Attn Bridge Jumpers - Arrogate Running Saturday

can you believe - it's a Grade 2 - only 6 in the field lol


https://www.paulickreport.com/news/thoroughbred-racing/arrogate-towers-five-rivals-g2-san-diego-handicap/

1:5 or 5:1 ??

Whats the difference?

Quote: FleaStiff

1:5 or 5:1 ??

Whats the difference?

1/5 means for every $5 bet you win $1 or 20% - the exact way to say it would be you risk $5 to win $1

5/1 means for every $1 bet you win $5 or 500% - the exact way to say it would be you risk $1 to win $5

in sports betting 1/5 is expressed as -500

5/1 is expressed as +500

It's probably a lock unless something cruel happens and it'll probably be that way for some time.

Its early afternoon in Del Mar .. race been run yet?

Quote: FleaStiff

Its early afternoon in Del Mar .. race been run yet?

Nope, hours away, race 9, less than 3 hours away.

Wow he ran terrible, came in 4th. There was over a million show bet on Arrogate, all poof to someone else big time. Arrogate didn't break well, a rider ahead had an equipment problem, and seemed he had to hold back, then couldn't catch the #1 horse, Accelerate. Look up, people falling.

Baffert was baffled in the post race interview. Although he was gracious, he was nervous and could hardly speak clearly, sounded a bit like Sylvester Fudd. Charlie Rose was there interviewing him for a 60 minutes story, talk about embarrassment, egg on face, nobody could imagine this.

1. Accelerate $17.60, $32.60, $22.00
4. Donworth $119.80, $67.40
5. Cat Burglar. $38.20

Quote: onenickelmiracle

Wow he ran terrible, came in 4th. There was over a million show bet on Arrogate, all poof to someone else big time. Arrogate didn't break well, a rider ahead had an equipment problem, and seemed he had to hold back, then couldn't catch the #1 horse, Accelerate. Look up, people falling.

That's insane.

Lucky for me, this makes it almost impossible that floyd loses.

arrogate probably had a hidden, unknown injury or illness. no way baffert would run a horse that valuable unless he was in peak condition. the purse was only 300k; chump change for this horse. horses don't talk.

We are all friends here so please stay away from bridges for us.

in this video at 1:40 arrogate lengthens his stride and picks off one horse. at 1:58 he shortens his stride showing fatigue. that's never happened with him before.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMjKEETJLQc

What were the supposed odds of him not winning before the race 29/20, 39/40? It was funny the one time I thought maybe such a bet might be good at any price. I didn't play just entertained the idea. Now if a theoretical billionaire decided to place a billion dollar bet, the odds change because the jockeys know if they win, place or show, and arrogate doesn't, it's a lot of money for someone else. Enough to make cheating and ending a career the right play.

before the race the track media was calling arrogate "the greatest horse in the world." and he was. is he still? i don't think so. not unless they can find a real reason that his happened and correct it. secretariat once lost a race and they found out afterwards they he had an abscessed tooth.

Quote: lilredrooster

before the race the track media was calling arrogate "the greatest horse in the world." and he was. is he still? i don't think so. not unless they can find a real reason that his happened and correct it. secretariat once lost a race and they found out afterwards they he had an abscessed tooth.

It is a shocker I didn't expect. I believed the hype, because he broke the track record at the Travers, won the Pegasus, and was just a he-man in Dubai after a horrible start. They say to put a line through that race, I tend to believe it all other things considered. Might prepare for a large win bet in the Breeders cup hoping others will jump ship and he'll kick tail.

It was a handicap race, maybe the extra weight was a problem. No? Was a bad start, the second race in a row, which isn't good. The 2 horse in this race with the rider losing his irons, may have been a factor. Mike Smith speculated it may have spooked him, certainly seemed to affect the race from my perspective, seeing danger. I'm not sure the horse understood it or was affected by it. The rider may have been hogging the path he wanted to take on the outside, ill have to look again.

