I was just reading an article on Breeders' Cup handicapping that initially made a lot of sense to me. It says, in part, that "longshots are for experienced Breeders' Cup handicappers".
I decided to do a bit of poking around in the Breeders' Cup results to see if this was true. Here is a history of the payouts for the winning horse of the Breeders' Cup Classic:
2005 - Saint Liam - 6.80
2004 - Ghostzapper - 7.00
2003 - Pleasantly Perfect - 30.40
2002 - Volponi - 89.00 (43.5 to 1!)
2001 - Tiznow - 15.80
2000 - Tiznow - 20.40
1999 - Cat Thief - 41.00
1998 - Awesome Again - 11.40
1997 - Skip Away - 5.60
1996 - Alphabet Soup - 41.70
1995 - Cigar - 3.40
1994 - Concern - 17.00
1993 - Arcangues - 269.20 (133 to 1!)
1992 - A.P. Indy - 6.20
1991 - Black Tie Affair - 10.00
1990 - Unbridled - 15.20
1989 - Sunday Silence - 6.00
1988 - Alysheba - 5.00
1987 - Ferdinand - 4.00
1986 - Skywalker - 22.20
1985 - Proud Truth - 16.80
1984 - Wild Again - 64.40
If you take definition of a longshot as 10-1 or better ($22 payoff), that means only six of the 22 Classic winners have been longshots, so I guess the advice here is sound.
Of course, what stands out looking at these results isn't the sound bets made on favorites or upper-ranked horses, but the incredible payoffs on the long shots we're supposed to avoid. I really wish I had made the "mistake" of placing a sizable wager on Arcangues!
Technorati tag(s): breeders cup, breeders cup betting, horse racing odds
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment