[ADPinWDC]

KY Derby UPDATE: FAVE OMAHA BEACH SCRATCHED 
Unfortunately, forecast has morning RAIN in it. Who's a Mudder? 

Here's what I am picking up from chatter: 
SCENARIO A:  BET ON BAFFERT 
Roadster and Game Winner, who finished 1 and 2 in the Santa Anita Derby last month, move to the betting lead with Omaha Beach OUT
 -- both under well-regarded Trainer Bob Baffert (a Five-time KD winner). Game Winner brings Seattle Slew blood, but those way outside post positions (16 & 17) are not propitious. 
Improbable, despite the name, is ALSO a Baffert horse -- and stayed with powerful Omaha Beach (the favorite) in a TWO horse race down the stretch at the Arkansas Derby on a wet, sloppy track a couple weeks ago.  Improbable likes to run, doesn't need to be kicked. 

Some aficionados will be using the three horse EXACTA BOX with the Baffert entries. Six bets executed on one order ($12): 
A 1st and 2nd finish for each of the six combos of Improbable, Game Winner and Roadster. 
It's a good strategy to increase a payout when you have three horses bunched in the 4 or 6 to 1 range as singles. 
An Exacta pays much better... because it's riskier. 
Example: Last year the winner Justify (Bob Baffert) went off at 3-1 with just a $7.80 payout on $2, 
and Good Magic (9-1) came in second, paying $9.20 for that Place ticket. Meh. 
But as an EXACTA combo, finishing 1st & 2nd, that ticket paid $70. So had you bet $120 last year, you win $700 on the EXACTA.

SCENARIO B:  INSIDE TIPS, LATE CLOSING ODDS 
The racing pros seem to be coalescing around #7 Maximum Security, undefeated in 4 races.  
(won a slow Florida Derby, wire to wire -- good looking horse with closing speed.). 
And #8 TACITUS, a strong gray stallion that runs from the middle of the pack with a powerful finish.  
Won the Wood Memorial, Apr 6.  Smart jockey in Jose Ortiz.  Should be in the mix at 1-1/4. 
https://www.kentuckyderby.com/wager/kent...-live-odds  

SIX PACK SCOOP
Sooo... my strategy is: the Baffert horses out in 16 & 17 will be bumped out wide.  I think this is basically a three horse race.  
So, I am shifting to the three horse EXACTA BOX with #5 Improbable, #7 Maximum Security, and #8 Tacitus. 
A $20 exacta ticket with a combo of any those three will pay out $500 to $800. [The box gives you six $20 exacta combos for $120]   
Odds on both MS and Tacitus closed late (from 8-1, to 5-1), so money is flowing in that direction.  Ideal post positions, a factor. 
For Game Winner & Roadster, the money is flowing away.  
Plus a separate bet for thrill-seeking on each of 5-7-8 to either Win or Place, depending on risk level.  
Any of the long shots are spoilers obviously, and you tear up the tickets.  C'est la vie.

[ADPinWDC]

KY Derby UPDATE: FAVE OMAHA BEACH SCRATCHED 
Unfortunately, forecast has morning RAIN in it. Who's a Mudder? 

Here's what I am picking up from chatter: 
SCENARIO A:  BET ON BAFFERT 
Roadster and Game Winner, who finished 1 and 2 in the Santa Anita Derby last month, move to the betting lead with Omaha Beach OUT
 -- both under well-regarded Trainer Bob Baffert (a Five-time KD winner). Game Winner brings Seattle Slew blood, but those way outside post positions (16 & 17) are not propitious. 
Improbable, despite the name, is ALSO a Baffert horse -- and stayed with powerful Omaha Beach (the favorite) in a TWO horse race down the stretch at the Arkansas Derby on a wet, sloppy track a couple weeks ago.  Improbable likes to run, doesn't need to be kicked. 

