February 2010
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 |
Crist Blog | June 09, 2008
Unfishy
--Before we get to that promised recap of the five other graded stakes on Belmont Day -- coming later tonight or tomorrow -- could all those who keep insisting the Belmont Stakes payoffs were so fishy that the fix was in please remove their aluminum chapeaux and consider the following realities:
1)There was nothing particularly fishy about the payoffs. The place and show payoffs were entirely square and not too many bridgejumpers are going to unload on a horse with a loudly-publicized foot problem in a 1 1/2-mile race that the Derby-Preakness winner had lost 10 times in a row. Nor were the tri and super payoffs amiss. First of all, people complaining that the tri and super paid "only" $3k and $47k are forgetting that there was a dead heat for third, halving the payoffs. I suspect that many if not most players who had a 6-4-8 also had a 6-4-9 and that super players with a 6-4-8-9 also had a 6-4-9-8 -- if you're playing against Big Brown, I don't think you drew too fine a line between Anak Nakal and Ready's Echo, similar clunk-up-for-third candidates.
Add the two dead-heat payoffs together and you're really looking at a $7,657 tri and a $95,946 super, perfectly reasonable payoffs in a nine-horse field with a 25 percent takeout, only 504 tri and 3,024 super combinations available, and the clear 7-1 second choice -- the only horse in the race other than the favorite who went off at less than 14.50-1 -- finishing second. Also, it is always unreasonable to expect a parallel distribution of exotic bets mirroring the win odds when there is a heavy odds-on favorite. Exotics players are far more adventurous and plenty of them were specifically shooting for a monster payoff by eliminating Big Brown.
2)Suggestions that the favorite's connections loaded up on combos without their own horse and stiffed him to cash tickets make no sense if you consider the larger economics surrounding the race: Big Brown's defeat devalued his estimated paper worth of $60 million by something in the neighborhood of $30 million. While I don't buy the repeated speculation in the general press that a victory would have increased his value to $100 million or more, the idea that he was yanked for parimutuel gain is -- I'll resurrect the word -- absurd, considering how much more they lost in defeat.
Posted by Steven Crist Jun 9, 2008 4:32:31 PM | Permalink
Keywords:
Comments
whobet says:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/horseracing/bal-sp.horses23jun23,0,1636449.story
http://sports-talkers.com/horseboards/yabb/YaBB.pl?action=usersrecentposts;username=SPICYTOMATO
Spicey was right, read above comment
Posted by whobet Jun 23, 2008 5:48:54 PM
spice says:
i watched the post parade on this one, i wonder if anyone saw the rear left hoof wobble before ** he hit the tunnel , i noted the horse had a problem there, later it was reported that , he indeed had a loose shoe , i wonder if anyone can actually pull up that part of the broadcast, the horse was just about ready to enter that very loud tunnel they call it , his walking was different , back left was dragging, i was wondering, since it was reported to be true, what kind of person lets such a valuable animal go out with a loose shoe, if i could see it from the post parade coverage , just how do they explain that part, its true and was reported, , also , if anyone actually rides horses, loose shoe or bur or anything in the tender part of the hoof will cause great mental stress on an animal already stressed with the race its about to run, in his head and heart he wanted it bad, that i could see very well, , what is your take on reading body language in animals,
Posted by spice Jun 14, 2008 10:31:14 PM
steven_crist says:
kstafford,
Thanks for the heartfelt and interesting post, but I honestly wasn't talking about bloggers in general or you in particular. And I think we'd actually sell more rather than fewer newspapers if there were a juicy Belmont Stakes race-fixing trial, so I think you need a better theory regarding my supposed lack of objectivity.
Posted by Steven_Crist Jun 12, 2008 9:12:08 PM
kstafford says:
Well, I'm one of those bloggers you are probably talking about. If so, I'd like to point out that I never said the fix was in - only suggested it was possible that some foul play was involved.
I stand by that claim. I'm not naive enough to think that when tens of millions of dollars are changing hands and Rick Dutrow is involved that it is "absurd" to think something fishy may be going on.
You are dealing with a known cheater in Dutrow - every time he's cheated in the past, folks have lost money due to his actions.
Also, as you are connected with the DRF - a publication whose value/sales depend on people having an interest in the sport, it seems to me you aren't exactly an objective source on this matter. If it were to come out that the race was thrown, or if suspicions of the race being thrown were to become common place, it might be assumed that folks would shy away from tracks and conceivably fewer DRFs would fly off the shelves of local convenience stores.
Look, all I'm saying is that if you want to point fingers at people and call them names and depict them wearing tinfoil hats - how's about pointing fingers at asshats like Dutrow that drug their horses and are known to try and cheat the system,thereby screwing over bettors and other horsemen alike. Seems to me you might find more fault with them than those who suggest that (oh heavens, perish the thought!)perhaps Dutrow and company may have been up to old tricks.
Again, not one of those people looking to make an excuse for losing a bet. I had blogged for weeks that I'd pay any sum to see Dutrow have to eat crow. I happily parted with my money to see that outcome - all I'm saying is that in a day and age where the integrity of EVERY sport seems to be called into question on a daily basis (think of spy-gate in the NFL and the recent claims of referree malfeasance in the NBA), that now probably isn't the time to put the blindfolds on and act like all is well when KNOWN CHEATERS like Dutrow are involved in something just a tad eyebrow raising.
Do I really think it was fixed? No, absolutely not.
Do I think it's possible some dirty play may have been afoot? I think the answer to that question is abundantly clear. In fact, I'll re-resurrect your own word and say it's ABSURD to suggest that those concerned with the possibility of a fix are being absurd.
Fair enough? Now can we cease with the childish antics (i.e., tin foil hat comments, etc.)and move on?
Posted by kstafford Jun 12, 2008 6:26:42 PM
marc says:
Thanks for the information. Of course the size of the field would have something to do with that and so would how "odds on" each were.
Posted by Marc Jun 12, 2008 3:17:26 PM
ray_johnny says:
Hey Steve,
I have a high level of respect for your writings, and I understand your need to protect the game to some point but...
While your analysis on the payouts not being "fishy" was good, that doesn't mean someone still couldn't have cashed a boatload of tickets if they "knew" Big Brown would not run his race, and/or not be able to pressure obvious lone speed Da'Tara, who also happened to have a good stamina pedigree and a trainer who had won the race before
A check of the betting patterns would have at least been in order considering the horse’s connections, the magnitude of the race, and the fact that he was eased in the stretch. Additionally, racehorses do often get prerace shots - they come in large hypodermic syringes in various colors and consistencies (if you've been in the backstretch on the morning of a race you would know this) - you really think the trainer has any idea what is in these shots half the time? You really think they are all testable? Think again. Maybe that didn't happen in this case, but... there are ways...
