Mike Beer and Andy Serling are both trying to beat American Pharoah

[DeltaLover]

I do not have a problem, when a public handicapper is going against a 2-5 shot. Not when it is a frozen Thursday afternoon at Aqueduct's inner track, with a messed up by the mad bomber tote board .. I contrary, I think that in this case, he is doing a good job, pointing the crowds to the right directions.

I have a completely different opinion though, when we are in the first Saturday of June having the potential of experiencing racing history!

The fact that the whole nation has turned its attention to Belmont. means that all the public figures of the sport, need to be very careful and even conservative in what they are doing and saying!

Ignoring the new super star of racing, anticipating his defeat because of this and that reason, it simply does not send out the best message..

I do not mind about the actual handicapping opinion (which was completely wrong and even arrogant as it was proven by the facts) but about the message that was send to the casual horse racing fan, who was cheering for his hero..

When you are trying to bring in new fans to the game, you do not try to impress your peers and regulars with your creative handicapping and ability to discover hidden value. Instead you praise the new super, promoting his heroic image to the wide public, hoping for the next triple crown winner and giving out an ABC 101 handicapping opinion and you are simply rooting for the him.

[Stillriledup]

DL
Youre saying that analysts should be disingenuous to current customers so they can coddle people who come once a year, if that? This is one of the biggest problems racing has and that is ignoring current customers. Youre suggesting analysts lie to current customers so that the potential new customer wont get the wrong idea?

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

DL
Youre suggesting analysts lie to current customers so that the potential new customer wont get the wrong idea?

If you want to put it in this way, then I do not think I suggested them to lie but just to make a better handicapping job, than going against the obvious and failing so miserably

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

DL
Youre saying that analysts should be disingenuous to current customers so they can coddle people who come once a year, if that? This is one of the biggest problems racing has and that is ignoring current customers. Youre suggesting analysts lie to current customers so that the potential new customer wont get the wrong idea?

Good point.

But you're a little off on your last sentence. Potential new customers WILL GET THE WRONG IDEA given what Delta wanted to see happen.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

If you want to put it in this way, then I do not think I suggested them to lie but just to make a better handicapping job, than going against the obvious and failing so miserably

I disagree with your premise here, Delta. To suggest that a handicapping opinion which proves to be wrong, even on a marquee race such as this, is indicative of a "mediocre handicapping job" which needs to be improved to suit the adoring masses of the superstar horse, is terribly unfair to the public handicapper IMO. Do the rest of us handicappers look at this race differently, or compromise our handicapping principles, just because history is in the making? Of course not...and neither should Serling. If the adoring novices in the stands need a cheerleader for their new idol...all they have to do is look at the tote board.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Good point.

But you're a little off on your last sentence. Potential new customers WILL GET THE WRONG IDEA given what Delta wanted to see happen.

Wow. You realize you typed "good point" right?

I think im going to frame this post for posteriority!

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I disagree with your premise here, Delta. To suggest that a handicapping opinion which proves to be wrong, even on a marquee race such as this, is indicative of a "mediocre handicapping job" which needs to be improved to suit the adoring masses of the superstar horse, is terribly unfair to the public handicapper IMO. Do the rest of us handicappers look at this race differently, or compromise our handicapping principles, just because history is in the making? Of course not...and neither should Serling. If the adoring novices in the stands need a cheerleader for their new idol...all they have to do is look at the tote board.

I certainly am less inclined to discard a favourite in a race that will determine the next super star of horse racing than an obscure claiming race where the class dropping horse is attracting the crowd's attention becoming the 2-5 chalk. The reason of course, has to do with the transparency of the existing information, the quality of the related connections and the huge interest they are having in winning the specific race.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I certainly am less inclined to discard a favourite in a race that will determine the next super star of horse racing than an obscure claiming race where the class dropping horse is attracting the crowd's attention becoming the 2-5 chalk. The reason of course, has to do with the transparency of the existing information, the quality of the related connections and the huge interest they are having in winning the specific race.

And yet...those short-priced, highly-publicized superstars continue to disappoint on a regular basis.

