the Derby. He is listed @ 4/5 in the morning line, but I could see him go a little lower. Deserving favorite in the Preakness.
-Firing Line seems the logical choice to improve. He did not change leads down the stretch in the Derby. He had 6 week breaks between his last two races. How will he handle the 2 week turn around?
-Danzig Moon keeps J Leparoux (who probably could have ridden Divining Rod).
-Divining Rod is the sentimental choice. The Jacksons/Barbaro/Preakness etc. There will be plenty of mentions of Barbaro during the TV coverage. J. Castellano picks up the mount.
-One problem with the new shooters is the added weight they will carry (compared to their last race) against a tough field:
Tale of Verve +9lbs
Bodhisattva +10lbs
Divining Rod +8lbs
-Mr Z is sort of "wild card" in here. He had a very troubled trip in the Derby. He has done his best running on the front end. With new ownership (same trainer) maybe he goes for the lead? I am expecting a little stronger pace up front.

In the 18 horse Derby all you can hope for is a clean run. With the field being smaller for this Preakness, I personally believe strategy can play a roll. Could also be rain in Baltimore on Saturday afternoon. I plan to Handicap the Susan/Preakness double in the next few days and make a small wager on Friday.

I rarely look closely at the Preakness as a potentially playable event for me, and have no intention of betting it this year. If I was I'd be looking into mud proclivities ahead of this one, but I'm not, so I haven't. I don't remember the last time I bet that race, maybe once in the late 90s I think. Typically short fields, somewhat peculiar main track layout at an arguably flaky venue only running 37 days that I'm not in the habit of following closely and therefore won't handicap well, and good luck to those looking to actually play it. I'll be a spectator looking forward to the Belmont Stakes.

Here's what I'll be cheering for in the 13th race at Pimlico on Saturday: I hope they manage to keep the power on this year, remember when to start the timer, don' t have a drunk running onto the track trying to punch running horses, and all make it back to the barn with everything attached that they started with. Except for any drunk in Baltimore that tries to punch a horse again.

I think Danzig Moon still retains the 'wiseguy horse' title. Which I think is good for a free peppermint, but not necessarily any money.

The money obviously continues to pour in on 'no' triple crown, and Pharoah is not attracting action on 'yes.' William Hill's line has moved twice in the last 24hrs, and is now at +300/-360 for yes/no triple crown. This does not extend to the WmH line specifically on the Preakness outcome, however:

Preakness future bet (~3:45pm-5/15)
American Pharoah -125
Firing Line 4/1
Dortmund 9/2
Danzig Moon 20/1
Divining Rod 20/1
Mr. Z 25/1
Bodhisttava 30/1
Tale of Verve 50/1

Will Am.Ph. win Preakness:
Yes: -125
No: -105

Quote: DrawingDead

Also, I found the terms of the prop from these two major brick & mortar Las Vegas books stating: "Must run in Preakness to have action." Maybe it is just my faulty memory, but I don't recall that condition from prior years of wagering on this prop. It is a difference that matters, "stuff happens" is a major part of the game, and though it does not extend to taking out the "stuff happens" in the interval between the Preakness & Belmont, this stipulation still does reduce the desirability of taking the "no" by a few percentage points a week before running at Pimlico.

Who was the last Derby winner not to run in the Preakness? Spend A Buck?

Quote: ThatDonGuy

Quote: DrawingDead

Also, I found the terms of the prop from these two major brick & mortar Las Vegas books stating: "Must run in Preakness to have action." Maybe it is just my faulty memory, but I don't recall that condition from prior years of wagering on this prop. It is a difference that matters, "stuff happens" is a major part of the game, and though it does not extend to taking out the "stuff happens" in the interval between the Preakness & Belmont, this stipulation still does reduce the desirability of taking the "no" by a few percentage points a week before running at Pimlico.

Who was the last Derby winner not to run in the Preakness? Spend A Buck?

Grindstone. Retired 5 days after the Derby due to bone chips in his leg (knee).

I bet $4 on the Black Eyed Susan / Preakness Double

8, 9 / 2, 8

So I'm alive to Dortmund and Firing Line. I really wish I would have bet more than $4. I'm still rooting for Pharoah. If anyone will give me +300 on him winning the triple crown, I will take it!