Quote: onenickelmiracle

The 2 horse in this race with the rider losing his irons, may have been a factor. Mike Smith speculated it may have spooked him,

if mike smith actually did say that it's a totally lame excuse. you can't trust what jockeys or trainers say about their horses. they have hidden agendas.

I'm not much of horse racing fan, but seeing a horse pay $119 for placing is amazing.

Quote: DRich

I'm not much of horse racing fan, but seeing a horse pay $119 for placing is amazing.

Especially in a five horse race....

Quote: DRich

I'm not much of horse racing fan, but seeing a horse pay $119 for placing is amazing.

Yes. Amazing to read about and amazing if you happen to have bet on it, but what I would want to know is "Is it suspicious?"
And how did the exacta do.... all that money on the Bridgejumper must have skewed the exacta wagering too.

Quote: FleaStiff

Yes. Amazing to read about and amazing if you happen to have bet on it, but what I would want to know is "Is it suspicious?"
And how did the exacta do.... all that money on the Bridgejumper must have skewed the exacta wagering too.

very, very doubtful the race was fixed if that is what you are asking. the trainer and jockey are multi millionaires and are not in need of picking up shady money. that sometimes will happen at very small tracks with very small purses where the winner is not paid big and they can make much more than the purse would pay with a bet. the exacta paid 97/1, not really huge. the main skewing was caused by gamblers betting place and show figuring arrogate was a lock. the crazy thing is the apparent ignorance of so many gamblers. win, place and show would have all payed back the same amount - $2.10 for a $2.00 bet or 5% profit for arrogate. so there was no reason to bet win or place. all those who bet win or place on Arrogate accepted more risk for no increased return. absolutely crazy. it's possible that some of the horses were given illegal drugs which is widespread in racing but that is a very different thing than fixing a race. the bottom line is that there is no such thing as a lock in gambling. to bet on a lock you need to find somebody who will let you bet on whether or not it will get dark tonight.

I hear Phil Ivey is a millionaire also.

DEL MAR

JUL 22RACE 9OFFICIAL
CARRYOVERS
N/A for this track
TVG San Diego H.
CHANGES
RESULTS & REPLAYS
RACE ENTRIESPOOL TOTALSINTERVALS
Win odds, Win, Place and Show pool sizes and exotic pool totals
PGM# HORSE POST MLO WIN
ODDS $1
WIN PAY L/C WIN POOL % PLACE POOL % SHOW POOL %
POOL TOTALS $538,038 $1,049,316 $1,752,568
1
Accelerate
1 8 7 $8.85 $51,354 9.5 $27,671 2.6 $45,988 2.6
2
El Huerfano
2 12 30 $31.80 $14,293 2.7 $9,720 0.9 $16,107 0.9
3
Arrogate
3 1/5 1/9 $1.05 $430,967 80.1 $990,270 94.4 $1,650,604 94.2
4
Donworth
4 10 24 $25.85 $17,569 3.3 $7,261 0.7 $14,235 0.8
5
Cat Burglar
5 10 18 $19.05 $23,853 4.4 $14,391 1.4 $25,632 1.5
6
Dalmore
SCR SCR

Exotic Pool Totals
Quote
RACE 9 PAYOUTS VIDEO REPLAY
FINISH PGM# HORSE MLO FINAL WIN PLACE SHOW
1
1
Accelerate 8 7 $17.70 $32.60 $22.00
2
4
Donworth 10 24 $119.80 $67.50
3
5
Cat Burglar 10 18 $38.20
WAGER RUNNERS PAYOUT
$2 Exacta 1 / 4 $196.10
$2 Quinella 1 / 4 $75.40
$0.60 Trifecta 1 / 4 / 5 $130.41

Arrogate
3 1/5 1/9 $1.05
win wagers $430,967................... 80.1%
place wagers..... $990,270.... 94.4%
show wagers.....$1,650,604........ 94.2%

only $3,072,000 total on win place show bets

Quote: FleaStiff

I hear Phil Ivey is a millionaire also.

