Put Your Fingers Where your Mouth Is

King Glorious · #1 10-26-2006, 08:57 PM

I got this idea from something Blackthroatwind said to me the other day. He asked me how much do I bet and if I bet enough to where it would hurt when I lose. Well, I want to see who's willing to take a strong stand for their convictions. Maybe this won't take off but I figured I'd try it just to see what happens. The point here is to post what u think is a bold prediction for the BC and if it doesn't happen, u stay off the board for a week. I said on another thread that I don't think Invasor breaks the top four in the Classic. Well, how strong do I feel about that? Am I willing to impose a sort of "self ban" if he does? Now this is not my stand against bet but an example. I say that u can chose as many as u want to. Any takers?

randallscott35 · #2 10-26-2006, 09:01 PM

King, I like you but that is a very dumb idea. Nobody, including you, has to feel like they have to leave the board for a self imposed amount of time for getting a horse race wrong. We are all trying to win when we get right down to it....When we bet, we are taking the stand. No need to do it here. No pissing contests, and I'm sure Andy would tell you the same thing.

blackthroatedwind · #3 10-26-2006, 09:07 PM

I agree Randall and in fact King's " idea " is not at all what I was referring to when I asked him that question ( and I think he understands that ). My point in that question was to differentiate between rash internet opinions and ones someone is willing to back up at the windows and for a sum that can at least cause a little pain if lost.

It really gets to how I feel in general about people who give handicapping opinions, in that they HAVE to bet some amount that is real to them, as nobody will ever learn anything about playing this game without some very real gambling. Picking losers on paper may hurt your ego, but betting them will hurt your wallet, and is the only possible way someone will learn to correct errors and further their " opinion ".

In order to win you have to learn how not to lose.

King Glorious · #4 10-26-2006, 09:13 PM

Well, nobody else has to do it but I feel like it's sort of a way of finding out who's just typing things to be "heard" and who really believes what they are saying. He seems to think I'm so stupid in the way that I think and that I only say half the things I say because there is nothing to lose by typing crazy on a forum. Even though it's not really a loss, I still will feel some of the hurt he asked me about if I can't type on here. So I'm willing to back my convictions in this way. Just curious to see if anyone else is. Some people on here seem to think they are so much better at figuring this game out than everyone else. We all know that basically any so called "system" anyone uses, we still pretty much all come out with a winning % between 30-40%. Most of us are right around the 35% and it just pisses me off when some people post their opinions and others tell them how insane they are, as if they are so much more professional. So I want to see who will put up or shut up.

Bernardini · #5 10-26-2006, 09:14 PM

I agree with randallscott35, so what if you get a race wrong !!! here is my record of last 5 BCCs

2005 = 3/8
2004 = 2/8
2003 = 3/8
2002 = 6/8 (loved vindication)

KY Derby : outta last 7 times I got one, look at my picks..

2006 = picked Brother Derek
2005 = Afleet Alex
2004 = Smarty Jones
2003 = Empire Maker
2002 = Medaglia D'oro
2001 = Point Given
2000 = Aptitued

Okay, derby is hard to handicap, but nevertheless I'll post my picks for BCC again by Thursday, and I promise you if I'm wrong, I would'nt hide, no one would... this is where come to feel good about being wrong...

King Glorious · #6 10-26-2006, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I agree Randall and in fact King's " idea " is not at all what I was referring to when I asked him that question ( and I think he understands that ). My point in that question was to differentiate between rash internet opinions and ones someone is willing to back up at the windows and for a sum that can at least cause a little pain if lost.

It really gets to how I feel in general about people who give handicapping opinions, in that they HAVE to bet some amount that is real to them, as nobody will ever learn anything about playing this game without some very real gambling. Picking losers on paper may hurt your ego, but betting them will hurt your wallet, and is the only possible way someone will learn to correct errors and further their " opinion ".

In order to win you have to learn how not to lose.

That's exactly the point of this proposal. I'm trying to differentiate between those two types of people also. U say someone that's willing to back it up at the windows but I think that in some way, not being able to post on the forum might hurt some of them just as much, maybe more in some cases. U say that u have to bet something that is real to them. For some, this is as real as it gets.

Bernardini · #7 10-26-2006, 09:18 PM

okay, i will back up my BCC right off here goes :

Perfect Drift, Premium Tap, Lava Man, Invasor (tri box)

PD, PT, DJ, LM

PD PT, GW, LM

I will bet possibly three but at least one combo..
notice no bernardini, no being "BOLD" about it ... even though I love the horse !!!

randallscott35 · #8 10-26-2006, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bernardini

okay, i will back up my BCC right off here goes :

Perfect Drift, Premium Tap, Lava Man, Invasor (tri box)

PD, PT, DJ, LM

PD PT, GW, LM

I will bet possibly three but at least one combo..
notice no bernardini, no being "BOLD" about it ... even though I love the horse !!!

