Never to early Kentucky Derby futures!!!!!

[uscsilb24]

With the Derby prep races starting and some good value available on some horses I think i am goona go ahead and play some futures..

At first glance I will take my chance on some not so long shots..

1. Pyro (12-1)
2. Cowboy Gal (12-)
3. El Gato Malo (7-1)...Wish i had gotten this horse prior to this weekend
4. Z Humor (18-1)

Longshots

1. Anak Nakal (25-1)
2. Court Vision (20-1)
3. Talk of a Cat (70-1)
4. Texas Wildcatter (40-1)

I know it is extremely early, but figured I would take a chance with some of these while there is incredible value.

Any thoughts??

[46zilzal]

Yes it is:FAR too early. It will take until the group have all been tested at 9 furlongs to make ANY sense out of it. There are going to be, like every year, many who will drop out long before the first Saturday in May.

It is how these babies mature that one is able to tell who can get the trip. TEN FURLONGS is difficult enough at graded stakes levels for seasoned horses and now these are babies trying to do it under 126 pounds??

Far too early to even consider who can or can't. They haven't been battle tested at all. Speed doesn't win that race unless there is no pace pressure (Spend A Buck for example and to a lesser extent War Emblem) so how these babies run today usually has little to do at 5:32 PM, that Saturday when that gate opens.

[Southieboy]

You mean 6:04 PM

[ryesteve]

I would take a chance with some of these while there is incredible value.

Any thoughts??
My thoughts are that there's no such thing as "incredible value" when you're trying to bet the Derby in January.

[FlyinLate]

Not gonna bet anything as I believe it is a bit too early to wager on horses who have a good shot of not even running in it, let alone winning it.

Just for the fun of it though, here are my early derby selections.
1) Tale of Ekati
2) Into Mischief
3) Monba
4) War Pass
5) Colonel John

[kenwoodallpromos]

Court Vision.

[Robert Goren]

Take the field.

[russowen77]

I tried that last year as a lark. The horse I bet on "Raval" (sp) didn't even make the race. :blush:

[Zman179]

Kentucky Derby Future Wager:

BIGGEST SUCKER BET EVER. :lol:

[whyhorseofcourse]

I bet notional and hard spun last year.
We all know the results of that one.
I got notional at 40/1.

[JustRalph]

With the Derby prep races starting and some good value available on some horses I think i am goona go ahead and play some futures..

At first glance I will take my chance on some not so long shots..

1. Pyro (12-1)
2. Cowboy Gal (12-)
3. El Gato Malo (7-1)...Wish i had gotten this horse prior to this weekend
4. Z Humor (18-1)

Longshots

1. Anak Nakal (25-1)
2. Court Vision (20-1)
3. Talk of a Cat (70-1)
4. Texas Wildcatter (40-1)

I know it is extremely early, but figured I would take a chance with some of these while there is incredible value.

Any thoughts??

here is a thought........ your money is better spent betting on them as they progress on the Derby Trail.........if you really like them.


and it's Too!!!!!!!!!

[jma]

I can see a few bucks (and I mean a few) for fun if you want something to root for and you enjoy it, but it's way too early to risk serious money. You'd hate to put anything substantial on a horse that's 20-1 now when it could easily be 20-1 on Derby Day----IF he makes it to the race at all.

[Ilovedracing]

With the Derby prep races starting and some good value available on some horses I think i am goona go ahead and play some futures..

At first glance I will take my chance on some not so long shots..

1. Pyro (12-1)
2. Cowboy Gal (12-)
3. El Gato Malo (7-1)...Wish i had gotten this horse prior to this weekend
4. Z Humor (18-1)

Longshots

1. Anak Nakal (25-1)
2. Court Vision (20-1)
3. Talk of a Cat (70-1)
4. Texas Wildcatter (40-1)

I know it is extremely early, but figured I would take a chance with some of these while there is incredible value.

Any thoughts??


Looks good to me.

[cnollfan]

I have a hard time seeing 12-1 shots as value four months before a race when you lose if they don't start, let alone don't win.

Steven Crist said this and I agree -- I would like to see the pari-mutuel Derby futures have all the horses instead of just 23 and a field. As long as they have the technology in place for a pick 3 or trifecta there is no reason I can see that the tote companies can't handle it.