That being said, Big Brown's figs weren't all that great going into the race, and we have all seen the media and the public jump all over horses that romp over mediocre fields - only to flop when the pressure gets serious. The great ones always find a way to overcome, and Big Brown appears not to be one of them. He was not able to overcome the unfamiliar surface, a new distance, early trouble, lack of his favored steroid, a quarter crack etc.
While Desormeaux's mistakes early in the race may have played a factor in Big Brown's loss, they were certainly not the only contributing factors. It was easy to see that Big Brown was not the same horse that won the Derby and he Preakness after only five furlongs had been run.
Did Desormeaux do the right thing in pulling the horse up? Well, he clearly had no shot of finishing in the top 4, and it was obvious to any serious race watcher and handicapper worth his salt – that something wasn't right with the horse. A horse does not have to be lame to be pulled up - there can still be something wrong internally.
Given that the early part of Desormeaux's ride was poor - what would you do if you were sitting on a rocket ship worth $50 million (not in my opinion) that all of a sudden felt like a car with no oil that was out of gas? Considering what happened to Eight Belles, and the perceived value of Big Brown, Desormeaux probably did the right thing. He could have whipped him and hustled all he wanted - but Big Brown was never going to finish better than last on this day. To say he shouldn't have eased Big Brown because he wasn't visibly lame is unfair. How would anyone but Desormeaux know what the horse felt like?
And just because the trainer could not find anything wrong with the horse, does not mean there was nothing wrong with the horse. Horses fool average trainers all the time - they even fool the best in the game. Reminds me of a conversation I once heard between a jockey and a trainer.
Trainer: You stiffed my horse, why didn't you keep whipping him in the stretch.
Jockey: Every time I hit him he went further backwards. If I'd hit him anymore he would have been back in the starting gate.
Hopefully Big Brown's debacle will have a positive effect on the sport. Imagine that!
Maybe someone will FINALLY stand up at the congressional hearings and describe what some leading trainers do to their horses before EVERY race. (Why do you think the horses in California run like machines? Talk to a few jockeys off the record.) And this doesn’t include the monthly steroid injections, which CAN definitely affect a horse’s attitude, eating habits, aggressiveness etc.
Here’s the prerace list:
1. A designer drug cocktail to stimulate the various physiological systems mixed with various "legal" painkillers.
2. The latest un-testable blocking agent for blocking pain in the lower extremities. (Recall a recent suspension?)
3. Lasix and Bute
5. Cortisone in every joint before every race.
Why do you think horses continue to break down? Synthetic surfaces are a smokescreen inside political job designed to appease the public - breakdown rates remain the same - and will continue to do so because of the above.
Remember when the best horsemen in the business used to win at a 15 percent clip? What happened - did all these 28-35 percent trainers we have nowadays all of a sudden become genius horse whisperers? Much more likely they hired chemists? (And while we’re on the subject, did the trainers of last year’s 1-2 finishers in the Belmont have any previous drug infractions on their records?)
Unless a horse needs emergency medication due to severe illness or colic – they should have to go to the farm for administered treatments. Of course, making drug use illegal in racing would reveal the fakers and put them out of business (and some of their well-heeled owners too, some of which have a vested interested in continued drug use in racing). But the truly great horsemen (and horses!) would rise to the top. Who really stands to lose if drugs are outlawed in racing?
You'll certainly be able to tell at the upcoming congressional hearings.
As a leader in the industry, you should play a major part in getting rid of drugs in racing - all drugs – for the betterment of the breed long term - and for the betting public that support the industry.
Maybe that can be your destiny - if you're up to it.
I happen to think you just might be.
Thanks for listening,
Ray
Posted by Ray Johnny Jun 12, 2008 3:09:34 AM
bailey says:
Prozac Jack, a bit blunt, but I saw the sheer incompatability between BB and his jockey also - the results were predictable, and as you siad, BB decided not to respond. Um, yes, horses make choices...
Posted by bailey Jun 11, 2008 2:56:01 PM
el_angelo says:
Why should Da'Tara have paid more to show when 4 horses had to be paid out?
Posted by El Angelo Jun 11, 2008 2:42:44 PM
jeff_tatus says:
Here's my $.02 (cents) worth... How many of you (besides me) didn't trust your guts when you saw BB warming up before the race; especially right before they were loading into the gate?
What I saw was an unenthusiatic horse who didn't even remotely resemble the animal we saw loading in the gates in KY and MD.
Big Brown looked aloof, unfocused, and semi-spooked. I ran back to the SAM with my last voucher (no time to cancel BB key tickets) and got shut out trying to key DOC (1st & 2nd) with the 3,7,8,9, and 10 in third.
I should've taken the advice I gave so freely to a novice sitting at the table next to me; "Play front speed, it's been holding all day... they've goosed the track for BB to win the Triple Crown."
You gotta love Zito, if you don't, you gotta give him the respect that he truly deserves. Maybe that's what many of the old-timers did in the tri:
All w/ DOC w/6,8... or
6,8 w/ DOC w/all.
We all got mesmerized by the horse, the hype, and the hope of seeing a 3Crown... and that's why we didn't bet right. I remember betting the best closer (Afleet Alex) with ALL a couple of years ago. It was still a "signer" for a $90.00 ticket and if I had exercized my brains instead of my emotions; $112.00 dollars worth of DOC w/all w/all & all w/DOC w/all... I'd be much happier and ready to play the carryover today.
Posted by Jeff Tatus Jun 11, 2008 2:22:43 PM
steven_crist says:
Marc:
You wrote "Show me another instance where a 38 to one pays only $14 to show with odds on running out of the money."
I only had to go back one day: In last Friday's fourth race at Belmont, odds-on Greg's Lassy finished out of the money. 37-1 Tiffany's Rodeo finished third and paid "only" $6.00 to show. Although this fits your challenge, I understand Greg's Lassy isn't exactly Big Brown, but the point is that just because an odds-on horse finishes out of the money does NOT mean the other horses are supposed to pay more than $14 to show.
Posted by Steven_Crist Jun 11, 2008 1:54:20 PM
marc says:
In response to Steve's comment on June 9:
I don't have a sinister theory and didn't day I did. I just thought show payouts looked funny. Show me another instance where a 38 to one pays only $14 to show with odds on running out of the money. I know dead heat has something to do with it. Other payouts looked reasonable. I held my tickets for a while thinking there may be some mistake they looked so skewed (not the way I wanted I might add).