I can't make a case that Bernie doesn't hit the board. Unless he's injured. He could lose, but he'll hit the board.

blackthroatedwind · #9 10-26-2006, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Well, nobody else has to do it but I feel like it's sort of a way of finding out who's just typing things to be "heard" and who really believes what they are saying. He seems to think I'm so stupid in the way that I think and that I only say half the things I say because there is nothing to lose by typing crazy on a forum. Even though it's not really a loss, I still will feel some of the hurt he asked me about if I can't type on here. So I'm willing to back my convictions in this way. Just curious to see if anyone else is. Some people on here seem to think they are so much better at figuring this game out than everyone else. We all know that basically any so called "system" anyone uses, we still pretty much all come out with a winning % between 30-40%. Most of us are right around the 35% and it just pisses me off when some people post their opinions and others tell them how insane they are, as if they are so much more professional. So I want to see who will put up or shut up.

You don't understand what I am trying to say. What I was trying to say to you was that if you were forced to bet REAL money, a sum that hurts you to lose, on some of these opinions that you would learn to think differently. It is a subtle but important difference.

I'll give you a reasonable example. When I used to play the horses I bet a lot of trainer angles and was constantly taking off the wall shots. Yeah, I occasionally these hit and felt really smart, but when I started playing full time I very quickly realized these horses were losers for two specific reasons. One was very simply that they did not pay off over time but the other was far more important, playing these horses often made me overlook logical winners and I was missing out on opportunities to really make money.

The point is I only really learned this because I was making a serious attempt to make money at the track and, in fact, my livelihood depended on that. Kibbitzing wacky ideas is one thing, but pretending they make sense in a very real sense is quite another, and that is the distinction I was trying to make. Yeah, it might be " cool " if trainers took off-the-wall shots with these BC horses, and it might make some of the races more " fun " for some us, but it makes absolutely no real world sense.

hoovesupsideyourhead · #10 10-26-2006, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I agree Randall and in fact King's " idea " is not at all what I was referring to when I asked him that question ( and I think he understands that ). My point in that question was to differentiate between rash internet opinions and ones someone is willing to back up at the windows and for a sum that can at least cause a little pain if lost.

It really gets to how I feel in general about people who give handicapping opinions, in that they HAVE to bet some amount that is real to them, as nobody will ever learn anything about playing this game without some very real gambling. Picking losers on paper may hurt your ego, but betting them will hurt your wallet, and is the only possible way someone will learn to correct errors and further their " opinion ".

In order to win you have to learn how not to lose.

now thats a great lesson..well said..

Bernardini · #11 10-26-2006, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by randallscott35

I can't make a case that Bernie doesn't hit the board. Unless he's injured. He could lose, but he'll hit the board.

I still havent cashed the winning preakness ticket, yes i picked dini over barbaro. If he wins or hits the board im very happy, I cant make money with dini (may be with tri or super box). If i lose, i lose... right? besides, betting is one aspect of racing i enjoy...

blackthroatedwind · #12 10-26-2006, 09:33 PM

I'll go away for the rest of the year if someone wants to give me what I've lost since Alabama day.

Hell, I'll gladly leave forever!

King Glorious · #13 10-26-2006, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

You don't understand what I am trying to say. What I was trying to say to you was that if you were forced to bet REAL money, a sum that hurts you to lose, on some of these opinions that you would learn to think differently. It is a subtle but important difference.

I'll give you a reasonable example. When I used to play the horses I bet a lot of trainer angles and was constantly taking off the wall shots. Yeah, I occasionally these hit and felt really smart, but when I started playing full time I very quickly realized these horses were losers for two specific reasons. One was very simply that they did not pay off over time but the other was far more important, playing these horses often made me overlook logical winners and I was missing out on opportunities to really make money.

The point is I only really learned this because I was making a serious attempt to make money at the track and, in fact, my livelihood depended on that. Kibbitzing wacky ideas is one thing, but pretending they make sense in a very real sense is quite another, and that is the distinction I was trying to make. Yeah, it might be " cool " if trainers took off-the-wall shots with these BC horses, and it might make some of the races more " fun " for some us, but it makes absolutely no real world sense.

The thing is that when u make all of your comments to me about how illogical and insane I am, u don't know how much I wager or how successful I am at it. Just because I might say that if I were an owner, I would run in a spot that u might not agree with or that I think an owner should do a certain thing, that doesn't have anything to do with how I bet the actual field that ends up in the gate.

When u say things like u have to me, u are very condescending in your attitude. I've been playing this game for 20 years now. That may not be as long as u have and it's probably 99% likely that u have invested more economically into the game than I have. But that doesn't mean that I'm some rookie either. When u say that I need to "learn to think differently".....who are u to tell me that? How do u know who I've talked to and learned from in the sport that have helped me come to some of the beliefs that I have? U don't. There is a way to disagree with people, even to maybe help them see things in a different way, without attempting to belittle them.

