That's what we get for thinking!

[Kentucky Bred]

Well, this you got to see. Sorry about the link but it would be a very long post if I cut and pasted it.

It seems that a guaranteed system has emerged to win every Breeder's Cup. And I sort of knew it all along but didn't have the courage to play it. Next year I will. What the hell.

See it here:


http://www.equidaily.com/bestbet/opinion/31028.html


So, betting EVERY HORSE ENTERED IN EVERY BREEDER'S CUP RACE HAS PRODUCED A FLAT BET PROFIT OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS!! So, bet them all...it's simple.

Over every BC race ever it produced a very slight loss.

However, betting every horse over 20-1 is a stone cold winner. You would never think of that on a regular day at the races. But on BC Day, it's bombs away.

But wouldn't you know that the only reason I didn't lose my *ss on BC day this year is because of my play on the short priced "Halfbridled" and it took an exceptional ride by Krone to get it. Her out of control ride on Funny Cide was another story.

So, give me one reason why long priced horses dominate Breeder's Cup races. I will steal the easiest reason first...bigger fields.


Kentucky Bred

[kenwoodallpromos]

Flat bet win means the average odds on the winner is higher than the # of horses running. IMO that means shorter priced horses lose more than expected by chance. 2 possibilitits- lower priced horses are grossly overbet and/or underperforming at the BC. I say they are overbet but also my official reason = The actual difference in quality/class between all the entries are cl.oser than percieved by the public or assessed in the PP's so any negatives are critical. Bettors give too much credit to big name horses, trainers and races!!

[freeneasy]

these arent the kind of horses where you can get away with a mistake lose a length or two and still expect to beat. their aint no room for error

[kingfin66]

So, give me one reason why long priced horses dominate Breeder's Cup races. I will steal the easiest reason first...bigger fields.


Top quality horses, all in good form and relatively fresh (or in Frankel's case, too fresh), means wide open races.

[alysheba88]

Ill give another reason that I think is very overlooked.

An uneducated public.

The public makes so many big errors on these days its not funny. Stuff like making Peace Rules 3-1 or Aldebaran the favorite. Or favoring Funny Cide over Pleasantly Perfect. Could go on and on. Horses that should be 8-1 or maybe 10-1 go off at 15-1 or 20-1 plus because of this. The same phenomena happens in the Triple Crown races and undercard. Even people who normally understand the error in focusing on "picking winners" fall prey to it on these days because of bragging rights.

[diablogger]

Gee, any reason they only report the last five years?

In 1998, there were 82 total entries.

Total Bet: $164
Total Return: $74.4

In 1998, there were 30 at 20-1 or higher:

Total Bet: $60
Total Return: $0

I'm not going to even bother looking back further, because I'm confident the focus on the last five years alone simply takes advantage of random variations in longshot success. The sample size is far too small and probably isn't large enough even over the history of the BC to be of use.