Posted by Marc Jun 11, 2008 1:43:09 PM
kelso13 says:
I always knew that most horseplayers are stupid and love to blame their losing on conspiracy or jockeys.However, to think that B.B. was stiffed to cash a bet is mind boggling.I am not naive enough to think that in any situation where money is involved that there will not be people trying to take an edge.If B.B. wins the race he and his connections become immortals in the lore of horseracing and the horses value would likely have doubled..How can you compare that to winning a bet.
As for the drug issue,we all know that there are certain trainers that are juicing.This must be cleaned up.However, as a player we all know who the cheaters are.Therefore you just factor that into your handicapping process.What does it matter how certain trainers improve their horses.Whether they use legit methods or drugs you must deal with them every day at every track you play.Remember Oscar Barrera back in the day?No one knew for sure how he could claim a horse, move him up in class, run him back in two days and have the horse improve by ten lenghts.You just knew that it would happen and you bet them.I do not condone this situation, but I am a horseplayer and I will always be a horseplayer.This game is greater than all of the problems we have.Men have been racing horses against each other for hundreds of years and will for hundreds more.So, suck it up ,deal with the problems and try to hit that big pick 6 today at Belmont.I know I will be out there today and after 3 dark days I am jacked up and ready to go.
Posted by kelso13 Jun 11, 2008 7:18:08 AM
ralph_c says:
Hope it don't rain on wednesday. The pick 6 has a ton of grass races. I think four of the six on grass. Alot of hcp to do for nothing.
Posted by ralph c Jun 10, 2008 11:27:52 PM
brain_washed says:
it would be absurd to think the connections would devalue the horse but who is to say the connections had anything to do with the yank? someone has the jocks at his/her beck and call.... yes, tis a conspiracy!
Posted by brain washed Jun 10, 2008 7:30:28 PM
dunque says:
You know, it's possible that Dutrow and company cashed without the horse being "stiffed."
It's quite possible they felt the horse wasn't right and bet accordingly. They didn't have to stiff him.
I felt all week that Dutrow's bragging about how easy it would be was odd. He's always been the master of mis-direction.
Posted by Dunque Jun 10, 2008 7:29:20 PM
spectacularbid says:
to wayne80,
i don't think anyone will try to pin big brown's loss on president bush. 9/11, $4 gas, the weak dollar, an 8 year lull in the stock market, warrantless wiretaps, torture, 4000 dead soldiers, an additional 4 trillion in debt, loss of national prestige and the tragedy that followed katrina sure, but not big brown's loss.
Posted by spectacularbid Jun 10, 2008 4:58:48 PM
ed_sehon says:
You are absolutely correct, Steve. I haven't seen comments from too many legitimate horseplayers suggesting the race was fixed. What bothers me about the Triple Crown and Breeders Cup coverage is that four time each year folks who don't know squat about horse racing paint themselves as experts on the sport. I stopped counting the factual errors on Saturday's telecast at a dozen around 5:15. ESPN's coverage on Friday and Saturday was lamer than Eight Belles.
The networks should wise up and have more folks like you and Beyer on as "experts," as opposed to Hank et al.
As for BIG BROWN, I hope he gets a chance to redeem himself. I still believe he's a special animal.
Posted by Ed Sehon Jun 10, 2008 3:46:26 PM
j_perls says:
Steve, not that I think this happened, but what about this for a scenario:
Someone gets to a low level stablehand in Dutrow's barn and gives him/her ten or twenty grand to stiff the horse. Then, said individuals could have made tri and super boxes with the other contestants in the race. It cost $336 to do the tri and $1680 for a super box. All it takes is a couple of enterprising tough guys in NY to connect with the right desperate stablehand. There was around $225 in winning super tix, and $6,000 in winning tri tickets so it wouldn't be too hard to hit $20 worth of super bets (worth just under $1M) and escape under the radar.
This would be an especially brilliant grift because anyone (including myself) would argue that Brown was over the top and likely to bounce with his form pattern and health issues...
Posted by J Perls Jun 10, 2008 3:32:19 PM
mike says:
How does anyone proceed with betting on horses. I am a fairly big horse player, hit a pick six at Saratoga in 1986 the day before the Travers (over 18,000) and still am / was active in betting but how do you now know if a horse is on drugs or not. In the Travers how can you bet the race not knowing info on the drugs given to Big Brown or not. I am done with the horses. Bring on Football !!
Posted by mike Jun 10, 2008 2:50:33 PM
bob_m says:
as i write this i am downloading tomorrows form to begin preparing for the pick -6..
i am officially recovered from the belmont and am startin to get excited as we are 42 days from opening day at the spa.
i will be the one in the lawn chair at siro's 15 minutes prior to the opening day seminar, waiting for little andy to make me laugh..
and for dave liften to pick 3 horses to win who are all 3-5 !!!
Posted by bob m. Jun 10, 2008 2:41:23 PM
dickrx says:
DEAR STEVE,
When every Horseracing state in the U.S. makes Epogen and
Aranesp illegal substances
along with Anaboloic Steroids,
maybe horseracing will return
to the great sport it used to be. It would be very interesting to have past Hall of Fame trainers take a lie detector test asked the question "Did you ever knowingly run a horse on Epogen or Aranesp?
Posted by DICKRX Jun 10, 2008 2:29:09 PM
phil_b says:
Considering Dutrow's comments; I'd say that if Big Brown runs again, the odds that it'll be Desormeaux off / Prado on will be lower than BB's odds were on Saturday.
Posted by Phil B Jun 10, 2008 2:16:12 PM
dud_dew says:
"Chapeaux" line funny.
"Something serious happened" continuing less-than-impressive thematics from War Pass at Tampa.
Yeah. Serious. It was hot. BB was tired. Never before in horse-racing annals.
Posted by dud dew Jun 10, 2008 1:56:07 PM
dud_dew says:
Thanks for the "chapeaux" line, Steve. Nice chuckle.
As for the continuing insistence something dramatic happened to BB, as it did to War Pass, yeah. You're right.
I see it now. It was hot. He was tired. Never before in the annals of horse-racing...
