This is a place for friendly and civil discussion of horse racing of all types including handicapping.
Latest 6/17/19 by PISTOL9
Latest Oct-22 by AureaReaa
Latest Oct-21 by DogsUp
Latest Oct-11 by ChiefsCrown
Latest Oct-10 by Plus2lbs
Latest Oct-2 by horseman1985
Latest Sep-28 by TexSquared
When Pat Day was still riding, half the crowd at Keeneland would bet on whichever horse he was riding regardless of its real chance of winning. Of course many of his mounts were the better regarded entrants anyway but his presence would make many of them unbettable. Some days he would ride five winners and other days people would be cussing him out lol. Bottom line, a good jockey sure doesn’t hurt but they’re not going to win the race without the horse.
Oldbettowin said...I’ve got Everfast down for a pretty significant regression in this race
Let's put it this way: If you are playing a superfecta, I would not leave him off my ticket.
zowcownow said...Maybe the best way to handicap the race is betting on the 4 jockeys who you "think" can win with a competent ride. Lets see --- Ortiz jr (wins a lot) - Ortiz (wins a lot at Belmont) - Lepareaux (really hot right now) - and Johnny V (Pletcher angle). Ok I'll box these 4 in an exacta and call it a day. No handicapping required.
IF you think it's a jockey's race, then you would have to play Lezcano wouldn't you? He's the top rider at BEL
In a four horse race I woul 100% agree. :D
Agreed. He'll be last, 15 lengths off the pace and pass Joevia in the final 1/16th to finish 8th.
Wiseguy angle......Ok....going with Tapit and Peter Pan angle. Sir Winston, Intrepid Heart (tapit), Tacitus (tapit), and Bourbon War (tapit).
I like these on your list but just can't get behind Intrepid Heart too much. I watched his Peter Pan a few times, he was only carrying 116 lbs and only at 1-1/8 and he was weaving and looking very leg-weary, almost drunk. That is not something I wanna see in the Belmont where they will be carrying 126 and going longer.
I feel this is a pretty serious consideration, which I normally would not negatively score IF the horse ran without looking leg weary. I certainly would not be using him first for sure. Breeding is one thing but it has to have proper reflection on the race track and this is not what I am seeing with Intrepid Heart. I think it's because he only had 1 race at 2 years old (another negative) and speaks to "foundation".........foundation is proably the most important thing for a race like The Belmont Stakes. It's more important than in the Derby or the Preakness or the Peter Pan.
Yes, the trend is toward lightly raced horses, but Justify and American Pharoah were FREAKS. If you think this one qualifies as that, then play him.
I thought the same thing watching the replay. He looked like a drunken teenager wondering down the stretch. I was going to play a box with him but now I decided to play Sir Winston and Master Fencer on top in some exotics in hope of an upset with the same 2 plus 4 underneath. I may not even have Intrepid underneath but not sure yet. I like Bourbon War better even though he has taken my money too often already.
You and I often see things the same way. Glad it wasn't my imagination the bad way he ran. If he had been carrying 126 I could have forgiven it, like I did for horses in the Derby. But to run that bad and be carrying light weight....... I don't think Intrepid will be on my trifecta at all at this point. Not after thinking about what I just said. I'd rather take my chances with a horse I don't have enough data on, than one I do have data on and the data isn't good.
Bourbon War is an interesting horse. Every time he doesn't run well, his odds are low. Maybe this time he gets it right.