Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ArlJim78
You may get tired of repeating yourself, but I also get tired of seeing these angles portrayed as handicapping tools. Frankly I don't see these rules, or angles, as just ANOTHER handicapping tool, I see them as BAD handicapping tools. As you say, normal handicapping and common sense should apply to this race, like it does to other races.
Not having raced at two does not apply to many derby starters, so it doesn't rule out many horses. The far more difficult task is what to do with all the horses that did start at two.
You mention that you posted that list to show what Curlin is up against. To me that kind of thinking is wrong, he is not up against all that history, he is only up against this field on Saturday.
|
If they aren't tools what would you like me to call them? Past Performances can be criticized the same way...what Curlin did in the Ark Derby doesn't necessarily translate into how he will run Saturday but most handicappers ( myself included) study PP's...why? Because they are useful tools along with others. A tool isn't good or bad, it's how you use them. There are dozens of angles I don't list cause I fail to see any causal relationship in them...the ones I do list I can defend (except for Damascus one and I state that). Call me stupid but I think a lot of folks who are thinking about betting Curlin to win might want to know that no horse without a race at two has won the Derby since 1882 and with less than 5 LT starts has won since 1918...of course Curlin may win but betting him should be a decision based on all available info not just that which you favor.