Posted by dud dew Jun 10, 2008 1:53:00 PM
spiffy_one says:
ATTENTION!!!A brief lesson in Steroids 101:Winstrol is not as powerful a steroid as Equipoise or Decadurabolin; it gives horses just a small "edge" while enhancing their appetite...the other compounds have more severe effects on the horses and in some cases make them highly aggressive in some instances..I have 30+ years' in the industry and have seen that enhancing horses'performance with steroid therapy is a double-edged sword..Item 2:..DON REED: You are my Hero!!!!
Posted by spiffy one Jun 10, 2008 1:48:58 PM
kelso13 says:
I can't believe that any one other than the Dutrow is now blaming Kent D. for this fiasco.Sure things got a little dicey going into the first turn , but once B.B. was tipped out into the 3 path and settled I thought the race was over.When I saw the 6 furlong split was 1.12.90 I thought now is the time to go.That is when Kent asked for and got no response.
Then when several horses passed B.B. everyone knew it was over.I think at that point the jockey did the right thing.In fact Jerry Baily commented that it was the right thing to do.You always protect the horse in that situation.Now that it appears that B.B. is O.K. ,Dutrow has the nerve to criticize the ride.He wanted Kent to use the whip.Why?It was evident that the horse was done.Why punish him so that he maybe finishes 6th or 7th.Also, in an interview before the race Dutrow said that he had no instructions for Kent, that Kent knew the horse and knew what to do.Now he says that they wanted him to go for the lead.There's an old saying: "success has many fathers , but failure is an orphan." I still think that there is some thing wrong with this horse.I would be very surprised if B.B. ever races again.I hope that I am wrong, but more than 45 years experience as a fan has made me expect the worse.Now,with that being said ,I am eagerly anticipating Wednesdays card at Belmont.B.B.'s failure will not impact that in the least.I am concerned more with the weather report for tonight.T-storms and possible heavy rain might effect the turf races. Also, 6 weeks until opening day at Saratoga.My 47th,minus 1 year for military service.I still get goose bumps when I walk into the place.
Posted by kelso13 Jun 10, 2008 1:39:15 PM
wayne80 says:
After weighing the evidence, I have no clue what happened to Big Brown.
But I am sure of one thing, no matter what happened, someone will say it's George
Bush's fault ;).
Posted by Wayne80 Jun 10, 2008 1:19:37 PM
wayne80 says:
I am sure we can all relate to this one.
IF Eight Belles had survived, most likely Proud Spell, or Belles if she were not injured at all, would have won The Belmont by 10, which would have been an awesome story and great for racing.
Instead, we got Da Tara.
Maybe Pyro will come back running, otherwise, what a dreary Travers it will be.
Posted by Wayne80 Jun 10, 2008 1:12:26 PM
prozac_jack says:
Dear Steve, Mr Dutrow is Dead on about the STUPID ride Kent "the creep" gave Big Brown. B. B. didn't know if he was coming or going.# 1 Kent "the creep" falls asleep in the gate, then BLAMES the horse for slipping # 2 after the gate bell woke-up Kent....told Big Brown to lets catch up, so B. B. took off, only to run up on the heels of another horse, so Kent...said to B. B. I was only kidding a YANKED his head off, B. B. said from this point on STUPID I don't care what kind of command you give me I'm not RESPONDING to this IDIOT again, and now I have solved the mystery. This horse is simply smarter than this jock..I do not think your East Coast boys get it Steve, Kent...was KICKED out of Calif..the West Coast trainers, got sick and tired of his ANTICS they couldn't TRUST what kind of ride he'd give-em for on day to the next.. Mr Dutrow Put Rafeal Bejarano on and see what a difference a REAL jock makes..
Posted by Prozac Jack Jun 10, 2008 12:16:27 PM
angelbaar says:
I see Dutrow is now onto blaming Kent. Are we going to see daily excuses from him until he finally convinces himself it had to be someebody OTHER than the trainer ? In Wednesday's Excuseblog " Groom trained too fast "
Posted by Angelbaar Jun 10, 2008 12:04:04 PM
pru says:
I know this might not be the most popular race, but what about big brown vs war pass? I would certainly be captivated either watching them in the kings bishop or a one turn mile at Belmont right when toga ends. Can't wait to take a stab in tommorrow's pick 6...Steve I have read exotic betting what do you feel is enough coverage for tommorrow to warrant a play. I'll either stab it with $24 bucks or make a big play. Need to create some mock tickets, thankfully I can view pps on the iPhone and blog to keep me from the misery of equity derivatives.
Posted by pru Jun 10, 2008 11:55:38 AM
c says:
"Lone speed is a deadly angle. It trumps class and overall speed."
Tell that to Indian Blessing, Shake the Bank, and Bayou's Lassie. Lone speed is great, but it's not enough. You still have to have enough engine under you. IMO, it's a slightly overplayed angle.
Posted by C Jun 10, 2008 11:39:54 AM
pappi0007 says:
for all those here who watch the race with blindfolds on...first it was very humid on saturday..secondly the trainer told the buffoon to put the horse on the lead.. which was what i was thinking for the last three weeks and the trainer been saying the last two weeks..go to the front and steadily increase the lead..guess what? thats what DA TARA did!!!!...BB could have gotten lead breakin 2 lenghts bad..fighting the horse in the heat..STUPID
Posted by pappi0007 Jun 10, 2008 9:57:29 AM
matt_harper says:
I can't wait until the use of administering steroids to racehorses is banned across the country! I want everyone to remember what these "super" trainers statistics are this year, and the past 5 years for that matter, and compare them to their results next year. Dutrow was coming back to New York, he knew what they would test for, I wonder if Winstrol acted as a masking agent for something else? Since he had been suspended numerous times in N.Y., he knew it would show up. He said that he didnt give B.B. the steroid to show America what kind of horse B.B. really is. Well, we saw what kind of horse he is, and we saw what kind of trainer Dutrow always has been.
Posted by Matt Harper Jun 10, 2008 9:36:00 AM
grasslover says:
Mr Don Reed- Grasslover responding! I am not a trainer at all, but rather a 45 year old horseplayer from Cincinnati. Visiting River Downs regularly throughout their season and playing live as well as simulcast races is as far as I get in the sinister department. LOL! Thanks for your interest and good luck to you always!
Posted by grasslover Jun 10, 2008 9:26:17 AM
ray_manley says:
Don Reed,
Wow what a post, keep up the outstanding work. Very, very funny.
Posted by Ray Manley Jun 10, 2008 8:09:00 AM
pom says:
I couldn't agree more with Nathan-Detroit's comments about Iavarone's background. A leopard doesn't change his spots; he just finds a new hunting ground- in this case, the race track. He's scammed people out of money before. What makes you think he's said three Hail Mary's and been reborn an honest man? As an owner myself, what I'd REALLY like to know is how and why, based on his required background check, NYRA even allowed him to be licensed. That's criminal.
