RSS Feed for this Blog

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Gulfstream Tag Sale

- Wednesday’s card at Gulfstream consists of no less than nine claiming races, plus a first-level allowance. Man, there are a lot of claimers down there. I don’t recall that being the case in past years, even my most recent ones up until last year. My earliest recollection of being at Gulfstream was in 1975; I was at the Florida Derby, and saw Foolish Pleasure get upset by Prince Thou Art. I also recall being there in 1978 with my mentor, Jake. We met a couple that was living out of a Cadillac, and they gave us tips every morning. This all transpired at the beach in the back of the seedy old Hollywood Beach Motel, but they turned out to be live; I remember in particular a first-time starter on the grass with Jean Cruguet who romped at 5-1 and man, I wish I could recall the name. That was also the first time I saw (and won on) Waya, the magnificent turf mare who captured my heart with her last-to-first rallies (and she won the Beldame on the dirt too); later that year she defeated the boys in the G1 Man O’War.

Well, enough of that for now; I get depressed when I think of the fact that the track is no longer there in a form that anywhere resembles what it was like. I will go and check it out at some point, though probably not this year, but it won’t be what I know as Gulfstream. I’ll have to give it another name.

Anyway, the one allowance race on Wednesday is for three-year old fillies. Morning line favorite Coronado’s Vision (Coronado's Quest) could be considered a dark horse Oaks prospect if she wins as impressively as she did her last. In the futures pool for the Oaks, the all-others are 7-2, and then comes Folklore at 6-1 and Wild Fit at 7-1. I’ll go out on a limb right here and say with some certainty that neither Folklore nor Wild Fit will win the Oaks. Otherwise, I don’t really have a clue. Wild Fit is scheduled to return in the Las Virgenes on Feb 11, and have I mentioned before that we’re going to bet against her?

[UPDATE: Lukas announced that Folklore will skip the Las Virgenes and point to the SA Oaks a month later instead; which should leave Wild Fit as a big favorite; all the better.]


Anonymous said... i was saying before, people are weird! does Folklore get bet to 6/1 favoritism for the Oaks, after flaming out @ 1/5 odds just one week ago???'s as if that race never happened...are people really that ignorant???...and even if she DIDN'T fall flat on her face recently, does she deserve to be anywhere NEAR 6/1 for a race that's still THREE MONTHS AWAY???...simply unbelievable...myself, i make Balance the favorite for the race right now, and even she was unplayable @ 13/1 odds...same deal with Brother Derek or First Samurai or any other horse who went off below 40/1 in the Derby pool...if you think you better than a 1-in-40 chance of picking the Derby winner on February 1st, no matter WHO it is, then there's a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in...that's what makes these pari-mutuel futures such a joke...with only 24 betting intersts, it's virtually impossible to get fair value on anyone but the "field"...even the longshots are gonna be far to low...and what's with these morning lines???...Battaglia makes Half Ours 30/1 to win the Derby, when the horse has never been beyond 5 furlongs and hasn't even run since last MAY???, i know his MAIN concern is not offending the connections of any horse, and attempting to make it seem as if the prices in the pools bear SOME resemblence to reality, but who is he trying to kid???...surely he can't be THAT ignorant...same deal with the "Watchmaker Line" that appears in that "Derby Watch" column that'll be cranking up least Battaglia (and the Vegas bookmakers) have some sort of vested interest in the numbers, because there's actual money changing hands...but shouldn't the Racing Form (which does NOT accept wagers) attempt to display odds that contain some realism?...of course, the Form has a working relationship with Churchill Downs, and also some of the Vegas books (who advertise in their publication and provide occasional article fodder), so i'm sure the Form isn't looking to step on any toes basically, there's a conspiracy to produce a big lie...or at least that's how it appears to me...even TRAINERS are falling into the trap now, check out this quote from Hollendorfer regarding Cause to Believe: "The people who rate the horses for the Derby had him morning-lined at 20/1, so i think we'll have to move up after today"...who is Hollendorfer kidding?...does he really think his horse has better than a 20/1 shot at winning the Derby???...maybe on race day, but not on February 1st, Jerry...sorry for the rant, but i just can't believe this whole Derby-odds in Vegas the past several years, it's become something of a sore spot with me due to all the casinos low-balling everything...

Anonymous said...

...incidentally, i do feel you can take a shorter price with Oaks futures than you can with the Derby...partly because the Oaks favorites are generally a little stronger in proportion to the rest of the field, but mainly because the Oaks doesn't draw a 20-horse field where all hell can break loose on the racetrack...for instance, i'd have been tempted to back Balance at somewhere around 25/1 or 30/1, whereas i couldn't have taken that price on any Derby participant...