Re: I Was Wrong
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thorograph -- Ask The Experts ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by p-dub on May 20, 2001 at 13:04:06:
In Reply to: I Was Wrong posted by Mark O'Keeffe on May 20, 2001 at 03:53:05:
: I was wrong in my evaluation of the Preakness, and more importantly, I've been proven wrong when I said that Thunder Gulch would never produce a classic winner. He has, but I reserve the right to knock him if PG doesn't win the Belmont(LOL). PG won for fun while giving the impression he does not know what he is doing or what he is capable of. He ran geenly today, and if he ever gets his act together he will be one tough customer.
: For the record, I stand by my assertion that despite the fact he won, from post 11 at 2-1, it was a horrible bet. I bet DB and Marciano to run in the exacta and got @#$% for my investment.
A horrible bet?? At that mutuel against that field he was a great bet. Good luck seeing 6.60 again. The new shooters were hopelessly overmatched which left the 5 horses from the derby. Would you take those odds in essentially a 5 horse field when AP and DB simply aren't good enough, Congaree figured to regress a bit from his excellent derby race, and Monarchos wouldn't get the pace to shoot at and also run on a track that doesn't promote his style as well as other tracks? I've never seen so much talk over PPs in my life. True they are significant but many derby horses have won from outside and PG isn't the first horse to win from an 11 hole. This kept him out of trouble and allowed Stevens to do what he wanted. Sometimes we overanalyze things to such a degree that we miss something that is staring us in the face. The Preakness has never been known as a race to get rich on but that mutuel was just fine with me.
Post a Followup