In any event, when I said that I think Invasor and Sun King are both in way over their head, I stand by it. U told me that I was being illogical (again) so let's see who's willing to back up what they believe. I'm assuming that u will be playing the races at the windows and so will I. But I'm going on record here saying that neither of those two horses break the top four in the Classic and if either of them does, I'll stay off of here for a week. And yes, that will hurt me because I do like to spout off my opinions and thoughts on here.

hoovesupsideyourhead · #14 10-26-2006, 09:50 PM

ok ill take that action and lets back it it up with a small wager..100 bucks..you say invasor and sun king dont break the top 4..if im right you send the moneys to derby trail..if i lose you get paid..in or out..

ArlJim78 · #15 10-26-2006, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

In any event, when I said that I think Invasor and Sun King are both in way over their head, I stand by it. U told me that I was being illogical (again) so let's see who's willing to back up what they believe. I'm assuming that u will be playing the races at the windows and so will I. But I'm going on record here saying that neither of those two horses break the top four in the Classic and if either of them does, I'll stay off of here for a week. And yes, that will hurt me because I do like to spout off my opinions and thoughts on here.

What I don't get is staying off if you're wrong? That's not a punishment. Hell that's a free pass. If you're wrong about your stand and if you're really a stand-up guy you should stay on and face the music. I want you around after the classic so that i can say to you "I told you so" regarding Invasor. My stand is that there is no way he is worse than third. If I'm wrong I certainly won't be ducking you or anyone else either.

blackthroatedwind · #16 10-26-2006, 09:52 PM

You have skewed my words to suit your point which I do not appreciate...however, I think the point of yours I disagreed with was something about Invasor not being as good as five horses that Sun King faced in 2005. Since you seem to feel that is a defendable opinion I would love to hear the five horses and your concrete reasons that they were better horses than Invasor.

I will start by saying you better have some pretty clever ones because Invasor has run three races faster than any Afleet Alex ever did. Now, I am not necessarily saying Invasor is a better horse than Afleet Alex was but the bar is pretty high.

Seattleallstar · #17 10-26-2006, 09:57 PM

When I bet it always hurts, its no fun if you arent risking enough to where it hurts.

King Glorious · #18 10-26-2006, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

You have skewed my words to suit your point which I do not appreciate...however, I think the point of yours I disagreed with was something about Invasor not being as good as five horses that Sun King faced in 2005. Since you seem to feel that is a defendable opinion I would love to hear the five horses and your concrete reasons that they were better horses than Invasor.

I will start by saying you better have some pretty clever ones because Invasor has run three races faster than any Afleet Alex ever did. Now, I am not necessarily saying Invasor is a better horse than Afleet Alex was but the bar is pretty high.

What I said was that Sun King has been facing weaker horses this year than last year. I didn't mean each individual horse. Of course, Invasor is better than most of the ones he faced last year but overall, I think he faced much better race in and race out than he's faced this year.

#19 10-26-2006, 10:13 PM

My longhsot and not sure she will be one is Satwa Queen. She is my play of the day.

blackthroatedwind · #20 10-26-2006, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

What I said was that Sun King has been facing weaker horses this year than last year. I didn't mean each individual horse. Of course, Invasor is better than most of the ones he faced last year but overall, I think he faced much better race in and race out than he's faced this year.

I can understand that, as overall this has not been a strong year for older horses, but I also think Sun King has clearly put in some better performances this year, especially recently, than last year. Even his Woodward was probably better than any race he ran last year.

Believe me, I am not overly optimistic about Sun King's chances in the BC Classic, and think he is at best likely to sneak into a lesser spot. Certainly if either Euro transfers his turf ability to dirt, something I consider pretty unlikely, they will beat Sun King, and Invasor and Bernardini figure to be formidable foes. I do believe Sun King will finish ahead of Lava Man, and not necessarily because I feel he is a more talented horse, but I believe the race sets up much better for him. The truth is I am biased towards Sun King....I have loved him since his debut, his trainer is a close friend of mine, and his owner's wife is very nice to me...how can I not root for him?

But, honestly, looking at the pps I don't see what is illogical about Sun King. I am happy to take my chances against the Euros, Brother Derek is OK, and actually ran well last time, but the race dynamics don't suit him and when you add the extra distance in he hardly rates to beat Sun King, Flower Alley is a joke, Giacomo is absurd, Lawyer Ron is certainly interesting on the huge trainer switch but also has the wrong running style for the race and has never been successful against even moderately talented horses, Perfect Drift is showing signs of age and is nowhere near as fast this year as previous years, Premium Tap also has the wrong running style though he is an improved animal, Suave is hard to take but perhaps has an outside shot on his best but also does his best running on the pace and Super Frolic has similar problems but does appear to also fit into the superfecta mix as his races have been at least faster than most on a relatively consistent basis. Remember something about Sun King, he has shown dramatic improvement specifically when allowed to drop back and make one run, and that is exactly the style that gives him a shot to at least get a reasonable piece of the purse.