Posted by Pom Jun 10, 2008 7:46:22 AM
landen says:
Mr. Reed,
Although I wonder if you have too much time on your hands to respond to so many comments, your commentary was very amusing. Thanks!
Posted by Landen Jun 10, 2008 3:17:09 AM
ryan says:
Mike - Actually, Desormeaux was quoted saturday evening as saying something like "once I knew we weren't going to get 5th i pulled him up". That's the highest finish they pay for. That horse wasn't going to sniff the money.
Posted by Ryan Jun 10, 2008 1:31:00 AM
don_reed says:
Good God! Now Dutrow's blaming Desormeaux!
Can't NYRA management read the RIOT ACT to the one man who is single-handedly destroying what's left of racing's reputation?
Why is NYRA's Duncker letting this get out of control? Where's the "gag" rule when you need it?
I thought it was a dead heat as to which blowhard had been exposed as a coward - Steve Ballmer, Microsoft's CEO - who recently ran for cover in a Hungarian university classroom when a deadly egg attack was launched by ONE student (viewable on YouTube) - or Dutrow.
Mr. Ballmer, you've been eclipsed. Take one step back.
Posted by Don Reed Jun 10, 2008 1:22:30 AM
mediwoman says:
don_reed: I see that- but I don't and I missed him all afternoon. I could have been with NY racing connections at the track that day front and center but I stayed here to hang out with the blog- ^_^ and enjoyed my $550.00 BH/Belmont Double! Can't wait for Wednesday's card.
Posted by Mediwoman Jun 10, 2008 1:01:54 AM
master_long_shot says:
Big Brown
He was in trouble three weeks before the Belmont, period. If you watch the replay of the race and watch it very closely, you will see how spooked, nervous and uncomfortable Big Brown actually was in the early running. Not that this really would have made much of a difference in the race. This horse was in trouble before the race and his demeanor during it only made it worse. Super kudos to Kent D for realizing his horse was in severe trouble from the get go!
Master Long Shot
Posted by Master Long Shot Jun 9, 2008 11:51:18 PM
master_long_shot says:
Steve,
Remember what I posted last week before the Belmont? Look it up. I told you all that Big Brown would finish 5th or worse and I guess he could not have finished worse than he actually did. I do appreciate most folk’s money on Big Brown because it made my day so much easier. This one was like shooting fish in a barrel. I am sorry for the fans, the industry and Big Browns owners. However my wallet is much larger and I grew a few inches as well. This was a one horse race that is for sure. Thanks DeeTa!!!!!!!!!!!!
Master Long Shot
Posted by Master Long Shot Jun 9, 2008 11:28:32 PM
crich says:
Steve, spot on with your analysis.
There were no bad payoffs or chicanery.
The almighty Racing Gods combined an injured hoof, scorching heat, in retrospect a bad post, a poor ride and bad trip to bring down this would-be deity and his supercilious entourage.
I bet him only in Pick 4's and 6's and was alive in both cases. Since I invested $240 in P6 tickets, I thought the 3K payout would have been a fair price. While the 5/6 payout was about 1/3 of the 6/6 one, is it safe to assume that practically nobody had Da' Tara on a 5/6 ticket?
I am happy I did not use the angle if he lost he'd be totally out since I couldn't use Da' Tara on top with fake money.
Steve, do you believe BB will race again and if so on what schedule?
Also, since no other 3YO horse has distinguished himself in any way what do we have to look forward to this summer and fall?
Posted by C.Rich Jun 9, 2008 11:06:01 PM
don_reed says:
Bar Cat & Manley: No one beats ESPN when it comes to incompetent racing camera work. No one. Unless it's NBC.
Andy S.: You're right - Casino Drive's absence really mattered. And if you're a fan of the theory that the Da Tara et al order of finish was pre-destined, it would have been a 10-horse field with higher payoffs.
Mediwoman: See how we've gradually taken Steve's "live" blogs for granted?
Dave: Flip's show bet strategy resulted in his doubling his money. And with the longest shot-on-the-board 1st, he was presumably one of about 2-3% of the betting public who posted a profit when the windows re-opened to cash bets.
Wes Preble: People who start off with "let me get this straight" instantly lose all hope of convincing people that their ideas have merit (even if they do).
George Quinn: Amen, brother. Dutrow's and the IEAH contingent's behavior is why when we tell people we're racing fans, they instantly assume that we're barbarians.
GoCashBaby: What was even more shocking was the flippant Jerry Bailey on ESPN repeatedly stating that there was nothing to be concerned @ running a horse, with a recently treated quarter-crack, in a Triple Crown race.
C: I'm with you. Kent had no choice but to stop BB before something even worse were to happen.
Unitas: As it so often happens with formerly heralded horses, Belmont itself has dropped down into the claiming ranks, into the present roster of 3rd-rate sports arenas.
Mr. Manning: I can't imagine a worse way to lodge a justifiable complaint, that reasonably stated, would have otherwise been persuasive.
"Grasslover": Considering that a notorious trainer once received an almost-eternal suspension after a lab analysis, may we inquire as to your actual ID?
Babes: That sentiment was also heard, loud and clear, at Monmouth on Sunday. I got you, Babe.
RichP: Your "trainer-tri" trio has succeeded in making people forget how much they once disdained golfer Greg Norman (Barry Bonds is currently hoping for the same results).
Dave DC: Soul is indispensable. Those opting for the high-wire act - love the horse/disinherit the connections - are returned to earth, rudely.
Scoots: You get one free Furlong Frank - my treat - for the first double negative used in a sports context this year that didn't result in your saying the opposite of what you meant.
Horserun: "Sore winners"? $79.00 to Win = Irate? Who? Wha?
Justin: Dutrow did make sense, weeks ago - before he became Shakespeare's King Lear. He did emphatically state that running BB 3 times in 5 weeks was something he absolutely did not want to do.
Green Mtn Punter: Matt Winn's successor, in this respect, is Randy Moss. And he is unmercifully outnumbered.
LA62: An unreasonable request. Fractional times require TV people who understand fractions.
Bryan: My guess is that some of the "big" players saw "quarter-crack," "A.R. Baron," and "96*" on the thermometer - and then wisely abstained from disaster.
Dan Baedeker: What a great name for a "trip" analyst!
Rich P: After you left the company of the woman who told you that she "always bets the two longest shots in the BS and always wins" - my italics - did you check to see if she was related to Big Brown's trainer?