[Tom]

Mike correctly passed by a 2-5 and 3-5(?) shot earlier in the card to cash on better value horses.

The name of the game is winning. Should he had passed all three races, or bet all three heavy favorites? Or filled his pockets with good handicapping rewards?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

And yet...those short-priced, highly-publicized superstars continue to disappoint on a regular basis.

You only need to a beat a couple of them to make money. You hit a hell of a lot of them tom make less money.

[Rex Phinney]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I do not have a problem, when a public handicapper is going against a 2-5 shot. Not when it is a frozen Thursday afternoon at Aqueduct's inner track, with a messed up by the mad bomber tote board .. I contrary, I think that in this case, he is doing a good job, pointing the crowds to the right directions.

I have a completely different opinion though, when we are in the first Saturday of June having the potential of experiencing racing history!

The fact that the whole nation has turned its attention to Belmont. means that all the public figures of the sport, need to be very careful and even conservative in what they are doing and saying!

Ignoring the new super star of racing, anticipating his defeat because of this and that reason, it simply does not send out the best message..

I do not mind about the actual handicapping opinion (which was completely wrong and even arrogant as it was proven by the facts) but about the message that was send to the casual horse racing fan, who was cheering for his hero..

When you are trying to bring in new fans to the game, you do not try to impress your peers and regulars with your creative handicapping and ability to discover hidden value. Instead you praise the new super, promoting his heroic image to the wide public, hoping for the next triple crown winner and giving out an ABC 101 handicapping opinion and you are simply rooting for the him.

This is easily one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read. They are arrogant for saying that a horse would fail for the 13th time in a row? Think about that for a minute.

The "casual fan" got their fill of hype if they were watching NBC, all 6 on air personalities picked AP to win, Jerry Bailey was practically standing on the tables taking his clothes off crazy over the horse. Those same fans would have lost a sh!t ton of money Saturday if they played the bleeding heart bet and played Tonalist, Bayern, Untapable etc.

You are forgetting that when they made their picks he wasn't the next super horse yet, another one was trying the same thing 12 months ago.

They are handicappers not cheerleaders, shame on you for not realizing the difference.

So as it is he won and we can all rejoice and enjoy the greatness, I don't think anyone here was putting the pink slip to their car behind Frosted or Materiality, so what does it matter.

[classhandicapper]

I think a reasonable compromise is for public handicappers to tell customers who they think the most likely winner is and to also give some guidance as to who they think might be the best value given the probable odds.

That way, you list American Pharoah first or say he's the most likely winner and then make the case for why you think it's smarter to bet against him given the odds.

I gave American Pharoah a 50%-55% chance of winning, but I played Mubtaahij to win/place and under AP because I expected him to run better (possibly much better) which put him right in the thick of it against Frosted and Materiality at longer odds. So if AP blew out at the distance, he could win and if not he might still fill out the exacta.

IMO, he did run better, but not by enough. I believe he didn't change leads again. I need to watch the replay again. Had he changed leads he almost certainly gets 3rd and maybe even 2nd. 1 1/2 miles is a long way to go on the same lead.

[burnsy]

Originally Posted by Tom

You only need to a beat a couple of them to make money. You hit a hell of a lot of them tom make less money.

Said the man that wisely knows how to actually make money playing horses. The two public handicappers are wisely trying to make ROI and know the true chances, they don't pick one race a year. People that want to be placated or told they are right......should stick to Fox News and MSNBC. According to some, thinking for ones self is a problem.............its not if you want to win in horse racing, one of the reasons I like it. Telling people in this country what they "want to hear" is what makes a sucker, a sucker..........."look honey the two gambling experts picked AP." "Gee, that's so obvious it can't be wrong."............. In what universe does life work this way? But people believe it..........keep gambling..... That right there is why most people can not do well at gambling.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

They are handicappers not cheerleaders, shame on you for not realizing the difference.

In this case they did a very pool job..

Note:
Please keep the shame for yourself..

[porchy44]

Originally Posted by pandy

I agree. I personally thought he was an underlay, which proved to be wrong, .....

Why are you wrong ? A horse can still win and you can be still right about the horse being an underlay.