- Kent Desormeaux has been handed a seven-day suspension for his rodeo riding aboard Be Bullish in the sixth at Belmont; and the rider has appealed. Ed Fountaine, writing in the NY Post, noted that the decision to not disqualify the horse was "consistent," given that at Saratoga, stewards set standard of leaving winner's number up despite obvious fouls.
But sooner or later, they'll have to draw line, before this turns into anything-goes rodeo.However, leaving the horse up wasn't entirely consistent given the DQ of Victory for Sienna on Aug 20 at the Spa; another incident in which the fouled horse had no shot to win.
- In an odd note, the Boston Globe notes that some bridgejumping activity at Suffolk on Godolphin's Afrashad, in which some $154,000 was bet on him and entry Council Member into a total show pool of $163,630, was reportedly most active in Pennsylvania simulcast betting. Hmmm, maybe John was hanging around the 5th floor at Philly Park again....or maybe it was Valerie or The Last Filly at Presque Isle Downs?
In any event, that action was dwarfed by the bridgejumpers at Belmont....or maybe they were at Pocono Downs?....for Any Given Saturday in the Brooklyn. A total of $1,250,142 was wagered to show on Any Given Saturday out of the total pool of $1,295,523. [NY Daily News] That created a minus pool of over $240,000; just add it on to the state's bailout package.
And even those who bet on mule races can't resist a guaranteed five cent return on the dollar. Sunday's first at Fairplex not only created a minus place pool - show betting was barred - of some $19,607 on the two prohibitive favorites, Bar JF Hot Ticket (7-10) and Sarah Newlson (9-10); but there was a minus quinella pool of $1,199! That winning combo returned the requisite $2.10, tying the world record for the lowest quinella payoff ever, and that wasn't you Ms. QQ, was it??
3 Comments:
Alan - Nope, that wasn't me taking a dip in that particular quinella pool! Thanks for bringing it to my attention, though, as I may have to rethink my quinella strategies. Generally, I've been in agreement with Richard Eng, who observed that "the advantage of betting a quinella instead of an exacta comes when the horses you like are roughly the same odds." In Betting on Horse Racing for Dummies, he pointed out that if you're using a long-shot, the exacta is the place where you'll get the most value. But if you're using two favorites, the quinella is supposed to be one way to "maximize your investment." Of course, when looking at a race where the $1 exacta paid $1.80 and the $1 tri paid $4, I'm not sure there was much "maximizing" of the investment to be had.
What would the show payoff have been on any of the others had AGS missed the board? Seems to me there is no great risk betting a few bucks on one of the others 'just in case'. I've done this plenty of times in harness racing and I've been rewarded with a few huge show payoffs.
Whenever there's a minus pool in a mule race out here, I bet all the others to show. During the Vallejo meet, Sarah Nelson produced a minus pool, and I almost got a nice return as she was 5th with 40 yards to go. Sadly she got up for second and the second choice, always the fast mule but rarely straight, Bar JF Geno paid something like 12-1. Actually, I knew how erratic this mule could be and was just betting eventually, he would veer so badly he could take sarah out and leve me with triple digit show payoffs. Now, I'll have to wait for next year for my big mule coup.
Post a Comment