|
|
05-04-2009, 09:17 PM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,845
|
$103 dollar underlay
I would have to say so. Even in retrospect, I can't find reasons why this horse did not pay at least twice that. Maybe even more.
The last I saw there was about 17 million bet into the win pool. That would mean over $300,000 dollars were bet on Mine That Bird to win. There just aren't enough anything-can-happen players, hunch players and I-always-play-the-8 guys combined to add up to that amount.
Unfortunately this will likely become a conspiracy and cheat thread, but he wasn't the only horse that far exceeded any kind of figure it had ever earned.
My point is, if I would have had a ticket to cash, I would have been incredibly disappointed by what I got back for the enormous risk I took to get it.
Maybe the most amazing underlay I have ever witnessed.
Last edited by Valupix; 05-04-2009 at 09:18 PM.
|
|
|
05-04-2009, 09:21 PM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: America
Posts: 6,955
|
I have to agree. So did MTB's trainer Wolley who stated he thought the horse would be at least 100/1.
|
|
|
05-04-2009, 09:21 PM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,898
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valupix
I would have to say so. Even in retrospect, I can't find reasons why this horse did not pay at least twice that. Maybe even more.
The last I saw there was about 17 million bet into the win pool. That would mean over $300,000 dollars were bet on Mine That Bird to win. There just aren't enough anything-can-happen players, hunch players and I-always-play-the-8 guys combined to add up to that amount.
Unfortunately this will likely become a conspiracy and cheat thread, but he wasn't the only horse that far exceeded any kind of figure it had ever earned.
My point is, if I would have had a ticket to cash, I would have been incredibly disappointed by what I got back for the enormous risk I took to get it.
Maybe the most amazing underlay I have ever witnessed.
|
TVG had something that it was the biggest underlay in Derby history, I believe...
|
|
|
05-04-2009, 09:27 PM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston+Ocala
Posts: 23,757
|
no conspiracy, i actually saw the same thing last year in the
belmont stakes. when the sharp players know prior to the race that the favorites have a less of a chance of winning the race than a mine that bird, that is how you get low payoffs. if you think for one moment that people other than myself didn't know that friesen fire and mr. dunkirk had litterally no chance before the race took place you were quite naiive. horseracing is almost the same thing as the stockmarket, someone always knows something that you don't know. i knew those horses were gonners ahead of time, unfortunately i was not able to pick the right horses. i ran 2nd 3rd and 4th to the race.
|
|
|
05-04-2009, 09:38 PM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,845
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relwob Owner
TVG had something that it was the biggest underlay in Derby history, I believe...
|
Underlay/overlay is subjective. What is an underlay to one is an overlay to another. It's hard to make a definitive declaration.
|
|
|
05-04-2009, 11:16 PM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 2,636
|
ONe thing overlooked in this notion of MTB being an underlay is the weather. The track was sloppy, it was not sloppy fast either. When conditions like that hit, anything can happen so just based on general horse racing principles, few horses should be 100-1 in that. Although I'll grant you Atomic Rain or that D Wayne Lucas colt probably were underlays..
|
|
|
05-04-2009, 11:28 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NY USA
Posts: 974
|
I think the biggest underlay was in the 2005 Woodward at Belmont. Dutrow had the chalk St. Liam and a separate betting interest entry of rabbits. The two rabbits who were both 10K claimers and not entered to win but only bother Commentator were bet down to 24-1 and had 10K bet on them to win.
__________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
05-04-2009, 11:36 PM
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 2,636
|
Some of those MD horses in the Preakness too. What was the one: Water Cannon? Magic Wisner was legit at whatever odds he was but some of them..
|
|
|
05-05-2009, 12:23 AM
|
#9
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 328
|
Rick's Natural Star in the BC Turf will always be the most infamous underlay. Went off at 56-1. Don't know how much money was actually wagered on him, but to this day it's still mind-boggling to think even a single dollar went his way.
|
|
|
05-05-2009, 01:43 AM
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 2,636
|
Dunkirk at 6-1 or whatever it was had to certainly be more of an underlay than Mine that Bird.
By the way: Is this about the worst name for a Derby Winner ever? Mine that Bird what the hell does that mean anyways?
|
|
|
05-05-2009, 06:58 AM
|
#11
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,898
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPinMaryland
Dunkirk at 6-1 or whatever it was had to certainly be more of an underlay than Mine that Bird.
By the way: Is this about the worst name for a Derby Winner ever? Mine that Bird what the hell does that mean anyways?
|
Are you saying Dunkirk's price should have been higher?
|
|
|
05-05-2009, 08:02 AM
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston+Ocala
Posts: 23,757
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relwob Owner
Are you saying Dunkirk's price should have been higher?
|
if mine that bird was 50-1, dunkirk should have been 500-1. dunkirk had no chance to win before the race, mine that bird did.
|
|
|
05-05-2009, 08:22 AM
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 373
|
Would have been in the "mutual field" in years gone by
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relwob Owner
TVG had something that it was the biggest underlay in Derby history, I believe...
|
For many years there was no chance for the fans to bet separately on potential booming longshots...with any field more than 12, the worst horses were coupled in the mutual field, serving as an entry...so in this case and recent renewals there would have been a nine horse mutual field including Mine That Bird, bet as one.
Last edited by oddsmaven; 05-05-2009 at 08:23 AM.
|
|
|
05-05-2009, 08:25 AM
|
#14
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 125
|
Nowhere To Hide was 45-1
Flying Private was 46-1
Atomic Rain was 55-1
Advice was 49-1
Last year Big Truck was just 28-1.
All those horses should have been more than 100-1. It's obvious there is no conspiracy here. Betting public obviously won't let any horse go off at more than 60-1 and that's it.
|
|
|
05-05-2009, 08:32 AM
|
#15
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,005
|
okay now is as good a time as any for me to ask a question that I have been wanting to ask for a long time.
Now, I wagered online and I saw the handle being with about 15 mintues left, around 20ish million dollars. DRF says the handle was 114 million dollars for the derby.
so is the pool you see just for on track handle only?
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|