PDA

View Full Version : NYRA's show pool cancellations


SG4
06-09-2015, 10:23 AM
Didn't hear anything about this ahead of time, but in checking the Belmont day charts it looks like Belmont didn't offer show wagering on either the Woody Stephens or Ogden Phipps. This seems like a curious move since I'd think on big days there would be enough money spread all around to make minus pools difficult to achieve, and it's easy to redboard now, but I didn't think either of the 2 favorites were slam-dunks the way a minus pool creator usually is. I know they did this last year for Untapable's Mother Goose, and that I thought seemed like a prudent business decision based on how the field stacked up, even though people grumbled about that at the time.

What I want to know is how often does NYRA plan on doing this in the future, and who has the ultimate decision on when to cancel show wagering? Seems like that'd be a pretty pressurized handicapping position, as that must've been a decent chunk of change they missed out on in profits with Competitive Edge running out. Long-term I'd have to think the occasional minus pool is offset with more profits from bridgejumpers running out of the money, but maybe they've got real numbers to back up their ideas where I'm really just going on a guestimate. I know Woodbine follows this methodology as well, think this is something other tracks will start to copy too?

cj
06-09-2015, 11:16 AM
Not allowing show betting on the Woody Stephens was bizarre. I don't think I've ever seen that at a NYRA track on a six horse field. It looks even sillier with the supposed standout running last.

It made a little more sense in the Phipps with Untapable, but it is still pretty weak in my opinion.

What's next, have some horses running for purse money only like the old harness racing days?

Rise Over Run
06-09-2015, 12:11 PM
Covering the minus pool is the responsibility of the entity (racetrack, OTB, etc) that accepts the wager, not the host track.

DeltaLover
06-09-2015, 12:16 PM
If it was for me, I would have eliminated show betting altogether.. If this was not possible, I would have restricted only in fields with at least 10 starters

Stillriledup
06-09-2015, 01:36 PM
Not allowing show betting on the Woody Stephens was bizarre. I don't think I've ever seen that at a NYRA track on a six horse field. It looks even sillier with the supposed standout running last.

It made a little more sense in the Phipps with Untapable, but it is still pretty weak in my opinion.

What's next, have some horses running for purse money only like the old harness racing days?
No doubt. Dont you just love it when some 'track official' handicaps FOR YOU?

And ROR is right on covering show, which means they could just ban show betting on track and with any nyra affiliated adw and let everyone else bet since theres no skin off their nose.

Rise Over Run
06-09-2015, 01:53 PM
And ROR is right on covering show, which means they could just ban show betting on track and with any nyra affiliated adw and let everyone else bet since theres no skin off their nose.

I highly doubt it's possible for the host track to not take show wagers while allowing others to do so.

Stillriledup
06-09-2015, 02:12 PM
I highly doubt it's possible for the host track to not take show wagers while allowing others to do so.

My point was that they could take show wagers but not permit on track people to bet into the pool. I know there are simo tracks that ban show even if the host track is accepting it, but it would come down to the ability of the tote software being able to block on track customers from betting it.

If you are a person who doesnt bet thru the host hub, you shouldnt be banned from making a show bet because the host track doesnt have the desire to specifically block just those bets that could cost them money.