http://www.drf.com/news/breeders-cup-withholds-breeders-cup-betting-challenge-purse
Can someone explain:
a) how did he wait until such a late race to begin making wagers when one has to wager $900 per on 5 races that day (wouldn\'t that alone be a disqualified?) and
b) why would it be different for 2 people to discuss their betting strategies than one person telling himself what his other ticket is holding and trying something different? I just don\'t understand the collusion part other than a couple of people taking different horses/tacts to try and win some prize money.
I think I must be missing something., just not sure what.
Going to steal a line from Ed DeRosa; \" Juggling multiple entries is strategy; conspiring with another person is collusion.\" I can understand why some in the contest are upset but we all use information from many different sources to come up with our bets. In this case, the guy still came up with the winning bet.
We interrupt this expose to alert you to the fact that..The Daily Racing Form has severed its ties with the bcbc and nhc which is affiliated with the bcbc and HAS LAUNCHED ITS OWN HANDICAPPING TOUR!! Now back to the hard hitting journalism.
I don\'t typically play in tournaments so am no expert but it would seem pretty difficult to me to prove collusion. Where\'s Mueller when you need him!
The rules stated that on Friday for every race (of the 5 mandatory) you failed to play you\'d be penalized $1,000 from your bankroll - so if he didn\'t play any Friday wouldn\'t that mean he\'d start Saturday with only $2,500. On Saturday every one of the 5 mandatory races you failed to bet $900 on would penalize you $2,000; seems he shouldn\'t have had a bankroll left when he began to play. Is the answer that the tournament doesn\'t apply the penalties until your final bankroll is determined? If so then (to me) that makes no sense and he\'s a prime example - being able to hold your bankroll until the end and then be successful on a couple of shots, then have them lower your final tally by a few thousand doesn\'t seem like much of a penalty.
Makes some sense. Someone can place a couple of huge wagers on early Friday races and either be tapped out (same as losing huge bets on last two races Saturday) or suppose well ahead then either do nothing the rest of the tournament and be penalized or bet the minimum on each race, lose but still finish well ahead in the competition. In that comparison, makes sense not to penalize until the end. He made two great wagers; hats off.
Is one allowed to bet their winnings into subsequent races or are you limited to the original 7500?
You can bet winnings, which is why you can bet the whole was early and risk losing everything, even on one race.
The name of the game is to sell these real bankroll tournaments to the host venue. In truth the organizers just want you to churn and that’s how we are able to sit in semi premium rooms at these boutique tracks for breeders cup(keeneland,del mar ) if you were at Santa Anita we were in the downstairs grandstand with curtains surrounding us and it felt like a warehouse. I believe they announced 15 or so percent of the handle was coming from this contest (on track). So what a few decided was let’s say to hell with the mandatory 5 race ($600Friday $900 Saturday ) rule and just bet our one or two best bets if we win they just subtract the penalty without taking real cash anyway so why hunt and peck. What most real bankroll tournaments do is disqualify you if you miss a bet. Why not do this at the bc tourney? And who is really complaining about this? Did a organizer suggest it? It couldn’t just be the letter writers could it? Have any of the letter writers had partners in other tournaments? Unethical? probably..illegal? Prove it. Problem is if your Bob Baffert it’s hard to throw shade at Jorge Navarro!
mattjr62 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The name of the game is to sell these real
> bankroll tournaments to the host venue. In truth
> the organizers just want you to churn and that’s
> how we are able to sit in semi premium rooms at
> these boutique tracks for breeders
> cup(keeneland,del mar ) if you were at Santa Anita
> we were in the downstairs grandstand with curtains
> surrounding us and it felt like a warehouse. I
> believe they announced 15 or so percent of the
> handle was coming from this contest (on track). So
> what a few decided was let’s say to hell with
> the mandatory 5 race ($600Friday $900 Saturday )
> rule and just bet our one or two best bets if we
> win they just subtract the penalty without taking
> real cash anyway so why hunt and peck. What most
> real bankroll tournaments do is disqualify you if
> you miss a bet. Why not do this at the bc tourney?
> And who is really complaining about this? Did a
> organizer suggest it? It couldn’t just be the
> letter writers could it? Have any of the letter
> writers had partners in other tournaments?
> Unethical? probably..illegal? Prove it. Problem is
> if your Bob Baffert it’s hard to throw shade at
> Jorge Navarro!
There\'s always time to lock the barn door -- if you have the collective will.