Who are you leaving out of the WIN spot your most worried about?

[BlueChip@DRF]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

a bad combination in big races!

If it's the post-time favorite, yes.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Mendelssohn raced with Lasix in the BC Juvenile Turf.

thanks for that info, Spalding.

I guess in rome do like the romans, so he will probably get it this time too.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

I think taking the purist view of "I am going to try and beat the favorite" is a mistake in the Derby these days.

I feel the exact opposite for the KY Derby. I rarely have an opportunity to wager a 20 horse chaos race. I can do conservative wagering any day of the week at any track here and abroad. KY Derby is when I put together some "wild n crazy" exotics because it's fun.....and because it can be way more profitable.

3 year olds doing something they've never done before is a crapshoot, and that's precisely how I play it.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by clicknow

I feel the exact opposite for the KY Derby. I rarely have an opportunity to wager a 20 horse chaos race. I can do conservative wagering any day of the week at any track here and abroad. KY Derby is when I put together some "wild n crazy" exotics because it's fun.....and because it can be way more profitable.

3 year olds doing something they've never done before is a crapshoot, and that's precisely how I play it.

In principle I agree and I play that way but I've chucked too much profit potential playing the ignore a legitimate favorite on nearly all tickets approach since I banged it up in 11 and 13. My highlights since were blowing upthe Belmont trifecta the same year. I used only savers savers to Nyquist in all bets. I was done last year in P3-4 before the Derby ran. Anyway if we get a Justify win I think the payoffs will be good not great. I play a lot of turf and get those type of prices regularly. So I don't buy into all the typed justifications of how great these last x amount of derbies have been. I'm playing for blood too but will definitely have the favorite on a top denomination A ticket this year so I'm not all or nothing!

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

In principle I agree and I play that way but I've chucked too much profit potential playing the ignore a legitimate favorite on nearly all tickets approach since I banged it up in 11 and 13. My highlights since were blowing upthe Belmont trifecta the same year. I used only savers savers to Nyquist in all bets. I was done last year in P3-4 before the Derby ran. Anyway if we get a Justify win I think the payoffs will be good not great. I play a lot of turf and get those type of prices regularly. So I don't buy into all the typed justifications of how great these last x amount of derbies have been. I'm playing for blood too but will definitely have the favorite on a top denomination A ticket this year so I'm not all or nothing!

Forgot to add the detail blowing up the trifecta in the 2014 Belmont. That was my last lick in the Triple Crown series!

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

but I've chucked too much profit potential playing the ignore a legitimate favorite on nearly all tickets approach

I don't ignore favorites. Keyed Big Brown, American Pharoah, California Chrome, Smarty Jones.

I just don't know what the phrase "legitimate favorite" means for this particular race. Few handicappers, on a regular basis, are capping races with 3 year olds in a 20-horse field who have never run 1-1/4 miles.

Some bettors also seem to be somewhat reactive to trends that are not dependable. (i.e. that chalkier horses winning between 2014 to 2017, or that big longshots in other years will continue or not continue).

Between 1960 and 2017, I think 30 or so horses under 5-1 odds won and 28 horses with odds 5-1 or over won.

Thus, any year can produce "legitimate" horse (often revealed in hindsight) like I'll Have Another paying $32.60 and Animal Kingdom paying $20.90, or Chesapeake's "rabbit", Aristides, beating him like in the very 1st KY Derby.



If the total odds for my ticket don't add up to a profitable endeavor, I still play it "for fun" with very little bankroll, because it's my tradition to place a wager on this race.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

Forgot to add the detail blowing up the trifecta in the 2014 Belmont. That was my last lick in the Triple Crown series!

Maybe you're *due*.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by clicknow

I don't ignore favorites. Keyed Big Brown, American Pharoah, California Chrome, Smarty Jones.

I just don't know what the phrase "legitimate favorite" means for this particular race. Few handicappers, on a regular basis, are capping races with 3 year olds in a 20-horse field who have never run 1-1/4 miles.

Some bettors also seem to be somewhat reactive to trends that are not dependable. (i.e. that chalkier horses winning between 2014 to 2017, or that big longshots in other years will continue or not continue).

Between 1960 and 2017, I think 30 or so horses under 5-1 odds won and 28 horses with odds 5-1 or over won.

Thus, any year can produce "legitimate" horse (often revealed in hindsight) like I'll Have Another paying $32.60 and Animal Kingdom paying $20.90, or Chesapeake's "rabbit", Aristides, beating him like in the very 1st KY Derby.



If the total odds for my ticket don't add up to a profitable endeavor, I still play it "for fun" with very little bankroll, because it's my tradition to place a wager on this race.

Boy it almost sounds like you are preaching to me! No worries I love the talk at this specific time of year. All of your points I fully get. I don't think you quite get how unrealistically greedy I have gotten! All my P3-4 tickets since 2013 had the derby winner on them to add up to roughly cost of ticket plays. If the favorite won it was lowest denomination on all wagers. That is unrealistic! And except for Nyquist whom I hated his pedigree, I thought very highly of the rest. Always Dreaming at his price should have been a higher denomination on tickets. My value radar is the best it's been since I started playing in 1996. I have had an average mutual of 7/2 for a decade creep up to 5-1. Since I retooled my exotic play my average return has been 7.58-1. It was higher but got chopped down significantly after an extremely chalky March. Long story short I get value seeking. But this race has not seemed to be much more than an average return in my opinion lately. My horizontal wagers will have big tickets with favorite included. In race I am going to attempt to tee off with favorite in 2nd position or worst and with a minimum of 8-1 on top. That is very doable and realistic this year. Both of whom I think will be the top 2 choices have weaknesses. This approach I think works. Favorite wins I get a top denomination P3-4(hope I'm alive anyway!). Favorite loses I get a top P3-4 and in race wager to a potential jackpot. If I'm right! I'm just not going to bet in a bi polar manner this year! Good luck man!

[señorclipclop]

I feel good with Good Magic, Hofburg, Vino Rosso, and Solomini in the win spot. Don't fear anyone else.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by señorclipclop

I feel good with Good Magic, Hofburg, Vino Rosso, and Solomini in the win spot. Don't fear anyone else.

I've narrowed down to Bolt, Hofburg, Mendelssohn.....still working on "maybes" Solomini and Bravazo. I also don't fear anyone else for the win spot. So there are 2 horses we both like for the win in common.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by TheGarMan

Its a little soon to say, but I'm probably leaving out Mendelssohn.....

Why am I worried?

Because if a Breeders Cup Champion who won his last start by 18 lengths and is trained by one of the best in the world wins the Kentucky Derby, I will wonder how I could have been so freakin' stupid to ignore all the signs.




But you cannot bet them all. So for me he is shaping up to be a "tough pass"...

This is the correct answer.