- DRF Bets
- Handicapping & PPsThoroughbred Past Performances
ReportsPremium NewsDigital PapersHorsemen's Products
- DRF Classic PDF PPs
- DRF Formulator PPs
- DRF EasyForm PPs
- Daily Racing Program PPs
- Equibase PPs
- TrackMaster PPs
- NewsCategoriesTrack Notes
- DRF TV
- StorePast Performances
- Compare all DRF PPs
- DRF Formulator PPs
- DRF Classic PPs
- DRF EasyForm PPs
- Daily Racing Program PPs
- Expanded Closer Looks
- Equibase & Trackmaster PPs - Thoroughbred
Free: Usually reliable mutuel field may fail to cash in Kentucky Derby Future Wager
Ever get the feeling you took a wrong turn? Backed the wrong horse?
Perhaps then, you will relate to apprehension regarding the 2012 Kentucky Derby Future Wager. Something this year is very odd.
The third and final pool for the 2012 Derby closes Sunday at 6:30 p.m. Eastern, and this handicapper’s ticket will be the same as the first two pools – No. 24, “all others.”
If the season continues on its surprisingly predictable path, the ticket will be a loser.
Churchill Downs introduced parimutuel future wagering in 1999, and for 13 years the theme usually is change. Even though the pools always include the top 23 Derby candidates of late January, February, and March, the candidates often fall short.
For recent Breeders’ Cup Juvenile winners, the trail has been particularly tough.
Seven of the last 13 BC Juvenile winners never won again: Answer Lively (1998), Anees (1999), Johannesburg (2001), Vindication (2002), Action This Day (2003), Wilko (2004), Stevie Wonderboy (2005), and Vale of York (2009).
Macho Uno (2000) missed the Derby, though he later won two graded stakes. War Pass (2007) won an allowance, finished second in the Wood, and never ran again. Midshipman (2008) and Uncle Mo (2010) missed the Derby.
The exception was Street Sense (2006), still the only Juvenile winner to win the Derby.
The Derby also is tough for in-the-money BC finishers. Since 1998, only 11 made it to the Derby gate. Just two hit the board. Cat Thief, third in 1998, was third in the Derby. Afleet Alex, second in 2003, was third in the Derby.
Into this welcome chaos, many Future Wager bettors view the list of 23 individual runners with disdain. Wager on a single horse, one of the top 2-year-olds of the previous year? You must be kidding.
The alternative is ever-reliable No. 24, “all others,” which includes hundreds of Triple Crown nominees. Do unknown late-bloomers ever win? You bet they do.
Animal Kingdom (2011 Derby) and Big Brown (2008) were No. 24’s the first two pools. Mine that Bird (2009) was No. 24 all three pools. No. 24 is a profitable bet.
No. 24 won six times in Pool 1, generating a $44 return for $26 invested ($2 wagers).
No. 24 also won six times in Pool 2, generating a $93.20 return from $26 invested.
No. 24 won three times in Pool 3, generating a return of $87.40 from $26 invested.
Over the past four years, No. 24 has won seven of the 12 Future Wager pools.
However, three previous years (2005 to 2007) were not good. No. 24 went 0 for 9.
Now it looks like No. 24 will generate a goose egg in 2012.
Although the BC Juvenile is not usually a key race, 2011 is proving to be the exception.
For the first time in the Breeders’ Cup era, the one-two-three Juvenile finishers have returned to win graded stakes prior to the first Saturday in May.
Hansen (Grade 3 Gotham), Union Rags (Grade 2 Fountain of Youth), and Creative Cause (Grade 2 San Felipe) have maintained, and improved, on their outstanding form of 2011.
Technically, the graded stakes achievement has never happened, though 1984 top BC finishers came close when they commenced their Derby seasons. The winner Chief’s Crown won two Grade 1’s – the Flamingo at Hialeah and Blue Grass at Keeneland.
BC runner-up Tank’s Prospect won the Grade 3 El Camino Real Derby at Bay Meadows and the Grade 1 Arkansas Derby at Oaklawn Park; third place Spend a Buck romped in two big ungraded races at Garden State Park – the Cherry Hill Mile and Garden State.
Spend a Buck, Tank’s Prospect, and Chief’s Crown – led their division at 2 and also 3.
This year, history is repeating itself. Months after they finished one-two-three in the Breeders’ Cup, Hansen, Union Rags, and Creative Cause continue to lead their division at age 3.
Those three consistent colts might cause some bettors to re-think wagering strategy for this weekend’s third and final pool of 2012 Kentucky Derby Future Wager.
A shakeup in the division has yet to occur. This year, a shakeup might never occur.
And yet, Future Wager bettors historically committed to the No. 24 strategy are virtually obligated to carry it out to the bitter end, while hoping for at least 10-1 odds.
I still believe in chaos. I still believe in No. 24, but admit this year to possibly having taken a wrong turn.
My sinking feeling about the 2012 Kentucky Derby Future Wager is I backed the wrong horses.
"If the season continues on its surprisingly predictable path..." And THAT'S the real story. 2012: Most boring lead-up to the Derby I can remember.
One very notable exception to this was Funny Cide in 2003, who I had in the first pool at 93-1! He just happened to run two of the biggest races of his career in the Derby and Preakness, showing that again a year and a half later in the 2004 Jockey Club Gold Cup.
Im using the pool 1 field bet strictly as a hedge bet ,knowing I will have more than half the field on derby day.
As a "24" bettor, I understand your logic. It is very unusual to have the top 5 or 6 prospects from pool #1 still in strong contention. However, we are still 7 weeks out, and it will be very surprising if these top horses, especially Hansen, Union Rags and Creative Cause all stay at the top of their game for 6 months. I just don't see it. I predict one or two of these top horses won't see the starting gate the first Saturday in May.
Mr. Free, I saw that you are involved in the process of assigning odds for these Derby Future pools -- does this mean that you also have a say in selecting which horses will available as individual wagering interests? I ask because I have been baffled since Wednesday when I saw that Cigar Street was not one of the 23 wagering options, but a horse like Midnight Transfer was. This made no sense to me -- supporters of Midnight Transfer have had the option of betting him in both of the previous pools -- pools in which he received minimal support. Why would he be expected to receive any support this time around? Is the issue graded earnings? I know Cigar Street has none, but Midnight Transfer's $36k won't exactly earn him a starting spot. In fact, both of these runners must finish 1st or 2nd in their next respective starts. Therefore they are in the same boat in regards to graded $, but I think it would be very hard to argue that the Louisiana Derby is not a much easier spot for Cigar Street to get 2nd than the Santa Anita Derby will be for Midnight Transfer (he will not be the 2nd choice on the ML in the SA Derby). Furthermore -- the LA Derby is THIS weekend, so Cigar Street would have a big shot at generating a lot of interest/dollars in this (the final) pool with a strong performance, while Midnight Transfer has zero chance. None. I could not understand why Midnight Transfer was in the pool while Cigar Street was omitted, at least not until I read this article. Is it possible that you chose to keep the clear second choice in the million dollar derby being run this weekend as a member of "the field" solely because you wanted to bet the field? I apologize in advance if you do not have any say in selecting which horses are chosen, but I am simply trying to understand why the committee would prefer to list a horse like Midnight Transfer over Cigar Street. thanks, Early