Quote:
Originally Posted by Real Quiet
I have to disagree with you Joly that picking a "third" place horse is disappointing. My bread and butter is finding the value in the 2 or 3 slots
|
RQ, I didn't mean to imply that it is "disappointing" to pick a third place horse, especially one with value. Indeed, sometimes a trifecta is made worthwhile by an astute play in the third slot (especially in the Derby). I only meant that I find it disappointing that our points contest can sometimes be decided by player A getting an "ABC" for 35 points while player B only gets "ABx", creating a 10 point difference. That 10 points is the same as picking the overall winner in another race. I guess my difficulty with our format is that there is absolutely no premium placed on finding value, whereas the horseplayer's credo is to find value wherever it may be hidden.
I share your negative feeling over getting 4 or 5 winners and being beaten by an improbable horse. Some handicapping contests have tried to address that by placing "caps" on the maximum win or win/place payouts. In major tournaments, the players at the back are still stabbing for price plays just under the cap near the end of the tournament. I don't know how low the caps might have to be to avoid just random stabbing.
I'm sort of rambling here, between races at Belmont. Back to the Pilgrim.