Vegas is calling. You could be at the Wynn in a couple of hours with your toothbrush and $10 in your pocket to get down on it. Don't forget the sawbuck.

Quote: FinsRule

I bet $4 on the Black Eyed Susan / Preakness Double

8, 9 / 2, 8

So I'm alive to Dortmund and Firing Line. I really wish I would have bet more than $4. I'm still rooting for Pharoah. If anyone will give me +300 on him winning the triple crown, I will take it!

Vegas is calling. I was there last year for the Preakness. Good times.

Another impressive performance by AP.

Of course, I will seek value and bet against AP in the Belmont.

Quote: HowMany

Another impressive performance by AP.

Of course, I will seek value and bet against AP in the Belmont.

There's no value in losers.

Quote: Sabretom2

There's no value in losers.

Indeed, you're correct.

But I have cashed a few very nice tickets betting against the many horses that were over-bet pursuing the Triple Crown.

No doubt, American Pharoah will be over-bet. Even if he wins.

Quote: HowMany

Indeed, you're correct.

But I have cashed a few very nice tickets betting against the many horses that were over-bet pursuing the Triple Crown.

No doubt, American Pharoah will be over-bet. Even if he wins.

He was 4/5 today. The payoff will be even thinner at the Belmont should he win. There is not much value in betting $2 and turning it into $2.80 or something like that in the Belmont.

Quote: Gabes22

He was 4/5 today. The payoff will be even thinner at the Belmont should he win. There is not much value in betting $2 and turning it into $2.80 or something like that in the Belmont.

But what will the EBAY value be of $2 Win tickets on the next TRIPLE CROWN winner be worth>?

I have 2 derby and Preakness win tickets saved. I'll buy another 5 or 10 for Belmont. betting on ap to win Belmont is stupid. But there's other ways to make money. I hit the pick-4 for $275 today....

there was tremendous value today if you liked AP and not Dortmund or firing line.

Tank-you, tank-you, tank-you berry much; a perfect visually impressive and utterly facile result to set up what I want to do. And it doesn't involve me betting on this horse to get a mile and a half at Belmont.

Wm. Hill Triple Crown proposition odds
Saturday morning: Yes +300, No -360
Saturday evening: Yes -155, No +125

And that very last number is everything I was hoping for out of this. I'm delighted that his fans are delighted. I plan to provide the marketplace liquidity necessary to make a number of those $2 souvenir tickets possible, so thank me in advance as you plan how you'll be displaying that cherished prize.

Trivia question: Last time this race was run this slow? In 1950, 66 years ago. Last time it was even won in anything as sluggish as 1:58 flat? 1956, 60 years ago. There were some extenuating circumstances, of course, making that subject to interpretation. As there tends to be about every fourth or fifth year or so, or about 15 or so times in that half-century and change since the last time it was this jaw-dropping painfully slow.

I was really concerned that someone would go down in those conditions. I'm glad the pace was off and they didn't break down any horses. Yes, I'm a wimp when it comes to that aspect of racing.

Quote: Gabes22

He was 4/5 today. The payoff will be even thinner at the Belmont should he win. There is not much value in betting $2 and turning it into $2.80 or something like that in the Belmont.

How much value was there in betting Firing Line or Dortmond?

I was told I was stupid when I made $7.80 at the derby and I was stupid again when I made $3.80 yesterday. Just to raise the stupidity level, when the rain started, I doubled my bet.

Belmont is a ways off so I have no idea if I'll demonstrate my stupidity again. I'll simply bet the horse I believe will win, to win.

Quote: beachbumbabs

I was really concerned that someone would go down in those conditions. I'm glad the pace was off and they didn't break down any horses. Yes, I'm a wimp when it comes to that aspect of racing.

My wife expressed concerns about the weather, but I think the horses are pretty adaptable to all weather conditions. I see them running around pastures here that are in poor condition (not smooth like a race track); they seem to do just fine. I also did a quick check of horse injuries in New York and it looked like most conditions did not involve rain.

