View Poll Results: Is it a good deal for US that FOX now has the Belmont Stakes
|
YES!
|
|
134 |
42.68% |
NO!
|
|
45 |
14.33% |
Only if they keep covering the ladies' HATS!
|
|
16 |
5.10% |
Who cares?
|
|
119 |
37.90% |
|
|
02-06-2022, 10:14 PM
|
#46
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,871
|
I'll watch it on TVG.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
02-09-2022, 04:37 PM
|
#47
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: South of heaven
Posts: 385
|
Didn't ABC get the Belmont broadcast for a couple of years? I remember that turned out rather dismally. I'll bitch about NBC plenty, but continuity in such a short series seems better to me.
|
|
|
03-21-2022, 07:00 PM
|
#48
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 2,752
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
We are not peers with TLG in this game, Randall...not by a longshot. Our work, even if it was comparable, doesn't carry the same responsibility as his work does. He plies his trade out in the open, for everybody to see...while we hide under the cover of anonymity, far away from the prying eyes of our critics. If TLG were operating in secret as we are...then you wouldn't be able to say that his performance has declined since Harvey died.
We call ourselves "winning players"... but our claims are unsubstantiated. TLG's work is out there for everybody to see. And this makes any comparison between us and him very unfair, to him.
|
100% agree with this. We are not peers of Andy and his job is tremendously more difficult with more scrutiny. I am curious from Andy, if he feels inclined to answer, if, given his position, if it is more valuable for him to pick a higher quantity of winners at a likely smaller price, or forego a higher win percentage to land on longer priced winners on occasion with more of those running underneath?
I know we as horseplayers look more for the longer priced, hidden runners, and the information associated to it, but Andy has a much bigger audience that may force his hand. Or maybe he doesn't think about any of this.
One of the toughest calls for a public handicapper is a situation where you have a heavy favorite that looks very tough (say 6-5 morning line) and another runner in the race at long odds you really like (say 12-1 morning line) that might beat the favorite 1 out of 5 times. Do you put the price on top?
|
|
|
03-21-2022, 10:52 PM
|
#49
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,333
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Track Phantom
100% agree with this. We are not peers of Andy and his job is tremendously more difficult with more scrutiny. I am curious from Andy, if he feels inclined to answer, if, given his position, if it is more valuable for him to pick a higher quantity of winners at a likely smaller price, or forego a higher win percentage to land on longer priced winners on occasion with more of those running underneath?
I know we as horseplayers look more for the longer priced, hidden runners, and the information associated to it, but Andy has a much bigger audience that may force his hand. Or maybe he doesn't think about any of this.
One of the toughest calls for a public handicapper is a situation where you have a heavy favorite that looks very tough (say 6-5 morning line) and another runner in the race at long odds you really like (say 12-1 morning line) that might beat the favorite 1 out of 5 times. Do you put the price on top?
|
Shouldn't the idea be to pick the one you hope has the best value? It's impossible to know what odds any horse will be, as well as what it's actual chances are of winning, but you make your best guess. I don't feel a need to put the most likely winner on top, but more the horse that is my best guess will pay off the most in the long run. Sometimes this is a short priced horse but sometimes bigger priced horses.
There are a lot of things I think about when making my picks but one is not to focus on necessarily absolutely having to have the likeliest winner on top. We all bet horses that we know are far from the likeliest winner but the odds, at least hopefully, will compensate for that. Since I approach my job as a bettor, this is the way that makes me the most comfortable.
Having said that, I try to be careful not to haphazardly put excessively long priced horses on top, not that I won't bet horses like that, and will say so on air, but sometimes those horses are better second or third choices. That way, when I do, hopefully people will realize I actually do like that horse more than just taking a bit of a shot.
It's far from an exact science, and I don't want to tell others how to do their jobs, other than to say make sure you have the integrity to bet at least something on any horse you pick that is over say 4:1. Don't take shots with other people's money just to feed your own ego. That's inherently dishonest.
|
|
|
03-21-2022, 11:38 PM
|
#50
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 2,752
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by the little guy
Shouldn't the idea be to pick the one you hope has the best value? It's impossible to know what odds any horse will be, as well as what it's actual chances are of winning, but you make your best guess. I don't feel a need to put the most likely winner on top, but more the horse that is my best guess will pay off the most in the long run. Sometimes this is a short priced horse but sometimes bigger priced horses.
There are a lot of things I think about when making my picks but one is not to focus on necessarily absolutely having to have the likeliest winner on top. We all bet horses that we know are far from the likeliest winner but the odds, at least hopefully, will compensate for that. Since I approach my job as a bettor, this is the way that makes me the most comfortable.
Having said that, I try to be careful not to haphazardly put excessively long priced horses on top, not that I won't bet horses like that, and will say so on air, but sometimes those horses are better second or third choices. That way, when I do, hopefully people will realize I actually do like that horse more than just taking a bit of a shot.
It's far from an exact science, and I don't want to tell others how to do their jobs, other than to say make sure you have the integrity to bet at least something on any horse you pick that is over say 4:1. Don't take shots with other people's money just to feed your own ego. That's inherently dishonest.
|
Thank you for the response. That's a solid approach.
|
|
|
03-25-2022, 10:06 PM
|
#51
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,264
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Track Phantom
100% agree with this. We are not peers of Andy and his job is tremendously more difficult with more scrutiny. I am curious from Andy, if he feels inclined to answer, if, given his position, if it is more valuable for him to pick a higher quantity of winners at a likely smaller price, or forego a higher win percentage to land on longer priced winners on occasion with more of those running underneath?
