Re: Bodog ROFL_copter
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hate reading random "handicapping" please more figures.
Clark, for what you say to hold truth he'd likely need to be head and shoulders above what everyone else is ATM. I don't understand why he was 4-1 in Derby and would be 6-5 in another race soon after. Seems like standard recent form fallacy.
[/ QUOTE ]
There's dramatically more information available now, even considering it's just one race. In addition, the Preakness will have at least 6 fewer horses, maybe half the number of horses, and the new horses in the field are almost always worse than the horses they are replacing from the Derby. Plus, field size in the Preakness significantly reduces luck relative to the Derby, especially for a closer. There are a lot of reasons the favorites in the preakness have historically won at a rate dwarfing that of favorites in the Derby.
Again, I likely will bet against the horse in the race itself. But -400 is simply a silly bet.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thremp, Clark is correct.
1) We have dramatically more info. Hugely more info.
2) 17-18 of the 20 horses were exposed as 'not good.'
3) The Preakness is max 14. SS can't get hung out on post 20. Generally, fewer than 14 run the race.
4) Many of the new horses will also suck.
Barbaro went from 5-1 to even money or so, his Beyer was only 1 higher.
Smarty went from 4.2-1 to even/6-5 or so to 3-10 in the Belmont. That's how pari-mutuel betting works with very good horses.
Secretariat was famously 1-10 at Belmont.
Given SS bloodline, domination at 2 years old and win at Churchill, the odds are likely to drop. +125 is my guess [if not even money] for Preakness, and I won't be betting him there but that's where it'll be is my best guess.
|