October 16, 2006 at 14:25 #3170
I’m still struggling to understand how Detroit City won the Cesarewitch. From my form analysis I rated him a definite Lay. For those of you who backed him. What did you see that I didn’t?October 16, 2006 at 20:53 #80100
Steady on Mortisha, I’m not sure I’m ready to offer up the last turkey in the shop to the bookies just yet! I take your point about the Champion hurdle. Where are all the Favourite backers on TRF? Surely someone on here must have backed Detroit City on Saturday?October 16, 2006 at 21:00 #80101davidbradyMember
- Total Posts 3901
Only mugs back the jolly – everybody knows that.
It’s about value and getting a run for your money with a 33/1 shot.;) Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂOctober 16, 2006 at 21:02 #80102
Hurdlers have a good record in the Ces, and if you read Dick Mordin’s write-ups about Detroit City, you’ll learn that his Cheltenham performance and the one before that were truly exceptional. They also showed marked improvement, I believe, which seemed likely to be expressed on the flat, without his h’cap mark reflecting it initially, on the basis of his hurdling.
He’d been trained by Noseda on the flat earlier, and was promisingly bred. But it was the hurdling times he returned for his age that were sensational.October 16, 2006 at 21:07 #80103carlisleMember
- Total Posts 772
Dick don’t you mean Nick, oh no sorry you are right.
bye<br>October 16, 2006 at 21:53 #80104
Quote: from davidbrady on 10:00 pm on Oct. 16, 2006[br]Only mugs back the jolly – everybody knows that.
It’s about value and getting a run for your money with a 33/1 shot.;) <br>
Detroit City started at over 20/1 ante post and was backed in to 9/2F. So someone spotted the value.October 16, 2006 at 22:14 #80105BulwarkMember
- Total Posts 3119
I had a tip from my brother, who knows a bloke, who knows a bloke, who knows a bloke that says its a cert (sort of thing). Even then, and it was a pretty poor Cesarewitch field, I couldnt back it, i liked lightning strikes, but DC won easily enough.
Detroit City is not however your run of the mill jumps horse, he is by Kingmambo (generally best, i find, with 1m fillies but his colts are often quirky and hard to place, distancewise), sire of rule of law, kings best etc. wheras he wasnt great last year, i suspect that the horse is very happy in training this year which explains his newly found consistency since he started jumping. I wouldnt lay him for any sort of staying/jumping event as he is clearly a horse with a question mark beside him (he could be anything and no one knows how good he is or isnt).October 16, 2006 at 22:21 #80106davidbradyMember
- Total Posts 3901
It was a joke – I admit a fairly poor one but a joke nonetheless.October 17, 2006 at 08:00 #80107guskennedyMember
- Total Posts 759
I’m certainly inclined to agree that Detroit City is a horse to lay at single figure odds in the Champion Hurdle market. He looks like a horse who will be suited by further and his trainer doesn’t seem too convinced about his CH prospects. Although I’m not a great one for statistics it does appear to be very difficult for juvenile hurdlers to make an impact when they move into top all-aged company and in any event I’m still not convinced that he was the best hurdler of his age group.October 17, 2006 at 08:48 #80108davidjohnsonMember
- Total Posts 4491
Some might say that Dick Mordin is the most amusing freudian slip of all time.October 17, 2006 at 19:26 #80109
I can’t complain. Just on the basis of Mordin’s rave reviews and explanations, Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â I’ve won Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£325 for Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£15 on Detroit City, and another Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£75 for 30 at Aintree.
Star de Mohaison at Cheltenham, again at 33s, wasn’t bad either. That was Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£99 gained for Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£3. Another was War of Attrition: Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£175 for Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£15 at Cheltenham.
You don’t abdicate your own judgement, but you’d better sit up and take notice when he raves.
I have Detroit City at 26s and 14s for the CH, but he doesn’t owe me an awful lot.
But the brilliant AP bets I’ve had on the horses he’s raved about (with explanations) are too numerous to cite; the losses, relatively negligible.
I must live in a different universe from some of you guys as regards my esteem for Mordin.
(Edited by Grimes at 8:31 pm on Oct. 17, 2006)<br>
(Edited by Grimes at 8:31 pm on Oct. 17, 2006)October 17, 2006 at 19:40 #80110FlatSeasonLoverMember
- Total Posts 2065
I was going to back it until I saw the trainer saying it was ay underpriced :(. As far as I’m concerned money talks and you need to take notice.October 17, 2006 at 21:28 #80111
Actually, LSL, I did take notice.
What struck me was that his trainer suggested a few weeks before that he probably wouldn’t run in the Ces, yet I noticed on Oddsmaker that money kept coming for him.
Then I decided to risk it and could still get 20s; a little later I put another fiver on at 12s.
But I’d have to disgree with you about the money on a horse always talking. Sure, it can be a very significant indicator, but by no means always.
Incidentally, Mordin’s judgment was backed up unequivocally by the Mirror’s Valuescope team, who mentioned a couple of big-priced ew bets, but basically thought Detroit City home and hosed.
Talking about significant betting moves, again, I noticed several weeks ago that horses little or nothing had been said about in the lead-up to a race, yet seemd anomalously low in the betting maybe 3rd or 4th favourite in the betting in the bookies’ adverts in the morning paper on the day of the race had a quite regular habit of turning up trumps. I didn’t have a penny on any of them!
The last few weeks I’ve been watching out for them and it’s been disappointing, but I feel pretty sure it’s worth persevering with. It means the bookies know something most of us don’t and they don’t want to draw attention to it by bringing the price in too drastically, but they don’t want to lose more on it than they have to.
It suggests the racing press have a shrewd idea about it, but since, as someone pointed out, we are really competing against each other, and not the bookies, I’m amazed at how open and nformative they are – even bearing in mind that they’re paid to be helpful.
<br>(Edited by Grimes at 10:34 pm on Oct. 17, 2006)<br>
(Edited by Grimes at 10:45 pm on Oct. 17, 2006)October 17, 2006 at 21:34 #80112FlatSeasonLoverMember
- Total Posts 2065
Grimes I agree I think. What I mean is that you need to take a second look at a horse that is well supported, though I’m by no means suggesting they should be backed. Sometimes the money is significant but sometimes it may be becuase of something superficial like the name or the jockey booking.October 17, 2006 at 23:52 #80113AlderbrookMember
- Total Posts 349
Not that I backed him, but the horse showed improved form run by run over jumps and towards the end by turning the races into stamina tests.
A literal interpretation of his flat form did put him down as a lay, but his jumps form was progressive and he had had a change of stable.
I would not have layed him, but I certainly would have avoided him at 9/2.
If you lay summat on literal form alone you’ve got to expect them to win now and again. Even more so if you lay them from ‘interesting’ stables (not suggesting that of Hobbs in the slightest btw).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.