Scottsville Sun 8/9/13

I think Cereza is the right one here, no saying Belt Up will stay, whereas Cereza seems to be looking for this distance and more.

The Madji Wrote:

---

> Yeah and I was balls to the wall Lade Jade
> Touching Base for the swinger (open bet) ..paid
> poorly ...

someone else was also balls to the wall....

bayern Wrote:

---

> I think Cereza is the right one here, no saying
> Belt Up will stay, whereas Cereza seems to be
> looking for this distance and more.


OK...so you guys picked out my swinger....<

Why swing when, with the fav, you get almost 7 times the swinger pay-out on the trifecta :S

Ascot Charm a place is a steal at 2/1

Englander Wrote:

---

> Why swing when, with the fav, you get almost 7
> times the swinger pay-out on the trifecta :S


I'm a dupla....

Thor Wrote:

---

> Ascot Charm a place is a steal at 2/1


nice call.....(tu)

down the straight...they make to the inside....around the bend...they make to the middle outside....

Thor Wrote:

---

> Ascot Charm a place is a steal at 2/1


(tu)

Genuine question, not a moan or pocket talk, though I was on the example I will use... why at Scottsville (and to a lesser extent other courses) do jockeys head for that far rail coming off the bend in not so big fields? Using Zara's Legacy as an example, not the best of starters but got the rail, 4th back in Indian file. No huge problem with that. But as soon as they hit the bend Sturgeon sees horses and goes wide and ends up on that far rail. Why not either push off the rail a little earlier for better position or be a little patient and wait for a gap rather than go the long route? Obviously, some horses take longer than others to "get going" but then as I say, why not push off the rail a little earlier? I believe I am right in saying that, from off the bend, the near rail would be the same as for low numbers in a sprint and low is much preferred, so why take the long route and go to the "worst" ground? I have also heard jocks a number of times say over 1000 it is better to simply run straight(ish) because the ground lost trying to get across often does not compensate unless the horse is very good. So why do pretty much that over half the distance? I'm asking because I am interested to know if I am wrong, or is it that a lot of these jocks simply don't engage their brain?

Englander Wrote:

---

> Genuine question, not a moan or pocket talk,
> though I was on the example I will use... why at
> Scottsville (and to a lesser extent other courses)
> do jockeys head for that far rail coming off the
> bend in not so big fields? Using Zara's Legacy as
> an example, not the best of starters but got the
> rail, 4th back in Indian file. No huge problem
> with that. But as soon as they hit the bend
> Sturgeon sees horses and goes wide and ends up on
> that far rail. Why not either push off the rail a
> little earlier for better position or be a little
> patient and wait for a gap rather than go the long
> route? Obviously, some horses take longer than
> others to "get going" but then as I say, why not
> push off the rail a little earlier? I believe I am
> right in saying that, from off the bend, the near
> rail would be the same as for low numbers in a
> sprint and low is much preferred, so why take the
> long route and go to the "worst" ground? I have
> also heard jocks a number of times say over 1000
> it is better to simply run straight(ish) because
> the ground lost trying to get across often does
> not compensate unless the horse is very good. So
> why do pretty much that over half the distance?
> I'm asking because I am interested to know if I am
> wrong, or is it that a lot of these jocks simply
> don't engage their brain?

the condensed version.....

down the straight...they make to the inside....around the bend...they make to the middle outside....:S

Englander Wrote:

---

> Genuine question, not a moan or pocket talk,
> though I was on the example I will use... why at
> Scottsville (and to a lesser extent other courses)
> do jockeys head for that far rail coming off the
> bend in not so big fields? Using Zara's Legacy as
> an example, not the best of starters but got the
> rail, 4th back in Indian file. No huge problem
> with that. But as soon as they hit the bend
> Sturgeon sees horses and goes wide and ends up on
> that far rail. Why not either push off the rail a
> little earlier for better position or be a little
> patient and wait for a gap rather than go the long
> route? Obviously, some horses take longer than
> others to "get going" but then as I say, why not
> push off the rail a little earlier? I believe I am
> right in saying that, from off the bend, the near
> rail would be the same as for low numbers in a
> sprint and low is much preferred, so why take the
> long route and go to the "worst" ground? I have
> also heard jocks a number of times say over 1000
> it is better to simply run straight(ish) because
> the ground lost trying to get across often does
> not compensate unless the horse is very good. So
> why do pretty much that over half the distance?
> I'm asking because I am interested to know if I am
> wrong, or is it that a lot of these jocks simply
> don't engage their brain?

Very good question. Shortest way home the route to go surely. :S