This is a place for friendly and civil discussion of horse racing of all types including handicapping.
Latest May-3 by Wintertrian
Latest Aug-22 by Northof64
Latest Aug-19 by TexSquared
Latest Aug-18 by zowcownow
Latest Aug-17 by DogsUp
Latest Aug-16 by ChiefsCrown
Latest Aug-12 by Northof64
Latest Aug-11 by Wintertrian
Latest Aug-11 by zowcownow
Latest Aug-10 by Wintertrian
Latest Aug-5 by TexSquared
Latest Aug-5 by DogsUp
Latest Aug-4 by zowcownow
Latest Aug-3 by zowcownow
Latest Aug-2 by zowcownow
Latest Aug-1 by DogsUp
Latest Jul-31 by DogsUp
Latest Jul-31 by RAESFAN
Latest Jul-30 by ChiefsCrown
Latest Jul-25 by Plus2lbs
Latest Jul-24 by Plus2lbs
Latest Jul-24 by Wintertrian
I am begrudgingly going to include Code of Honor in most of my tris and supers. I don't know why I soured him in the first place, as he would've been my BC Juv pick had he ran. Maybe it's Mt. Livermore on the bottom, but there's plenty above to show that he should relish classic distances.
I’ll give you Orb and MTB but Super Saver was a stalker, not a closer and never farther back than about 5th or 6th.
Ticketman said...Not many
Then it's not a large enough sample size (for me) to have real relevancy.
At any rate, I guess that's why his odds are higher. He's one of those some people are willing to take a risk on.
Over 1/2 of the horses in the field have zero ky derby winners in their female family.....ever........but plenty of people will be betting on them, and many are chalk. Others don't have conduit mares that are type to win Derby. Those would be the ones I personally would not take a risk on. ;)
BUt everyone caps differently, and in this kind of field, I wouldn't even begin to criticize anybody's picks. Their methods, maybe, but not their picks.
So good luck to ya, TM.
GL brotha ... tough Derby this year ....
Curious if you read that link about the breeding and the horse coming up 0-0-0-0-0 ? no Dr. Roman, no numbers....
Big business there for someone
No sure what that's about bro ?
I thought the article was linked in this thread. Maybe I seen it somewhere else. Anyway, it was a long article, The Breeder was all set to breed two horses and notice that the numbers when the 2 were bred would be 0-0-0-0-0. This is because Dr. Roman stopped posting numbers. Thus, newer horse are getting no numbers and older horses are not being updated.
I may have seen it on blood horse, or somewhere else. Maybe just looking up the numbers trying to find updates.
It had mentioned the horse that won back years ago with a 9.00 was a year later moved to under 4 and so on. Going forward, they are going to be usless