[rastajenk]

I've heard that before, and I don't agree. I like the idea of everything else-field. I give most all the 400+ nominees a quick look-at before the Road to the Roses contest, and that's more than enough for most of them. A field is consistent with the notion that's it's a fun bet, not a serious investment. Keeping the focus on the main contenders, and making available the rest as a single unit, keeps the thing more attractive as a manageable prospect.

Listing them all individually may be doable from a tote point of view, but I don't think it adds anything to it, and may actually lower the handle. My impression is that those who would be intimidated by 400 entries and avoid it altogether would outweigh those who avoid it now because they can't wager on a single personal fave that hasn't done much yet and probably won't.

[46zilzal]

Unbridled Song, Hoist the Flag, etc etc. The best colts pre-race didn't get there in a state equivalent to win.

Future bets are sucker bets.

[rastajenk]

Thank you for that. Although, I suspect the folks that play them already know it.

[sandpit]

When I was employed by Churchill Downs, I repeatedly told the powers that be that these wagers (I'm including the even more ludicrous (sp?) Kentucky Oaks Future Wager) needed to be altered in order to generate new $$$. Derbywise, one simple way to generate a better chance for the fans to have multiple horses in the gate is to have each betting entity reflect the letter each horse's name begins with: #1=A; #2=B, and so on. With the 400+/- entries, you would always get a group of horses. Obviously, you would have to tweak it depending on the list of nominees, for example grouping "XYZ" or something to that effect. But the tote system could handle it.
I also suggested place and show wagering if they eliminated the "field" and made all the selections single wagers, since you'd almost be guaranteed a minus pool with people pounding the field to show.
Not sure if these were the greatest ideas, but at least it is something different and would likely increase handle. (The new management might want to up the takeout to about 40%, that would offset the lack of handle growth :D).
Needless to say, I'm not there anymore and the wager lives on in its same sad state. :bang:
Fixing the Oaks FWis hardly worth mentioning, since it handles about a tenth of what the Derby does.

[Robert Fischer]

Derbywise, one simple way to generate a better chance for the fans to have multiple horses in the gate is to have each betting entity reflect the letter each horse's name begins with: #1=A; #2=B, and so on. With the 400+/- entries, you would always get a group of horses. Obviously, you would have to tweak it depending on the list of nominees, for example grouping "XYZ" or something to that effect. But the tote system could handle it.


Great Idea.

Fan friendly , potentially reduces ALL 3yo into just 23 or so wagering entries, friendly to the handicapper who looks for value...

Good stuff here.

[rastajenk]

So each pool would be the same? Differing final odds, of course, but maybe only slightly, but the same set of horses? I don't see how that's an improvement, either.

[cnollfan]

I've heard that before, and I don't agree. I like the idea of everything else-field. I give most all the 400+ nominees a quick look-at before the Road to the Roses contest, and that's more than enough for most of them. A field is consistent with the notion that's it's a fun bet, not a serious investment. Keeping the focus on the main contenders, and making available the rest as a single unit, keeps the thing more attractive as a manageable prospect.

Listing them all individually may be doable from a tote point of view, but I don't think it adds anything to it, and may actually lower the handle. My impression is that those who would be intimidated by 400 entries and avoid it altogether would outweigh those who avoid it now because they can't wager on a single personal fave that hasn't done much yet and probably won't.

We will agree to disagree. I would absolutely adore the opportunity to put a hundred bucks on a couple of Derby sleepers at 500-1, and so would many horseplayers I know. There's no good way to do it now. The casinos lost their nerve when they went corporate so it's hard to get fair odds, not to mention inconvenient if you're not headed to Nevada, and 23 numbers is not enough to get the kind of odds that betting months ahead of time deserve.

[rrbauer]

"Value" in a Derby future bet?

"Value" implies a reasonable chance to cash the bet. If you're so dead set on throwing your money away, PM me and I'll give you my address!!

[cnollfan]

"Value" in a Derby future bet?

"Value" implies a reasonable chance to cash the bet. If you're so dead set on throwing your money away, PM me and I'll give you my address!!

How do I know you'll come up with the fifty large if I happen to win?