John Gaspar wrote:
>
> I looked in the red board room for selections of the card at
> GP yesterday and had a question.
>
> I recognize that picks are made before hand and that you
> don't have the benefit of earlier races on the card but you
> do have the benefit of previous days' bias or trends.
>
> My question concerns the 8th race. I too liked Iwin to get
> back or go through his previous top in this race and thought
> he offered value vs foes that either ran new tops in their
> last or were possible bounce candidates. The problem I had in
> making the play, even at what I would normally consider
> acceptable odds, was the position that I would have expected
> Iwin to be in. He broke from the 7 hole in a 7 horse field on
> a track which greatly favored the rail and had been favoring
> the inside for 2 days. I couldn't forsee a trip where Iwin
> would be able to get the rail or save ground.
>
> Is this a situation where you would have to pass the race at
> 5-2 or 3-1 (the odds suggested) but couldn't resist the race
> at say 5-1 or 6-1?

TG--This is the second question in a couple of weeks based on a set of assumptions which, to put it mildly, I don't agree with. To answer your question as posed--if I agreed about the bias, I would agree with your conclusions, and need higher odds to bet the horse.

There's a recurring quote in Atlas Shrugged by a character named Hugh Akston (sp?)--something like, if your conclusion seems impossible, check your givens. Alydar? TGJB