Ask the Experts

this is what you do when ND is getting their ass kickd every saturday - you indulge in every race possible!

I like Remarkable News in good hands, wine over the track, and looks so damn consistent.  shakespeare - great horse - but I expect regression 2nd back at this level.  Host always looks faster than the # he gets...

whoever posted that WO was the place to play today made good sense & as I look as the jocks up there today, allows me to drastically drop my pik 6/4 tickets for BEL.  I don\'t ususally look at WO.

Watching re-runs and noticed P.Val was on Becrux when he won it last year.Man,what a ride!
 Sooo,I\'m going with the mile an a half horse...Sky Conquerer.
Has that uncanny way of kicking it in w/authority every time.
Shake,Galantas,and Re.News under.

my play is a 1,2,3,6 box.

smaller 1,2,3,6,9 box.

6 will be the key at long odds in other plays.

How many couldn\'t get a bet down?

The following is not a complaint, but it looks to me like enough people got down to influence the odds.  I would have expected Drysdale\'s and Frankel\'s horses to take a lot more money than they did, and I would have expected that Super to pay more than it did in a 14 horse field.

Woodbine has a bizarre takeout structure.  Has anybody seen (not counting special promotions) a case where the regular takeout from the trifecta pool(28.3% at WOX) is more than the regular takeout from the superfecta pool (26.3% at WOX)?  This makes zero sense to me since there will always be far more super combinations that trifecta combinations.

If the Super in question had been hosted under Churchill\'s takeout rules (19% take on Supers) instead of Woodbine\'s (26.3% take on Supers), the Super would have paid almost $1200 instead of the $937 it did pay.  This shows you the power of the take (almost rivals compounding interest, huh?).

Even if the super had paid the $1200 under a more gentle take out regime, that still seems low to me compared to what I would have expected prior to seeing how the crowd bet the race which brings us back to the splendid ROTW analysis.  Kudos to Thorograph....I cannot imagine hammering a race more soundly.

spa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How many couldn\'t get a bet down?


Me for 1 it was very frustrating, so I concentated on Belmont

Also have to give a little credit to last weeks ROTW as they loved a filly named West Coast Swing in a Graded race at Arlington then scratched. She shows up in a Stakes at Prairie Meadows and faces little oppostion and still pays $4.00!

As many of us know Brisbet is not accepting wagers on New Jersey tracks (Monmouth and Meadowlands) as well as a number of other tracks.  Is there any word about negotiations to rectify the situation in time for the Breeder\'s Cup?  What are the best options other than Brisbet?

I haven\'t read anything about the specific issue you raise, but my understanding is that the Breeders\' Cup, not the host track, controls the signal for Breeders\' Cup races and negotiates its own deal with the ADW companies, so that normal limits do not apply.  Brisbet should be able to tell you whether they will be offering the BC races.

Would be interesting to know the answer. I have both BrisBet and YouBet so I am covered either way. I would use TVG if I was in one of their locales.

While all of these major track franchise owners are wrestling with each others signals and wagering outlets. Furiously trying to pin the competition to the matt. They are succeeding at one thing.

Brisbet states that they are \"not sure\" if they will take wagers on the Breeder\'s Cup from Monmouth.  But they are \"hopeful\"!!!!

Thoroughbred Times reports it\'s looking good for Brisbet:

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/national-news/2007/October/11/Breeders-Cup-wagering-unlikely-for-Youbet.com.aspx