Bob M: The NYS Owners TV ad been run, what, 15,000 times? How many times have we seen a NYRA Rewards Player ad, with a guy like you stating that the program resulted in great Belmont Stakes seats? Not once.
PP: Thank you; my sentiments, exactly. And Nick Zito is quite approachable; tell him in person. This is particularly true up in Saratoga, should you run into him at Mrs. London's. Buy him a Night & Day.
George315: Congratulations. I'd be even more enthused about your coup if the words "I," "me," or "my" hadn't appeared ten times in your press release.
Prozac Jack: I'm genuinely enthused! "He pulls up more horses than Wells Fargo" is in a class with William Murray's great description of a long-ago horse player who acidly referred to a particular jockey as "The Human Anchor."
NancyBen: "Greedy and obnoxious people." Where ever did you get that - ahem - impression?
Mini: Complain all you want, but Belmont will never be Paris (the City of Light). The toteboard - dropped on its head during that infamous trip up to Saratoga in 2006, and never the same since - will not be replaced until 2016, when the last of the 23 bulbs currently still functioning finally goes "pop."
Maybe that's why the win price, with the longest shot on the board winning the Belmont, was so "low" (it really paid "$179.00," but the "1" bulbs were all busted).
John: What a wonderful image you related - Belmont at 11:30 am, a packed house. And being a quarter-mile away, you could see 'em all, enthralled.
RaceFan: Were you there on Opening Day, Saratoga - 2006? - when the track's water pressure vanished?
Belmont 2009's ad campaign slogan: "BYO Bathroom!"
George Quinn & Jim Goodman: Thanks for the Keeneland perspective, very much appreciated. Now. Figure out how to keep the entire student body of the University of Kentucky from attending the Blue Grass (unless they run it at Belmont).
Ghost of Kingpost: Imagine what the reaction was at Three Chimneys when BB ran out- or that we could see and hear it today, on YouTube!
Joe Monaco: If you know a better way to get to Monmouth than The Death Alley Parallel To Newark, I'm all ears (even if you suggest a parachute drop).
Chipmunk Kent: You're right. A Da Tara-BB speed duel, with BB getting the worst of it, would have ignited a riot.
Wayne80: Respectfully disagree with you on the Dutrow-Servis comparison, but our wives' experience & disgust with NYRA bathrooms (Saratoga 2006; Belmont 2008) is identical.
And if the Belmont bushes in the fall are all dead, don't be surprised. A friend of mine at Monmouth passed on credible stories - about where people did end up relieving themselves - that were so graphic, they can't be repeated here (nor were they reported in the - no pun intended - mainstream press).
And finally, to Steve - not Crist, but my neighborhood UPS delivery guy:
You didn't bet the race, nor do you care much about racing.
But I do want to thank you for the "Go Big Brown" button that you left in my mailbox.
It's now positioned on the bulletin board, side by side with a photo of Joe Bruno that once illustrated a New York Magazine article (March 2008), the theme of which was that Governor Spitzer now had him "on the ropes."
Posted by Don Reed Jun 9, 2008 10:45:54 PM
jim says:
Steve,
you know what i say...HISTORY...theres a huge carryover on wed...focus..focus...focus..those west coast boys are already reading wed races.
Posted by jim Jun 9, 2008 10:13:31 PM
jerry says:
Steve,
There were two other payoffs, not the Belmont, that looked wierd..twice earlier in the card exacta payoffs and rolling double payoffs were exactly the same...can't remember the exact races but those "coincidences" were wierder than any of the Belmont payoffs!!
Posted by Jerry Jun 9, 2008 10:13:21 PM
justin says:
The only thing wrong with those prices is that I didn't cash to any of them.
Posted by Justin Jun 9, 2008 9:52:03 PM
trackerman says:
The race is over.BB,wiil get another chance.The problem is another 3 yr old will beat him if they should race in same race.That would be J BE K.The stake race woody stevens,he won suggest a late developing 3yr old.? We are moving on.
Posted by trackerman Jun 9, 2008 9:36:36 PM
ludwig says:
Guys,
It's just a game,so lighten up. That's why they call it betting, other wise it would just be collecting, and no one would play....
Posted by Ludwig Jun 9, 2008 9:27:01 PM
horserun says:
I was very happy BB got beat, still am, dont like anyone involved with the horse , but there is NO WAY i think for even one second that they would stiff this horse to make a score at the windows...these guys have plenty of money and the only thing their money cant buy them is going down in history in the record books and they were a mile and a half from immortality....i would have to think there is not enough money in the world to make any of the gentlemen, i use the word loosely, to even think about doing that ....i cant believe i would have to defend this crew, but it just makes me remember that horseplayers really will complain about anything
Posted by horserun Jun 9, 2008 9:26:45 PM
silver_charm says:
Steve while we are at it. Did Belmont Park purposely run out of water to sabatoge Big Brown because of Dutrows obnoxiousness. Therefore a very deeeeeeep loose race track becomes real heeeaaavvvyyy and tiring.
Not good for a horse who already had a reason to be tired.
I'm sure a lot a fans went home disappointed but I am also equally as sure a lot of people who wake up everyday and go to work at various barns on the backstretch woke up feeling REAL GOOD the next day.
Posted by Silver Charm Jun 9, 2008 9:10:07 PM
captain_america says:
You know, it's tough enough fighting off the general reaction that betting the ponies makes you a skeevy idiot without this ridiculous conspiracy theory nonsense you expect out of Communists and California Democrats.
Nobody wanted Big Brown to win more than his connections. The only explanation you need is that the horse either hated the deep Belmont track, the heat, or both. Desormeaux's ride wasn't a gem, but the horse that won the Derby should have won this race by 10 lengths. He wasn't himself.
Can we please move on?
Posted by Captain America Jun 9, 2008 9:05:36 PM
nooch1592 says:
For a bunch of people that I presume are horse racing fans, you sure do dump on the sport at even the slightest opportunity.
I'm all for criticism of management regarding facilities, purses, field size, etc., or industry-wide issues like poor scheduling and inconsistent drug rules, but the X-Files-esque conspiracy theories are too much. No rational person can think anyone involved with Big Brown threw that race.
Sure, there probably are cases of corruption in racing (and all sports) but I feel going in with that mindset makes for a miserable day at the track. First and foremost, a day at the races is supposed to be fun. You guys seem to have forgotten that, or maybe you are just contrarians by nature.