It is scary to look at but it doesn't seem as dangerous as it looks...but the true horse players may have a different take on it...

Quote: DrawingDead

Tank-you, tank-you, tank-you berry much; a perfect visually impressive and utterly facile result to set up what I want to do. And it doesn't involve me betting on this horse to get a mile and a half at Belmont.

Wm. Hill Triple Crown proposition odds
Saturday morning: Yes +300, No -360
Saturday evening: Yes -155, No +125

And that very last number is everything I was hoping for out of this. I'm delighted that his fans are delighted. I plan to provide the marketplace liquidity necessary to make a number of those $2 souvenir tickets possible, so thank me in advance as you plan how you'll be displaying that cherished prize.

Trivia question: Last time this race was run this slow? In 1950, 66 years ago. Last time it was even won in anything as sluggish as 1:58 flat? 1956, 60 years ago. There were some extenuating circumstances, of course, making that subject to interpretation. As there tends to be about every fourth or fifth year or so, or about 15 or so times in that half-century and change since the last time it was this jaw-dropping painfully slow.

So the Derby and the Preakness have gone exactly how you wanted it to. Because it sets up perfectly for this Belmont. Then when he wins the Belmont, it'll set you up perfectly for him losing the travers!

Or, you could look at it the opposite way... If you had just bet $100 on yes before the Preakness, you could have a guaranteed profit right now! But no, your way of losing everything in the Derby and Preakness probably makes more sense.

(This isn't a guarantee he is going to win the Belmont)

As for the time of the race, not only was the track conditions terrible as you mentioned, but did you see the post-race interview with Gary Stevens that said he weighed 15 more lbs after the race?

I'm not a big weight guy, but 15 lbs has to be something.

Why is it hard for horseplayers to give credit to horses for winning? And those who do give credit are usually laughed at or dismissed.

I think I will put some money on NO for +125.

Quote: FinsRule

As for the time of the race, not only was the track conditions terrible as you mentioned, but did you see the post-race interview with Gary Stevens that said he weighed 15 more lbs after the race?

I'm not a big weight guy, but 15 lbs has to be something.

Why is it hard for horseplayers to give credit to horses for winning? And those who do give credit are usually laughed at or dismissed.

It was amazing just how much mud everyone but the winner seemed to have on them. They were all probably equally burdened by the extra weight of the water on the horses and jockeys but breaking to the front and tossing mud on everyone following meant that they ended up carrying even more weight. The contrast between the winning jockey and the rest was huge...he was almost clean; they were covered in mud.

Quote: speedycrap

I think I will put some money on NO for +125.

No for +125 is a fine bet. But you can make more if you just pick who is going to beat him...

Quote: Sabretom2

How much value was there in betting Firing Line or Dortmond?

I was told I was stupid when I made $7.80 at the derby and I was stupid again when I made $3.80 yesterday. Just to raise the stupidity level, when the rain started, I doubled my bet.

Belmont is a ways off so I have no idea if I'll demonstrate my stupidity again. I'll simply bet the horse I believe will win, to win.

There wasn't. And then the rains started, so that threw a monkey wrench into it. I went ATB on Tale of Verve hitting the place and show bets, so I was rather happy. Oftentimes when a horse is an overwhelming favorite, I tend to do something like this with an underdog.

I'm kicking myself for not betting an AP / All / All after the rain started. This is what happens when I'm with family and distracted. Of course, family is important...

I could not find the winner.

Am I the only one that thought Dortmund's start was a little suspicious? Baffetrt's other horse broke to the outside very shortly after leaving the gate and sprayed half the field. Then cut back in and sprayed them a second time. Didn't seem to be any real strategic reason for the move other than to spray the young horses and put them off their race a little. Meanwhile AP got away with no mud and ended the race still clean.

Quote: Gabes22

There wasn't. And then the rains started, so that threw a monkey wrench into it. I went ATB on Tale of Verve hitting the place and show bets, so I was rather happy. Oftentimes when a horse is an overwhelming favorite, I tend to do something like this with an underdog.

Nice bet. I sure didn't see it. I had them running exactly like the odds implied. I made a big (for me) bet to win. When the rain started, I did it again.