Triple Crown (2004) (1 Viewer)

[Chris]

Because the other Triple Crown thread is last posted over 1 year ago

OK, here we go:

Smarty Jones wins the Derby going away.
And then he mops the field by 11 lengths in the Preakness.

Last we have the Belmont, could Smarty Jones be the first horse since "Affirmed" to take the triple crown?

 

[Patrick Sun]

It all depends on whether or not Smarty Jones has enough in the tank for that longer race at the Belmont.

 

[Seth Paxton]

Last year I was in Vegas and because of the length of Belmont and the rest he got in taking the Preakness off I put $60 on Empire Maker to win. Hurray for me.

This year I'd put $100 on Smarty Jones. He looked stronger down the stretch, he didn't appear to feel the need to take an early lead (won't get baited by a rabbit in the field), and was very consistent the whole way.

If anything I'd say ask yourself this, what other horse has looked like it had the slightest shot at winning that race if it went longer? Only Rock Hard Ten still looked strong at the end, other than Smarty that is.

I wasn't sold before the Preakness, but he looked great and unlike last year there was no other horse considered strong coming into the Triple Crown.

To me this is the year we finally get another Triple Crown winner.

 

[PatrickM]

Its interesting the similarities between Smarty Jones and Seattle Slew. Undefeated going into the three triple crown races and I believe the two horses even have the same number of wins.

I don't believe Seattle Slew was that heralded a horse at birth either just like Smarty Jones but I could be wrong.

Patrick

 

[Mary M S]

I picked Smarty for the win, Imperialism for 2nd (partly routing for the girl, whoops) and Rock Hard Ten for the 3rd place slot.

In approx. 70 years there have been 43 horses who have battled to this point yet lost at Belmont.

If Smarty’s luck holds since his head-bashing - he will avoid an incident such as that which plagued Spectacular Bid just before Belmont. I don’t think his trainer has to worry about a repeat of Funny Cides run at the Belmont 2003 (although he should think about it) Funny Cide was almost 2 lengths ahead at the 1 ¼ Derby, (Smarty 2 3/4 ) then 9 at the 1 3/16Preakness. (Smarty almost 12) Yet when F Cide changed his strategy at Belmont and set the pace on the rail instead of stalking as he had in his prior two legs to the crown, he ran out of steam. (Smarty stalked also in his last two)

But there really is something about this little guy. Every horse can ‘have a day,’ where he just plain does not feel like ‘playing’. But Smarty is proving himself to be an incredible all-round racehorse. Patient and calm at the gate seasoned, unflappable as regards track conditions, and not showing a marked preference for a particular distance, apparently to date still displaying untapped reserves. (He looked pretty fresh at the wires).

I just finished the novel, SeaBiscuit, yes some similarities of a difficult road for the horse, jocky, owner, trainers. Root for the little guy. Dust off the crown. I’m in the Smarty Party!

There’s a local stud around here "Smart Little Lena" famous for being scrawny and tiny (when the current trend was towards larger horses in cutting) as a foal and who almost died of blister beetle ingestion (his stable mate also aflicted was a fatality). Currently you can’t hardly buy a cutting horse out of top lines that does not have ‘Smart” or “Lena” in name and bloodline.

Be fun to watch the first ‘sons of Smarty’ come along. Some woman filling out registration is most likly going to name a filly 'smarty pants' (ugh).
I wish the little chesnut well!

 

[Gerald LaFrance]

I am going to bet a 100 dollars on Smarty how much would I win if he wins. I know nothing about betting the pony's?

 

[Jeff Gatie]

A horse will pay approximately double the odds for a $2 minimum bet. Say the odds are 2:1. That means you should get 2 dollars for every one dollar bet (minus some profit for the track, but this is just for estimating), so the payout will be $6 ($4 + the original $2 bet) for the win. So if you bet $100 on a horse that's 2:1, you'd win $300 ($200+$100 bet).

Example - The 1st race at Pimlico on Saturday

3 Uncorked (Castellano, Jr., A.) 121 LA b 2 2 6-4 6-3 3-1/2 1-Nose 7.90

 

[Denward]

Smarty looked awfully strong. He got a great start in the Preakness and was clearly in the lead after about 5 strides so he avoided what I think is the greatest luck factor in racing which is a bad start. He then settled into his preferred position right behind the pacesetters thus avoiding another huge luck factor which is bad traffic problems. Stamina was a big question surrounding Smarty going into the KY Derby, but he's shown he has plenty of that. I think his chances at the Belmont look terrific as there's no other horse that even looked close at either Churchill or Pimlico.

Smarty was 3-5 (or equivalently 1-1.7) I think at Pimlico and probably even lower at Philadelphia Park. I'd guess that he's going go off at about 1-10 for the Belmont. For a $100 bet, you'd get back $100 of your original bet plus $10 (woo-hoo!).

To elaborate on Jeff's post, the odds at a parimutuel racetrack (most, if not all of USA tracks) are determined by the bettors at each track. A race like the Belmont will be simulcasted at numerous tracks and off-track betting parlors around the country, and each site's bettors establish the odds for that site. So the odds will vary depending on where you place your bet. The quoted odds at the betting site already take into account the site skimming a percentage off the top. Also, keep in mind that the odds you get are the final odds determined after all bets are in. So if you place your bet when the odds are 10-1 but at race time the odds are 5-1, you get 5-1.

Here's a simple example. Let's say there are only 3 horses in a race and the bettors place $3 million dollars on Horse A to win and $2 million on Horse B to win and $1 million on Horse C to win. The total win pool is $6 million but the track takes about 15% for itself so the total available to pay to the bettors is $5.1 million. So the odds on Horse A, B and C will be 5.1/3="1.7 to 1", 5.1/2="2.55 to 1", and 5.1/1="5.1 to 1" respectively. These might be rounded off to "3 to 2", "5 to 2", and "5 to 1" for publication purposes, but the actual payoffs will be calculated more precisely.

 

[Mary M S]

"which is a bad start." Like so.....!

http://enquirer.com/editions/2002/06...lmont_zoom.jpg

Poor War Emblem, I hope SJ has a clean break.

 

[Denward]

I was thinking about War Emblem when I wrote that. I just couldn't remember the name and I didn't feel like Googling to refresh my memory.