Some aficionados will be using the three horse EXACTA BOX with the Baffert entries. Six bets executed on one order ($12): 
A 1st and 2nd finish for each of the six combos of Improbable, Game Winner and Roadster. 
It's a good strategy to increase a payout when you have three horses bunched in the 4 or 6 to 1 range as singles. 
An Exacta pays much better... because it's riskier. 
Example: Last year the winner Justify (Bob Baffert) went off at 3-1 with just a $7.80 payout on $2, 
and Good Magic (9-1) came in second, paying $9.20 for that Place ticket. Meh. 
But as an EXACTA combo, finishing 1st & 2nd, that ticket paid $70. So had you bet $120 last year, you win $700 on the EXACTA.

SCENARIO B:  INSIDE TIPS, LATE CLOSING ODDS 
The racing pros seem to be coalescing around #7 Maximum Security, undefeated in 4 races.  
(won a slow Florida Derby, wire to wire -- good looking horse with closing speed.). 
And #8 TACITUS, a strong gray stallion that runs from the middle of the pack with a powerful finish.  
Won the Wood Memorial, Apr 6.  Smart jockey in Jose Ortiz.  Should be in the mix at 1-1/4. 
https://www.kentuckyderby.com/wager/kent...-live-odds  

SIX PACK SCOOP
Sooo... my strategy is: the Baffert horses out in 16 & 17 will be bumped out wide.  I think this is basically a three horse race.  
So, I am shifting to the three horse EXACTA BOX with #5 Improbable, #7 Maximum Security, and #8 Tacitus. 
A $20 exacta ticket with a combo of any those three will pay out $500 to $800. [The box gives you six $20 exacta combos for $120]   
Odds on both MS and Tacitus closed late (from 8-1, to 5-1), so money is flowing in that direction.  Ideal post positions, a factor. 
For Game Winner & Roadster, the money is flowing away.  
Plus a separate bet for thrill-seeking on each of 5-7-8 to either Win or Place, depending on risk level.  
Any of the long shots are spoilers obviously, and you tear up the tickets.  C'est la vie.

[Phogge]

Tacitus to break the Baffert magic.

[Phogge]

Tacitus to break the Baffert magic.

[martyup]

Tacitus to break the Baffert magic.

Not on a sloppy track.  He'll get too much mud in his face and will fade in the stretch.

---

Okay, what are the odds that someone wears a Star Wars inspired Derby hat on May the 4th?

[martyup]

Tacitus to break the Baffert magic.

Not on a sloppy track.  He'll get too much mud in his face and will fade in the stretch.

---

Okay, what are the odds that someone wears a Star Wars inspired Derby hat on May the 4th?

[Phogge]

Ah... Tacitus was coming in the stretch. Did not hang. And beat the other favorites.

[Phogge]

Ah... Tacitus was coming in the stretch. Did not hang. And beat the other favorites.

[qwerty49]

Well, Maximum Security raced greenly on the far turn, and got taken down for it.  But he was easily the best horse today.  I get why they expanded the field to 20 horses some years ago, but I don't like it at all -- way too much chance for injury in the middle of that cavalry charge.

Would love to see a showdown between Maximum Security and Omaha Beach.  Maybe at the Travers in August.

[qwerty49]

Well, Maximum Security raced greenly on the far turn, and got taken down for it.  But he was easily the best horse today.  I get why they expanded the field to 20 horses some years ago, but I don't like it at all -- way too much chance for injury in the middle of that cavalry charge.

Would love to see a showdown between Maximum Security and Omaha Beach.  Maybe at the Travers in August.

[baymeadows3408]

The stewards made the right decision. By drifting out, Maximum Security impeded War of Will, Bodexpress, and Long Range Toddy and nearly caused a multi-horse spill that would have been a public relations disaster for a sport already on shaky ground. Intentional or not (Maximum Security's rider said the horse drifted out in response to being spooked by the roar of the crowd), the rules say you are disqualified if you cost a competitor or competitors a chance at a better placing. The circumstances are unfortunate because Maximum Security was the best horse and Country House was basically unbothered (he was carried wide in the incident, but didn't lose any momentum) and backed into the win, but the rules have to be applied or else you set a dangerous precedent of basically throwing out the rule book in a race that gets 18-20 competitors every year. You don't want to basically tell jockeys that it's OK to drift out and collide with a competitor who is making a challenge to your outside just because they are on the best horse and that there should be an unwritten rule about the rules not applying in major races.

Vegas fans were understandably upset with how Cody Eakin was assigned a major penalty for his cross check in game 7 of the series against San Jose, but there wouldn't have been any controversy if Eakin hadn't thrown the cross check while leading 3-1 late in the game. Likewise, if Maximum Security stays straight, he likely wins (although you could argue that War of Will had momentum and was going to present a very stern challenge) and there isn't any controversy. It's unfortunate how a deserving winner was disqualified in the one race that has any sort of resonance with the general public, but if a similar incident had happened in a $20,000 claiming race on a Thursday, the horse is disqualified in less than two minutes and 95% of viewers accept the outcome.

One last thought before I drift back into lurker mode: Horse racing, which is already on shaky public relations ground because of the fatal breakdowns this winter at Santa Anita, is incredibly lucky that there wasn't a massive spill with injuries to riders and/or horses. Maximum Security and War of Will had their legs collide, and War of Will was inches away from falling in front of most of the field. Racing may have never recovered from such a disaster.

[baymeadows3408]

The stewards made the right decision. By drifting out, Maximum Security impeded War of Will, Bodexpress, and Long Range Toddy and nearly caused a multi-horse spill that would have been a public relations disaster for a sport already on shaky ground. Intentional or not (Maximum Security's rider said the horse drifted out in response to being spooked by the roar of the crowd), the rules say you are disqualified if you cost a competitor or competitors a chance at a better placing. The circumstances are unfortunate because Maximum Security was the best horse and Country House was basically unbothered (he was carried wide in the incident, but didn't lose any momentum) and backed into the win, but the rules have to be applied or else you set a dangerous precedent of basically throwing out the rule book in a race that gets 18-20 competitors every year. You don't want to basically tell jockeys that it's OK to drift out and collide with a competitor who is making a challenge to your outside just because they are on the best horse and that there should be an unwritten rule about the rules not applying in major races.

Vegas fans were understandably upset with how Cody Eakin was assigned a major penalty for his cross check in game 7 of the series against San Jose, but there wouldn't have been any controversy if Eakin hadn't thrown the cross check while leading 3-1 late in the game. Likewise, if Maximum Security stays straight, he likely wins (although you could argue that War of Will had momentum and was going to present a very stern challenge) and there isn't any controversy. It's unfortunate how a deserving winner was disqualified in the one race that has any sort of resonance with the general public, but if a similar incident had happened in a $20,000 claiming race on a Thursday, the horse is disqualified in less than two minutes and 95% of viewers accept the outcome.

One last thought before I drift back into lurker mode: Horse racing, which is already on shaky public relations ground because of the fatal breakdowns this winter at Santa Anita, is incredibly lucky that there wasn't a massive spill with injuries to riders and/or horses. Maximum Security and War of Will had their legs collide, and War of Will was inches away from falling in front of most of the field. Racing may have never recovered from such a disaster.

[Phogge]

Tacitus seemed to have a lot left. Perhaps should have been rated a bit closer but the 20 horse field is ridiculous.

In the Indy500 many years ago rookie Dave McDonald tried to jump many positions from way back on the start when the cars are bunched up. He succeeded in killing himself and Eddie Sachs and putting some other cars out of the race before the first turn. Caused some changes to be made at the Brickyard. Perhaps an argument can be made to reduce the Derby field in the future.

[Phogge]

Tacitus seemed to have a lot left. Perhaps should have been rated a bit closer but the 20 horse field is ridiculous.

In the Indy500 many years ago rookie Dave McDonald tried to jump many positions from way back on the start when the cars are bunched up. He succeeded in killing himself and Eddie Sachs and putting some other cars out of the race before the first turn. Caused some changes to be made at the Brickyard. Perhaps an argument can be made to reduce the Derby field in the future.

