Polytrack breakdown today race 6

Not to be a redboarder but I had $20 across on that horse. Couldn't understand how the hell the odds were so high considering how sharp Motion is off the claim and 180+ day layoff.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by oracle80

How many races have you actually witnessed from keeneland?
And whats been your take on the rail, and running style of the winners?

oracle, this is a totally legit and serious question here just out of my curiosity because you seem to really hate this stuff.

what's the difference between the old keeneland and the new? why is everyone up in arms. at the old keeneland you would just bet the horse who would get the lead and you'd win more than you'd lose.

at the new keeneland, you throw out the horse who is going to get the lead, and you will narrow your choices down much faster -- it makes handicapping really easy lately.

aren't they really the same thing? a track bias is a track bias, so why is this one so much more patently offensive to everyone?

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

oracle, this is a totally legit and serious question here just out of my curiosity because you seem to really hate this stuff.

what's the difference between the old keeneland and the new? why is everyone up in arms. at the old keeneland you would just bet the horse who would get the lead and you'd win more than you'd lose.

at the new keeneland, you throw out the horse who is going to get the lead, and you will narrow your choices down much faster -- it makes handicapping really easy lately.

aren't they really the same thing? a track bias is a track bias, so why is this one so much more patently offensive to everyone?

I agree, the old stuff had a pronounced speed bias.
But its about more than that. Horses with no talent whatsoever are beating horses miles better than they are on a daily and consistent basis.
Its not poly I am opposed to per say.
Its the fact that its being marketed as a dirt replacement.
If tracks had room for a poly course, dirt, and turf, that would be fine.
But eliminating the dirt entirely is wrong. let the cripples run on poly all they want.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by oracle80

My sarcasm is usually unapprecated but Seattle and I have spoken on messenger enough over 3 years that he gets me. I'm an acquired taste.
I see people arguing the most vehemently over races and the like that i know they haven't watched or seen by the very eneral context with which they speak about them.
I'm willing to bet that staunchest of polytrack advocates on here haven't seen more than a few races, if that, on the stuff and they are telling us all about it.
Its frustrating.

didn't at all address my point, but oh well.

personally i've always liked to play Turfway park, well before the switch to poly. So last year i payed a lot of attention to it and watched many many cards. I was amazed at how different it was but also amazed that if you work at it and pay attention it really isn't so mysterious to handicap. Of course you have to approach it differently than dirt, no question.

Keeneland for me has always been an anamoly and i never have had any confidence handicapping it. So even now with the switch i haven't paid much attention because i don't intend to play it. From the little i have watched it looks like the action is real similar to TP though.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by oracle80

I agree, the old stuff had a pronounced speed bias.
But its about more than that. Horses with no talent whatsoever are beating horses miles better than they are on a daily and consistent basis.
Its not poly I am opposed to per say.
Its the fact that its being marketed as a dirt replacement.
If tracks had room for a poly course, dirt, and turf, that would be fine.
But eliminating the dirt entirely is wrong. let the cripples run on poly all they want.

fair enough, i was just wondering as i'm jumping into all of these conversations a bit late coming over finally from the espn boards after not enjoying myself there anymore.

i've found, in the days that i've handicapped and watched the races (about 2/3 of them) that most of the longshot horses who are winning aren't horses with "no talent" but more horses that are taking to the surface a bit better than others. most, and i use that term "most" very carefully, have run races in the past that would show them as capable of winning the races they are entered in -- just some examples off the top of my head: Connections from this past Sunday. He's not consistent, but he's capable of running the sort of race it would take to win it. His style suited the profile of the course perfectly -- and he paid about $61. Add to that the Malibu Mint/Hide and Chic exacta from Saturday -- based on how the track was playing, the first horse I threw out was Behaving Badly, and she got bet down hard.

Dirt substitute? No, I don't think it should be one either. But at the same time, I think that alot of people should stop pretending that it's impossible to handicap or bull**** to handicap and that they are somehow above it. It's been easy easy easy easy, RIDICULOUSLY easy money lately. I haven't done so well at the racetrack in months.

That's my two cents.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Intentionally so Dunbar.
read my response to Hooves 30 minutes before I posted this giving him kudos on the grass race he hit. I watch 5 tracks with streaming video live eevery day on Bris. And can tell you anything you wanna know about any of them.
Your the 3rd jackass to bite. I say we get at least 10 more.

I understand you did it intentionally. That's what made it all the more reprehensible.

I don't care if you were trying to prove a point to someone on another thread. When you title a thread "Polytrack breakdown today race 6" and Polytrack was not involved in any way, you are messing with the entire board. It's just one step behind those idiots on the espn board who liked to post that various horses, especially Barbaro, had died. Gee, if those jerks had only said they were trying to make a point to someone on another thread, I guess that would have been excusable, too.

--Dunbar

[Revolution]

Originally Posted by oracle80

The proper response was hey the race was on grass.
Lets see how many jackasses respond to this just off my first post, defending poly before they even knew it was a grass race.
I already gave Hooves kudos for catching the turf winner 20 minutes ago.
I'm sick of guys who don't watch races like you, talking to guys who do as if you know anything.

Nice to see you are exploiting horses that are injured for your own amusement.

Still waiting for that poly breakdown too. How about those 12 horse fields too.

[Revolution]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I understand you did it intentionally. That's what made it all the more reprehensible.

I don't care if you were trying to prove a point to someone on another thread. When you title a thread "Polytrack breakdown today race 6" and Polytrack was not involved in any way, you are messing with the entire board. It's just one step behind those idiots on the espn board who liked to post that various horses, especially Barbaro, had died. Gee, if those jerks had only said they were trying to make a point to someone on another thread, I guess that would have been excusable, too.

--Dunbar

Excellent post.

[NoCarolinaTony]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Hooves ok it was a dirty trick, but you know I'm sitting here watching 5 tracks right now like I always do.
Look at the responses already.
The "poly advocates" don't even watch races yet they know it all.

Mike is that you?

what do you have against poly? Have you seen it, walked on it yet, seen live races ? Just curious why so anti Poly?

I don't love it, I'm just not agianst it so far from what I've seen.

NC Tony