Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dilanesp
No, it is not, actually, a zero-sum game. It is a negative-sum game. 17 percent or so is taken out of every win pool. And that's REALLY important for people to understand.
Orb may or may not have been overbet. Again, even if he was, that doesn't mean Oxbow or any other horse was actually offering betting value. And thus, you have to review what you are doing whether you are betting 3 to 5 shots or 10 to 1 shots, and always think about whether you are really getting value or just looking for gambling action.
|
My point was that when somebody is bet significantly more than they should, it will create higher odds elsewhere. The pari-mutuel points when you make a line still have to add up to 124. If Orb should've had say, 38 (8-5 odds) pts instead of 63 (3-5 odds), that's 25 points right there.
Considering Orb was one of the smallest favorites ever in the Derby at 5-1, run over an extremely sloppy racetrack, it seems to be a stretch that he was a much heavier favorite in the Preakness than horses like Monarchos or Street Sense, who were more impressive at CD. Some of it was probably due to the fact that the 2nd thru 4th place finishers didn't go. I believe some of it was sentimental; Shug is a popular guy and an excellent trainer. You never hear him mentioned in the same breath with the "supertrainers". I think the media clearly was pulling for him to win the Triple Crown. The once or twice a year crowd picks up on that, and most of them are bandwagon jumpers. I doubt they were saying "Goldencents was one of the top contenders going into the Derby, and now, on a dry track and weaker field, he's going to be 8 or 9-1?"
