Ask The Experts

I\'ll google it later but I\'d guess he\'d be the first horse to make the liszt of Dubai horses to go Derby/Preakness.

I\'ll show myself out...

Buddy who\'s a member shared the seminar w/me when he came up to the house for the afternoon. I liked Gunny w/old school pp handicapping. Seminar write-up gave me even more confidence. Almost all of our action (win, exacta, tri, P4) keyed Gunny on top.

I live across the street from my parents. A few seconds after the race ended my mother called and said what the hell\'s going on over there it sounded like someone was being murdered. Sorry mom, I lost my mind (and my voice) when Gunny made the big move on the turn. It would have been the score of a lifetime. Oh well. At least we saved w/the exacta and turned a small profit.

One of these days...

12-8-7-1

Thanks for the detailed response. I suspected IWC being out of the limelight might be a factor. The triple digit Beyer thing is why I thought he might wind up with more play - it\'s odd but I have seen races where horses w/triple digits showing get more play than horses with 99s...

By the way, on the subject of orange shoes, I had a brief fling senior year of college with a girl who liked to wear orange Chuck Taylors. She was considered fashionable by people who seemed to know better than me (I\'ve always been happy if I can get out of the house w/the clothes right-side out and sans grease stains). It was 1987, but some things remain timeless, right?

Almost certain that since DRF began keeping the stat in the late \'80s, no horse has won the Derby when adding blinkers. No idea of sample size honestly, and there\'s a first time for everything, but on the surface looks like a negative move.

surprised they\'re paying out on a rigged event, shouldn\'t they just refund all wagers, LOL...they\'re still offering other bets on the election though. 13/5 on hrc landing between 47-49.99% is somewhat tempting. slightly under 2-1 for between 330-359 electoral votes, @ 2-1 on +360.

was hoping to see a line on dems taking both house and senate, thought it might be worth a flyer here nearly three weeks out; there\'s potential for a wave turning into a tsunami and now would be the time to get a price on it, but they don\'t have anything, unless i\'m missing it.

(EDIT: The above is strictly a wagering opinion. The above is a wagering opinion only. In no way does the above suggest, imply, hint at, or advocate for any particular political philosophy or ideology. I will of course be waiting to make a voting decision until I see final sheets on all contenders. I hear the folks across the street have the CP-USA sitting on a big new top. Will it be enough?)

If I\'d have known my post was going to cause a $hitstorm I wouldn\'t have bothered. I figured a mildly amusing anecdote posted in the middle of the night might amuse a handful of readers, I would have put the o/u on comments at one and probably taken the under...

I\'m with you on the time factor. I get an hour or two on a Friday night to handicap and an hour or two on a Saturday afternoon to play. I make my own lines on the races I look at, sometimes it\'s more quick approximations, but I\'ve been taking the ML as a given for years.

Capt. Moss on Saturday was a good illustration of the problem, at least as it affects me. I was looking for a single beyond Flintshire in the P6. I didn\'t think Capt. Moss would be any part of the 10-1 ML but with the ML that high and a short-priced Brownie in there I convinced myself he\'d go 4-1. Figured beating the fave with a 4-1 shot who looked really good on paper was a good way to go. Maybe I should have, but I didn\'t see him going off 2-1, and if I\'d known he would, I wouldn\'t have singled him. Wouldn\'t have mattered in the end as I never would have had Laoban, and I know this is mostly my fault, because I shouldn\'t have, but did, let that 10-1 ML affect the way I looked at the race.