Posted by nooch1592 Jun 9, 2008 9:03:53 PM
nyer23 says:
Steve - Thanks for being the voice of reason.
My cat would kill me in my sleep if I put that on her head!
Posted by nyer23 Jun 9, 2008 8:38:43 PM
nathan_detroit says:
Steve –
Many of us actually do understand the pari-mutuel pools, and how the payoffs were probably legitimate in the Belmont in lieu of the smallish field, etc., as well as the fact that some people (like myself) are prone to take a contrarian’s stand against what I considered to be a nice horse, but certainly not a great horse.
All that being said, I was only half-joking when I made the comment in your last thread that Big Brown won one for the “home” team by running out of the money.
I have been meaning to write and ask as to why there have been some allusions by DRF reporters (and columnists like Andy Beyer) as to the “shaky connections” involved with Big Brown, but no real investigative reporting on this colt’s ownership.
What I would specifically like to know -- and I DO believe it is relevant – is that when it was reported that Michael Iavarone, the majority owner of Big Brown, was fined $7,500, censured and suspended for association with A.R. Baron & Co. in 1999, it was also reported that the firm was the subject of a criminal and civil investigation. And that upward of a dozen employees of that firm were criminally indicted.
While it looks as if Mr. Iavarone was not indicted, of the dozen or so of his former co-workers who were, were there any public records (affidavits, testimony, statements by prosecutors, etc.) that these people were involved in organized crime?
While the general rule in New York seems to be “we don’t associate people with being mobbed up just because, as Frank Sinatra used to say, ‘my last name ends in a vowel’” – it is still common knowledge that organized crime (the Mafia, La Cosa Nostra, or whatever you want to call it) not only in entrenched in bookmaking and loan sharking, but in Wall Street as well.
So while I understand your newspaper is not going to subject itself to libel by making insinuations, the simple question that I was HOPING the DRF might look into was the association between Mr. Ivarone and the members of A.R. Baron & Co. who WERE indicted.
Please send some of your fig guys to work on that angle instead of par times and track variants.
The racing public deserves a full accounting of the ownership of Big Brown.
Posted by nathan_detroit Jun 9, 2008 8:23:34 PM
stu says:
Enough is enough! Simpliy put the horse was steadied often early, was extremely rank, had a shortened training schedule, a cracked hoof, broke terribly, and never got on stride. All of that equals a horse up against it. No handicapper in his/her right mind would bet that horse. By the way, Steve, good job on the math. Also, Dutrow is a joke. I'm no Desormeaux fan, but the race was essentially over once he broke bad and got rank. A 114lb man can't control a 1,200lb animal.
Posted by Stu Jun 9, 2008 8:21:39 PM
randy says:
Steve, As always you make a great deal of sense. I didn't hit the tri, but it wasn't because Big Brown didn't hit the board, i played a modest $40 ticket, using Denis of Cork 1st and 2nd, had D-Tara, but not either one of the third place horses, I thought the tri paid very well, and was actually pretty hittable. I see late this afternoon, that Dutrow is now blaming Desormeaux's ride, when it was obvious the horse had little in the tank. I rooted for BB and Desormeaux, but not Ivarone/Dutrow. Good luck in tomorrow's pick-6.
Posted by Randy Jun 9, 2008 8:07:33 PM
sherpaguide says:
Wow, just read article about Dutrow pretty much blaming KD's ride for the whole thing...this is what I was waiting for, this is going to get good!!! Think Prado will be riding BB in the Travers? Lol, love this game!!
Posted by SherpaGuide Jun 9, 2008 7:58:44 PM
alabama_dave says:
Thank you, Mr. Crist, for dispelling much of the conspiracy theory idiocy that has run rampant through some circles for the last 48 hours.
The best comment I've heard as to Big Brown's performance came from Desormeaux minutes after the race: "I had no horse." And anyone even remotely familiar with the game could see that midway through the second turn.
Posted by Alabama Dave Jun 9, 2008 7:58:15 PM
mike says:
Steve Crist,
I typically think your analysis is dead on, but I disagree with you about those questioning whether something "fishy" went on in the Belmont. Why did Desormeaux pull the horse up? Why? Did he even hit or show the stick to the horse before pulling him up? I watched it on youtube about 5 or 6 times and I don't think he ever touched him. Kent's on record saying the horse didn't feel sore or lame before he pulled him up. So why did he pull the horse up? His only explanation is BB wasn't going to win the race. How about 2nd, 3rd or 4th? I suspect if KD gave that type of ride in a $25k Maiden Claimer you'd view his ride much more suspiciously. I'm not questioning the integrity of IEAH or Dutrow (well in this matter!), but I am questioning KD's ride. Is he really that bad of a rider? Perhaps he is and that explains it.
Lastly, this isn't sour grapes. I bet multiple tri-keys, none of which required BB in the top three to be winning tickets. I ended up losing, but it wasn't b/c of BB's performance.
Posted by Mike Jun 9, 2008 7:40:21 PM
jersey_josh says:
Steve, As I posted on Saturday, I did not bet the race although I would have liked to see history...Well I did, yet another loss. Props to Zito and his crew for getting yet again 2 out of the 3 in the money. Heck of a job. As for BB, there are a million ways to lose a race and only one way to win a race. Isn't it Jerkens who says that is doesn't matter who the jock is...if you have the best horse you win. Jerkens will give a leg up to a bunch of unknown jocks and we would still bet the horse because of the trainer! And don't forget that they don't call jockeys PINHEADS for nothing. Jocks will run the race the way they see it on paper or their agent, almost never they way the trainer tells them to. Some horses are good enough to win with the jock fighting the horse the whole way...its called class.
Something that is lacking a bit with some connections, but Steve...you have class. Ahh...now for the mid-summer derbys!
Posted by Jersey Josh Jun 9, 2008 7:23:04 PM
dick_w says:
Marc
I don't mean to 'pile on', but the show payoffs seemed quite reasonable to me. As Steve stated with regard to the tri and super, if the dead heat doesn't happen the payoffs double. Same with the show payoffs for the 2 horses who dead heated for third. $14 is a very generous show payoff. How often do you see $14 show payoffs ? As for Denis of Cork, I felt he was indeed the most logical horse to finish in the top 3 (even more so than B B) because I felt, as did many others, that B B would either win or bust. Whereas, Denis was most likely to pass tiring horses to make it into the top 3. I never thought I would say this, but I think Flippers $200 show bet on Denis of Cork was a very good bet. Hey, he doubled his $ on what I considered to be a relatively sure thing. I didn't win a penny on the race myself, and I know a lot of others were in the same boat. But I see nothing fishy about those payoffs.