true, but there were probably 5 million people watching every move arrogate's jockey made. when a jockey stiffs a horse (holds him back) it can be seen in a replay and the very few times that has happened jockeys have been caught and disciplined. as far as i know a highbred horse worth millions of dollars has never been suspiciously handled in a big race or at least those who did such were never caught. also there are different kinds of betting patterns that provide a tell for the fix. for example: a horse that is 30/1 in the morning line is bet down to 6/1 with no obvious reason for that to happen. or a very strong favorite, expected to go off at 2/5, has a ton of money bet against him and instead he goes off at 3/1. or they try to disguise the fix by letting a 30/1 horse go off at 30/1 in the win pool but bet him way down in the exacta or trifecta. or they let the strong favorite go off at 2/5 in the win pool but bet very heavy against him in the exacta and trifecta pool. those tricks are not tricky enough to fool the authorities.

At that level, the real money is in the value on the farm as a stallion after retirement from racing. It would be idiotic financial suicide to diminish his perceived future value at stud even slightly.

If he met the very high expectations for his on-track performance in his races this year, and was then immediately retired at the end of this year, he could easily have been sold into syndication for $80,000,000+ (eighty-million or more) as he'd likely be earning around $200k to start in his first season for the syndicate or breeder(s) every time he impregnated a mare, which he'd likely be doing many times every year for a couple of decades, potentially resulting in a hundred million and possibly a couple or several hundred million or more in breeding fees over the lifetime of his "retirement" from racing. The wagering on this race is trivial by comparison.

There is zero possibility of laying off enough money to make stiffing such a horse at that level a sane act, and doing so could only be seriously contemplated by a drooling imbecile.

I have no problem taking chalk (heavy favorites) in various ways, under the right circumstances. But here is a partial list of what I consider to be some of the WRONG circumstances to eat chalk; examples of things, any ONE of which would usually lead me to quickly conclude that it is NOT the right time to accept a very short priced favorite:

[ _ ] Moving to a new surface, distance, or class, absent multiple major clues that the new conditions are likely even MORE suitable than the performances that led to today's short price;

[ x ] First race back off significant layoff;

[ x ] First race returning from shipping back and forth to compete in Dubai;

[ _ ] Wrong side of lifetime form cycle curve, an ageing/maturing favorite with clear precocious "win early" pedigree;

[ x ] A very short field, which is prone to peculiar erratic pace and anomalous results;

...this list could go on, but my point is that while this was not the most likely result, I wouldn't consider it even mildly shocking at all. The wagering market had him at about 79% probability of winning. So the collective judgement of the market implied a still significant probability of more than 20% that he would not win. And in my opinion, he was significantly overbet in this, with about a 60-65% probability of winning and nearly 40%-ish likelihood that he would not. The somewhat tricky business of deriving place and show probabilities based on market price or my or your opinion of fair value can be done, but gets more complex.

But the point I'm getting at should be apparent: there was always a clear and obviously non-trivial chance of him finishing off the board, It would be shocking if there wasn't, under the best of circumstances. And the circumstances of this one had flashing warning lights up the ying-yang - see checked boxes above.

baffert was quoted saying he's going to run arrogate in the pacific classic at del mar on sat. 8/19 and imho it is a rare opportunity for gamblers. for those who think arrogate's loss was a fluke they will probably be able to get way better odds - i would guess 3/5 or even possibly higher if it's a large field. and for those who think he's done as a superstar they will still be able to get a nice price betting against him.

I guess I'm just a very suspicious type. (Except when I should be).

I've not heard the term stiffing before, I guess it comes from holding the reines with a stiff arm.

I was thinking more of what do the cameras show in the Parade to the Post and entering the gate.
Anything the least bit unusual there?

I also wish to comment on Stud fees: I doubt the horse will be less valuable because he suffers from some after affects from that long ago incident when a jockey stiffed him.