[martyup]

It was the correct decision IMO.  It must have been heartbreaking for the owners of Maximum Security to see their horse's number taken down.  They have been in the horse racing industry for many years and have yet to win the Run for the Roses, despite several legitimate chances.  They seem to be good people.

The Wests spend their time engaged in philanthropy around the San Diego area. They have built a wellness center there that serves 1,000 people a day, providing meals, job training, computer classes, and health care. A Midwestern work ethic instilled early in life informs their actions, and as much as Gary West enjoys talking horses, he is even more passionate speaking about helping those less fortunate.

However, my sympathy for them has diminished since reading Mr. West's reaction to the Stewards' ruling:

“I think this is the most egregious disqualification in the history of horse racing, and not just because it’s our horse,” West told The Associated Press by phone Saturday night.

“If we can’t appeal to the stewards,” West said, “our other options are the state racing commission. If those don’t work, we might go to legal options. … But we have not seen what they saw.”

The last line is what irks me.  How can he say that the decision was "egregious" before he saw the replay footage.  Bad sportsmanship IMO.

[martyup]

It was the correct decision IMO.  It must have been heartbreaking for the owners of Maximum Security to see their horse's number taken down.  They have been in the horse racing industry for many years and have yet to win the Run for the Roses, despite several legitimate chances.  They seem to be good people.

The Wests spend their time engaged in philanthropy around the San Diego area. They have built a wellness center there that serves 1,000 people a day, providing meals, job training, computer classes, and health care. A Midwestern work ethic instilled early in life informs their actions, and as much as Gary West enjoys talking horses, he is even more passionate speaking about helping those less fortunate.

However, my sympathy for them has diminished since reading Mr. West's reaction to the Stewards' ruling:

“I think this is the most egregious disqualification in the history of horse racing, and not just because it’s our horse,” West told The Associated Press by phone Saturday night.

“If we can’t appeal to the stewards,” West said, “our other options are the state racing commission. If those don’t work, we might go to legal options. … But we have not seen what they saw.”

The last line is what irks me.  How can he say that the decision was "egregious" before he saw the replay footage.  Bad sportsmanship IMO.

[terry]

The last line is what irks me.  How can he say that the decision was "egregious" before he saw the replay footage.  Bad sportsmanship IMO.

Not just "egregious," but the most egregious in the history of horse racing. Yeah, right. 

I also didn't like the threat to go to court. The courts are a good forum for certain things. Changing the result of a sports event is not one of them.

[terry]

The last line is what irks me.  How can he say that the decision was "egregious" before he saw the replay footage.  Bad sportsmanship IMO.

Not just "egregious," but the most egregious in the history of horse racing. Yeah, right. 

I also didn't like the threat to go to court. The courts are a good forum for certain things. Changing the result of a sports event is not one of them.

[Phogge]

I would have gone to court over Sal Yvars stealing Campy’s signs in the Polo Grounds on that cold overcast day in October 1951.

[Phogge]

I would have gone to court over Sal Yvars stealing Campy’s signs in the Polo Grounds on that cold overcast day in October 1951.

[Mick]

I would have gone to court over Sal Yvars stealing Campy’s signs in the Polo Grounds on that cold overcast day in October 1951.

All part of the game, boys.  All part of the game...

Look for a very young rookie, #24...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrI7dVj90zs

[Mick]

I would have gone to court over Sal Yvars stealing Campy’s signs in the Polo Grounds on that cold overcast day in October 1951.

All part of the game, boys.  All part of the game...

Look for a very young rookie, #24...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrI7dVj90zs

[BostonCard]

State racing commission ruled that the Stewards decision is final and not subject to appeal.

I guess "we'll see you in court"?

BC

[BostonCard]

State racing commission ruled that the Stewards decision is final and not subject to appeal.

I guess "we'll see you in court"?

BC

[Phogge]

Hey Mick, looks like the Big Red One’s OD patch is in the iso frame you posted. What’s with that?

[Phogge]

Hey Mick, looks like the Big Red One’s OD patch is in the iso frame you posted. What’s with that?