jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No Sekrah,
>
> As per recent norm, you are off point again.
>
> Andy Beyer's point, which is EXTREMELY valid, was
> that if a horse enjoys a speed, bias and trip
> advantage during a race and with all those
> advantages, still runs a mediocre figure for the
> level, then that horse will be a bad favorite next
> time out. His view was that considering the
> pace/trip/inside bias, the 102 beyer wasn't very
> good and was weak for the Derby.


Without a context of a pattern to use AD's speed figure, this is ridiculous.

>
> And he is and was right. Now, he didn't pick the
> winner, which is the part that matters, but he was
> right about AD. Very right.

He was right by accident. He had no clue why AD didn't run well. Just as he had no clue Chad Brown was mentally capable of training animals on dirt.


>
> As for you, you have talked in many different
> directions this triple crown season,. 35 posts or
> so before the Derby talking about how great AD
> was, only to eventually post that you gave the 9-2
> shot, a horse you fawned over, about a 10% chacne
> to win. Then you lamented after the race that you
> made a mistake betting against the super horse to
> get sucked into a 30-1 shot with a nice pattern.
>

Nice of you to rewrite history. I had AD as one of the most likely winners in the Derby and said the analysis of his pattern was DEAD WRONG after many like yourself gave him no chance after misreading his 9s. The most likely winner in a 20 horse field still needs to have a price to pay and the odds weren't there to bet him. If he's 10-1 in the Derby, I would have had a big day. This is a game of value.

I never said I made a mistake betting against him. If the race is re-run, I make the same exact wagers I made.



> Then a few posts about Gunnevara and Always
> Dreamin Preakness week.
>
> Then miraculously you pop up about 3 minutes
> before the Preakness, live to Classic Empire,
> Cloud Computing and Gunnevara. No idea where CE
> or CC came from as far as you liking them and of
> course, you again bet against the horse you called
> the second coming.

Wow. Didn't realize I had to ramble all week about a horse before I was allowed to put a bet in on him. Thanks for the news. Never mind that CC pattern was totally dark to me until yesterday as I didn't bet the Wood or even think about the horse until this past week. I opened up the sheets and got a fresh look at CC and I liked him as a pretty obvious overlay.


>
> So I would worry less about what Beyer says. He
> was on point, whether you understood it or not.
>
> Jim


Beyer's analysis of AD was no more in-depth than anything the grey-haired old lady that was sitting behind me said for 6+ hours. I bet she cashed more tickets than he did.