Twinspires "free" expert selections

[Parkview_Pirate]

Anybody keeping track of these picks?

A recent feature of their email campaign, I believe the first selection a month or so ago yielded a nice 7-1 shot at Churchill. But the last three picks or so, including a 1-5 shot at Delaware today, have all failed to hit the board. These last three "expert" picks have also had their odds crushed from morning lines of 4-1, 7-2 and 8-1, to all below even money. Perhaps not a shock when you give out a HOT TIP to thousands of Twinspires account holders....

It's nice to be in the loop to contest and bonus news, and other horse racing items, but I'm not sure if this expert selection feature is achieving its goal - 'cause with picks like these I don't see a whole lot more handle in the future....

[RobertCalifornia]

Yet can you be sure these emails are really having such an influence or possibly other outlets are pushing it too. Sounds great just betting against unless it's a fluke.

[Parkview_Pirate]

Originally Posted by RobertCalifornia

Yet can you be sure these emails are really having such an influence or possibly other outlets are pushing it too. Sounds great just betting against unless it's a fluke.

I can't be sure what the effects, if any, the emails have on the odds - perhaps the last few would have been "wise guy" odds-on ponies anyway. But they sure took on a "fade the bridge jumpers" aspect, which seems contrary to the intent of an "expert" selection.

I rarely mooch a pick from anyone. I'd much rather see an email drawing attention to a competitive race, perhaps with free PPs or other handicapping products/comments attached, rather than a plug for a single horse that goes off well below M/L odds....

[Parkview_Pirate]

Another pick today at Belmont, 4th Race (), with a Chad Brown FTS. Morning line 6-1, went off at 8-5, salvaged a well-beaten third ($2.70).

Starting to be a bit of jinx....

[Nutz and Boltz]

The last two plays,both of which were FTS failed and went off as favorites. So it seems that they were both stabs based on trainer stats. No handicapping was involved. How did they do with selections based on past performance ? Just wondering.

[Parkview_Pirate]

Originally Posted by Nutz and Boltz

The last two plays,both of which were FTS failed and went off as favorites. So it seems that they were both stabs based on trainer stats. No handicapping was involved. How did they do with selections based on past performance ? Just wondering.

Not sure, but you bring up a good point. It's harder to 'cap first time starters, or make an accurate morning line for them.

But I can tell you a month ago when that 7-1 shot hit at Churchill, it was a large and competitive field - either allowance or higher claimers, with numerous starts. I believe the winner's M/L was 8-1 or 10-1. I can't pick my nose at CD, and was impressed the email tip was spot on - remembering it because that race was part of an online contest I entered.

I don't intend to be too harsh here, but the "pad that bankroll for the Belmont" had a bit of a penny stock pumper's angle to it, and $2.70 to show ain't getting it done.

[Nutz and Boltz]

Another "free expert pick" bites the dust at Belmont 06/21/17. Who's the expert, Mike Warren ?