I am also suspicious, and I'm especially suspicious of the methods (*ahem* doping) of some trainers, this one foremost among them. But I do not suspect him and others of his type of acting completely contrary to their clear financial self interest. Races involving $5k claimers at Portland Meadows, Delta Downs, or Turf Paradise are another matter entirely. I have no suspicions there, because they are most certainly crooked, without any doubt whatsoever, since eking out an honest living there is simply impossible (and trying to do so might even get you whacked for your saintly lack of crooked cooperation by the mob ownership of Turf Paradise in Phoenix). In-between hither & yon, top-hats & bottom-feeders... ehhhh. It varies. It's just that this animal in this event is simply not near the neighborhood where it even remotely pays to arrange for intentionally variable stuff to be creeping around.

But you're very much mistaken in your assumptions and doubts about there being any financially meaningful stud fee effects. Taken in context of pedigree, the race record in the small number of top level graded stakes, such as this one, is by far the most significant driver of demand for this four-hoofed oat-munching asset - especially a Grade 1 or 2 stakes contested at this kind of "two-turn" distance at this point in his maturation, particularly for the potential demand from the international market. His failure to perform in the race is the effect, and his value when sold is now diminished by the race result to a material degree, immediately, and to a non-trivial extent somewhat permanently, since permanently for the current owners will be a fixed lump sum established rather soon. And when his lifetime of services are offered for sale in a few months, it will not be a "long ago incident." None of the races ever run by this class of horse are going to be "long ago" at the critical point, soon, when the sum total of their entire future lifetime of breeding rights are commonly sold into syndication in a single transaction.

Right now he's an adolescent on the cusp of early adulthood, and it would be an astounding decision by his current humans if he ever sees a racetrack as a fully mature 5 y/o adult next year. This kind of racehorse does not usually keep racing for long enough to ever get to "long ago." That's just how it works at that level these days. He has now raced a total of nine times in his life, including this event, and he's unlikely to ever race more than about a dozen times or so when finished. Only five of those nine are what's called "black-type" races in events designated as "Graded" or even merely less important "Listed" Stakes, and when he's done at the track this race will still comprise a significant portion of his resume of them.

re stud fees and the cost of horses it's fun to look back at the times things didn't pan out and the rich guys got creamed. the green monkey, was a descendant of secretariat and northern dancer and he was sold in 2006 when he was 2 years old for $16 million. he never won a race. he finished 4th, 4th and 3rd in maiden races and then retired. lol

Quote: lilredrooster

re stud fees and the cost of horses it's fun to look back at the times things didn't pan out and the rich guys got creamed. the green monkey, was a descendant of secretariat and northern dancer and he was sold in 2006 when he was 2 years old for $16 million. he never won a race. he finished 4th, 4th and 3rd in maiden races and then retired. lol

Yes! While going off at odds of 4/5, then 1/1, and finally & stubbornly 6/5. The only tickets ever cashed in his illustrious career returned a profit of $0.80 on a $2 show wager. I remember him mostly because at the time I thought he could possibly become the greatest ever... source of ongoing serial horsey jokes, an involuntary gag that just kept on giving chuckles (for those who weren't betting the rent money on him at 4/5) on track-critter blogs and boards and a brand newfangled thing called Twitter and whatnot.

"Oh, remember this day for eternity! Greatest horse in history of universe (that has never run) magnificently got off a van! Is now in a real stall at actual track!"

"Egads, the soon to become greatest ever worked out! Slowly. But most awesome job of LEAVING HIS FEEDBAG that could ever happen!"

Etc, etc, carrying on with snarky ridicule like that for months, starting long before the grand regal equine celebrity was finally taken to post to "run" producing a chart note of "weakened" amidst a sea of crumpled tickets and the odor of $16 million becoming vapor, and finally about enough earnings to rent a van to haul His Most Excellent Exalted Simian Royal Splendid Greeness away.

I dont suspect any race fixing with Arrogate for $1 million in show bets. The thought did occur only some gentleman's bet between billionaires would be enough as a motive or if somehow some contract was broken by not doing good in the race.