Don’t forget who really gets the short end of all of this. The bettors who included RH or NI inany part of their wagers. Each horse is supposed to be ridden to win each race According to the rules of racing. That is why stewards Occasionally bring a jock in for “questionable” rides. Of course the bettor always gets the short stick .... We are suckers like that.
IMO - Justify was the most talented animal in the race With the distance perhaps being the equalizer. With The way it was run he really didn’t earn it the way I think a true champion should.
It’s like putting Usain Bolt and a marathoner in a sprint together. No way Bolt gets beat. Now have them go 26 miles. If you somehow make it that they walk all but the Last 100 yds and then run - well you have eliminated A gigantic variable for Bolt and he cruises. He is a marathon winner - but is he really?
Not quite. If someone got in the way of the marathoner for the First 100 yards and then they ran on, how much difference would it make?. What about NI suggested he was anything but a rabbit in the race? He had zero chance to win. Bettors deserved what they got if they thought otherwise.
I made one bet other than boxing my favorite numbers, I placed NI in all three spots with four other horses for a .50 Triple. Cost me $18. I guess I deserved to lose. Wish I would have known that before I bet!
Ha! Quick, I know you to be a good horseplayer, certainly better than I am, but I'll ask the question again: what about NI suggested he could win? If he went head to head with Justify, who is faster, would he have had any chance to go on? I don't get it. To me he was always in there as a rabbit, and I never considered him for the ticket.
Full disclosure: Although I had Justify on top (like most) I did not cash, as I had Gronkowski 3-4 and not in the 2nd spot.
‘gooch, I am far from a good handicapper. I have been going to Saratoga since 1979. Other than Saratoga, I occasionally bet on a big race. I have been part of this forum since just after LDK won the Belmont, reading 99.9% of what’s written, and admittedly, with no exaggeration, I don’t understand a thing about handicapping a race. I feel that picking winners is harder than hitting a baseball, therefore, my thoughts are: ‘it’s not worth the ‘work’’. If I’m not enjoying it, I’m not doing it.
I’m just in it for the fun of it. I enjoy getting a ticket with someone I’m hanging with and hoping for the best. I am a “$2 better” all the way. Now that I have Jackie in my life, we can’t wait until Saratoga so we can each pick three horses each race for a triple for a total cost of $6. We have a ball, win or lose. Mostly lose.
We may not have a chance of winning by using certain horses, but I don’t believe we DESERVE to lose by choosing them. Maybe we do, but I refuse to believe it. I don’t like how it sounds. We pick the wrong horses most of the time.
Maybe what you meant is that whoever bet on NI is a shitty handicapper. I’ll take that, because I am a shitty handicapper. I couldn’t pick a winner, with confidence, in a two horse race!
To answer your question...
I bet NI because he was working strong and Javier was riding him. I have witnessed Javier bring home long shots in big NY races for years. If he ran in the money, I wanted to have him. Those are the only reasons why I bet him. I had no clue what NI team’s intentions were.
I had the Preakness triple (Cloud Computing) last year because of that same thinking.
I believe that Quickcall's account explains why uncoupled entries are such a problem. It is the casual bettor, rather than the experienced handicapper, who literally pays the price when a horse is being sacrificed in order to aid his stablemate's chances. Million dollar race or not, horses with common ownership or trainers should run as part of an entry.
There was a theory for Noble Indy winning or running in the money that I considered although didn't ultimately bet- Justify breaks poorly (he did in his early pre TC races) and NI gets out to an easy lead. I thought that was at least possible.
Well, I suppose one could think going into the Belmont that no way Restoring Hope would be "allowed" to win, yet none other that Thorograph's Jerry Brown got sucked in on him. Hey, apparently all's fair in Love, War and Horse Racing.
The Daily Racing Form reported Thursday that New York stewards met with jockey Florent Geroux to discuss his ride in this year's Belmont Stakes, but further details about that conversation have not been released. Stewards referred questions from the Form to the New York State Gaming Commission, which did not return requests for comment.