I know we as horseplayers look more for the longer priced, hidden runners, and the information associated to it, but Andy has a much bigger audience that may force his hand. Or maybe he doesn't think about any of this.
One of the toughest calls for a public handicapper is a situation where you have a heavy favorite that looks very tough (say 6-5 morning line) and another runner in the race at long odds you really like (say 12-1 morning line) that might beat the favorite 1 out of 5 times. Do you put the price on top?
|
With Wood Memorial Day not far away,I’ll remind bettors of your $100 pick that day,a few years ago. Our mam Lalman struck that day. I guess that was a value bet that made up for a lot of losers.You know what might be fun,bringing back Crist and Beyer for a day. You could have a handicappers ‘old times day”and tell Harvey Pack stories.
|
|
|
03-25-2022, 10:11 PM
|
#52
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 20
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom
FOX, to me, understands what racng is.
NBC seems think is about some hockey puck making picks.
|
As a die-hard hockey fan, and someone who recognizes that Ed Olcyzk is actually quite intelligent with his analysis and picks, that's pretty short-sided.
|
|
|
03-25-2022, 10:24 PM
|
#53
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,333
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron
With Wood Memorial Day not far away,I’ll remind bettors of your $100 pick that day,a few years ago. Our mam Lalman struck that day. I guess that was a value bet that made up for a lot of losers.You know what might be fun,bringing back Crist and Beyer for a day. You could have a handicappers ‘old times day”and tell Harvey Pack stories.
|
I like that.
Game Token. Claimed from Contessa for $7.5K....made almost $300K for Lalman.
|
|
|
03-29-2022, 06:54 PM
|
#54
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,613
|
When I was a kid I liked the way Russ Harris did it. He would rank the horses in terms of probability of winning. That included the "best bet of the day" being the most likely winner.
The advantage of that to me was that I didn't have to guess what he was thinking in terms of prices.
If Harris's top pick was 4-1 or 5-1 that almost had to be attractive if Harris was right.
If Harris's top pick went off as the favorite I could skip the race or look at who he had listed 2nd and 3rd. If one of those horses was 10-1 or 15-1, then maybe I could play an exacta with that horse.
Of course that's only going to work if the handicapper is ranking the horses well in terms of probability of winning.
I also like what Steven Klein did.
He would handicap the races and the ones he was interested in betting he'd give you a minimum price. He'd give you the explanation and then say "at 6-1 or better".
Most of the time in my own gambling though I am doing what most public handicappers are doing. I'm looking for horses I think will be good value.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
Last edited by classhandicapper; 03-29-2022 at 07:07 PM.
|
|
|
03-30-2022, 09:47 AM
|
#55
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,871
|
Russ designed the perfect racing page in the Daily News.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
03-30-2022, 05:04 PM
|
#56
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Lakehurst, NJ
Posts: 1,035
|
Who cares what network covers what Triple Crown races?
I sure don't.
|
|
|
04-02-2022, 10:41 AM
|
#57
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,333
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Roulston
Who cares what network covers what Triple Crown races?
I sure don't.
|
Hard to focus on everything....especially when you're busy bringing the BC to Hawthorne.
|
|
|
04-02-2022, 01:06 PM
|
#58
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 946
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by the little guy
Hard to focus on everything....especially when you're busy bringing the BC to Hawthorne.
|
& changing the distance of the Turf Classic to 7.5 furlongs
|
|
|
04-23-2022, 07:04 PM
|
#59
|
self medicated
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: toga
Posts: 3,088
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Track Phantom
Thank you for the response. That's a solid approach.
|
His approach is exactly how you have to play this game to make money. If a guy just sits there and spits out chalk to pad his win stats. What use is he to someone that bets over a long period of time? Or teaching someone how to handicap? If your someone that’s at that track on vacation and wants to cash a ticket, just to cash , then it’s fine. There are tons of chalky “Public Handicappers “ that supply those winners (use the term loosely) daily. Not to mention names but I see them in TV all the time. The best ones are the guys that actually play to win . You can cash 3 chalk tickets and still lose that day or in two days . You have to hunt for value. By the way if the horse is 12-1 and you think it has a 20 % chance of winning. You are using that horse every time. If you play exactas you’re crazy not to use a horse like that. People should really watch guys like Andy to figure out how they do it……. Not just listen for what they are necessarily picking. I always get a kick out of the tip sheets at Saratoga, the next day , after a chalk day, they’ll scream . “Five winners in top!” Yeah, all five combined paid less than 30 dollars on two dollar bets! Gee, thanks but no thanks. What happens when it goes back to 33% chalk ? Which over a long period of time that’s exactly about what it is.
People that are successful in the contests. You have no shot in those by just going chalk constantly. There comes a time where you gotta find one and take a stand. At least one or two times a card.
|
|
|
04-28-2022, 06:17 PM
|
#60
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Lakehurst, NJ
Posts: 1,035
|
It's boring having the Breeders' Cup at the same venues every year.
And what about Laurel?
If Maryland is good enough to host one of the Triple Crown races every year, then why aren't they good enough to host a Breeders' Cup once in a while?
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|