Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
This, to me, is completely wrong, and indeed, is an indicator of what is wrong with these "theories".
If the curse of Apollo were a real handicapping factor, Curlin should not have gotten close. Remember, Street Sense, who won the race, got extremely lucky. Without that dream run up the rail under Calvin Borel, he probably doesn't win the thing.
So Curlin got beat by two horses, one of whom only beat him because of racing luck. Curlin himself beat 16 horses in the race. 16 well seasoned horses. 16 horses with more starts. 16 horses with 2 year old form. 16 horses that the "theory" says he could never beat.
|
Curlin: Raise A Native. Street Sense: Raise A Native. Steet Sense followed up that effort, dream trip or not, by getting nosed in the Preakness. The Raise A Native exacta. The theory or angle doesn't suggest Curlin couldn't finish well in the Derby. It suggests the probably of winning is lower based on the assumption a horse needs some foundation to nail a 10F race. Further, there's often reasons for non racing at two. Temperament or late maturation could play a role. Regardless of reason, the angle has worked and Curlin was defeated in the Derby.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
If you want a workable theory, you need to account for who runs well in the Derby, not simply who wins it. If the curse of Apollo really worked as a handicapping angle, it should apply just as much to hitting the board as to winning it.
And if you want to study a handicapping angle, saying "X out of 40 Derby winners" is basically guaranteed to be statistically invalid. You need to include every Derby runner up, every Derby third place finisher, etc., in the study. In fact, you should include last and next to last and third from last finishes-- if the handicapping factor is really dispositive, not only should they be less likely to win, they should also be more likely to finish last.
|
It's far easier to hit the board then it is to win. This is why the show pool typically pays far less than the win pool. Nobody ever said a non-raced two year old cannot perform well. The doubters simply question their edge. It's perfectly reasonable until they start wearing roses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
The reality is that if you start doing this, you will find that the theories don't "hold". For instance, dosage, even in its heyday, was absolutely terrible at predicting who would finish in the money in the Derby. It only "forecast" the Derby winner. Which basically proves that it was a random effect of variance.
|
That's the idea. Pick the damn winner. That is, unless you enjoy making place and show bets. All the boxcar gimmick wagers require picking the winner. If some pattern makes the job easier then I'm game. [/QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
Similarly, if a handicapping angle works on the Derby, it should also work on the Preakness, which is basically the exact same race as the Derby, run two weeks later. Yet Curlin won the Preakness! Indeed, he ran the fastest correctly timed Preakness in history.
|
Fact of the matter is many Derby angles carry well into the Preakness and Belmont. The Preakness is NOT even close to the same race as the Derby. It is shorter and less crowded. Many Derby runners skip it while new horses come in. Who won it last year? That's right. Raise A Native with Buckpasser-x.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
The bottom line problem with all of these angles is the assumption that the Derby isn't a normal horse race. You don't look at Storm Cat versus Raise a Native sire lines, or 2 year old experience, or number of starts in the 3 year old season when handicapping a $16,000 claiming race on a Friday at Santa Anita. Why do these irrelevant factors suddenly not only become relevant, but controlling, in this ONE race in May at Churchill Downs? There's no reason to do this other than people really want to gamble on the Derby and not pass the race because of its psychological and societal importance, and these "angles" give people an excuse to do it.
|
I look at all that stuff when wagering on younger horses. That said, these claimers are not running at 10F. I might look for Speightstown of a lightly raced horse in a sprint race or a Tapit stretching out to 8.5F.
Care to share how you wager the Derby or are you going to keep dumping on existing thoughts?