Posted by Dick W Jun 9, 2008 6:49:28 PM
andyscoggin says:
Do I hear the theme from the TWILIGHT ZONE playing in the background of the blog??
C'mon folks enough already, SAR opens soon, there's a $1 million carryover on Wed. Let's move on like good horseplayers are supposed to do!
Posted by AndyScoggin Jun 9, 2008 6:23:49 PM
gocashbaby says:
Now Mr. "Foregone Conclusion" has lowered himself again (I didn't think he could go any lower), by resorting to blaming the jock. What a complete clown.
Posted by gocashbaby Jun 9, 2008 6:19:05 PM
sherpaguide says:
Well said Steve, the payoffs all make sense when you lay it out like that.
My first Belmont Stakes experience...no trouble driving in at 9:00 am, and was a bit taken aback when a ticket scalper approached me in the parking lot; "wow, that never happened to me at a horse race before" I thought. Spent the early morning exploring the emmense track with my wife, soaking up the atmosphere before the throngs showed up. Was nice to run into the Hennegan brothers and purchase my own autographed copy of "First Saturday in May".
We knew it would be hot and crowded so no complaints there...but where the heck was the seminar?? Could not track it down; oh well, studied the form on a bench under a tree instead. Time to head to the paddock for the first race...I thought NYRA put together a nice card; the first 5 races were decent enough, nothing too hard to figure out for the fans to get there teeth wet; the stakes action after that was great, loved all the races leading up to the big one.
OK, the bathroom issue reared its' ugly head but I remember the days of the old Foxboro Stadium at Patriots games where the same thing happened often. We laughed it off Saturday and headed outside...95,000 flushing at once in an old building will cause problems, get over it you conceted giant hat wearing, one race-a-year attending annoying psuedo fans!!
Kudos to NYRA, plenty of staff...never had a problem placing a bet all day. Plenty of water and beer, that's all I ask for!
As for the race itself, :( I still have yet to render my final opinion. Was it the ride? I think the stranglehold played a part. The heat? NO, all the horses except for one all day dealt with it fine. No water on the track? Someone in this blog said that...I can assure you there was plenty of water all day put down...the trucks "honked" every time they went by to get a cheer out of the crowd. Foot, steroids, trainer, who knows but it just did not happen. You know what, 'Toga opens 6 weeks from Wednesday!!
P.S. Nice job Evening Attire on Friday!! :)
Posted by SherpaGuide Jun 9, 2008 5:53:45 PM
charles_baxter says:
Mabe Big Brown was ZAPPED!
Yes! That's right with an Electric shock or some Ultra sonic sound device that someone in the crowd directed at the Horse. If there was nothing physically wrong with him then something either distracted him or bothered him if I'm not mistaken.
Mabe!
Posted by charles baxter Jun 9, 2008 5:48:25 PM
yuwipi says:
Geez! Did anyone have a day at work like I did? I must have been asked by 20 people "what happened?" To which I offered many of the ideas that have been tossed around on this blog. We all follow and love the game, but lay people who were super psyched for this race don't think everything is on the up and up. I'm not casting any stones but I think Saturday's events have given the sport a black eye to those in the general public I've talked to. Totally different from the excited disappointment after the Smarty Jones defeat
Does anyone think a serene smile might have crossed the face of Mr. Fujisawa or his owner?
I see the charts have been updated, and they put $1,850,000 into the $1 million guaranteed Pick 4. Amazing.
Posted by yuwipi Jun 9, 2008 5:39:01 PM
steven_crist says:
Marc,
NYRA uses net-pool pricing, as most tracks now do. What is "fishy" about the show pool? Big Brown attracted a smaller percentage of the show pool than the win pool, which is not unusual. The payoffs flow directly from the pools, which were correctly calculated. What's your sinister theory?
Posted by steven_crist Jun 9, 2008 5:30:21 PM
larry_thiel says:
I'd be totally convinced that there was no conspiracy.
But then I remember sponges up horses noses.
The Breeders Cup pick 6.
We know there's betting into the pools after races are started.
Didn't an NBA ref take bribes.
I don't know about the Belmont.
It seems unlikely.
But we're involved in a dirty, dirty, game.
And it doesn't take much to fix a horse race.
Maybe someone didn't have to pay off Desourmeaux.
Maybe they had something on him from years ago.
And this is where they cashed in their ticket.
Drug's are everywhere in this sport.
I doubt it was fixed.
But it's not absurd that it might have been.
I've seen too much to say it's absurd.
Posted by Larry Thiel Jun 9, 2008 5:24:31 PM
marc says:
Your blog really didn't address the show pools which is the only one I think was fishy and still do. I have been unable to find individual show pool totals, but did learn from NYRA they do not calculate payouts as most tracks do.
Posted by Marc Jun 9, 2008 5:20:34 PM
mudhoundmojo says:
Arcstats,
I just finished a rather long response to your earlier post on the previous days blog. As soon as I pushed post, Steve's newest blog heading came up, so it will probably be the last post on the last blog. I am not necessarily expecting a response, I just thought about what you have been saying and responded. Since I did respond, I wanted you to have at least seen it.
Regards,
MudhoundMojo
Posted by MudhoundMojo Jun 9, 2008 5:10:33 PM
ray_flack says:
Well said Steve. More seasoned players would know that the logical place horse and a dead heat for third would water down the payout. Same argument for the exotics, as you said. Let us all move on, please. Ray
Posted by ray flack Jun 9, 2008 4:55:03 PM
andyscoggin says:
Those were not the only absurd comments our fellow bloggers were making!
Posted by AndyScoggin Jun 9, 2008 4:55:02 PM
Comments to this entry are closed.
About
Steven Crist has been the Publisher and a columnist for Daily Racing Form since 1998. Previously, he covered racing for The New York Times from 1981-1990; was founding editor-in-chief of The Racing Times in 1991-92; and a vice-president of the New York Racing Association from 1994-97. He recently released an instructional DVD titled "Exotic Tickets," and is the
author of several books including "Betting on Myself" and "Exotic Betting."
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- blackseabass on Very High Quality
- blackseabass on Very High Quality
- tim dean on Apple Blossom Time?
- yuwipi on Very High Quality
- glf on Very High Quality
- $bill on Very High Quality
- Arcstats on Very High Quality
- blackseabass on Apple Blossom Time?
- Clocker_Dan on Very High Quality
- Leon on Apple Blossom Time?
