Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
To me it usually comes down to a balance between speed and consistency. In the poll question above it is stated that aside from the speed figures, "all other things are equal"... so I assumed that there were no significant claiming acquisitions. Consequently, I see one horse who can be counted upon to run a certain figure, running against a horse that usually runs inferior races to the ones that its opponent figures to put out. The continual improvement of the "B" horse wouldn't impress me unless the horse was a newly-acquired 3-year-old...and even then I would strongly anticipate a regression in B's subsequent start. In fact, this continual improvement pattern is one of my favorite "bet-againsts".
I find that the horseplayer's cardinal error is his expectation that the horse will repeat his last race if all things going into today's race remain equal. I know many "knowledgeable" horseplayers who only venture beyond the horse's last "representative race", when there is a "valid reason" to do so. I have never been impressed with this sort of "logic". If indeed the game were that simple...then we horseplayers would have a lot more hair, IMO.
|
In almost all cases I agree with your thinking.
I'd way rather have the more consistent horse unless the horse showing recent improvement has faster back figures and I have good reason to think it's heading back to the old peak.
In my own gambling I tend play only high quality races. So I run into a lot of those lightly raced well bred horses from good barns that slowly improve over time. So it's occasionally a tougher call.
