If you were a bridgejumper...

[sq764]

All this talk about bridgejumpers getting toasted got me to thinking...

If you had $200K that you were given to wager, BUT, you MUST wager it on a thoroughbred horse to show.

What would be the standards in a race that would narrow down your search for the perfect play?

[Buddha]

i think usually a short field with a horse that towers over the field on paper.

[sq764]

How about if it is a maiden race or million dollar race?

Fast track or off-track

Jockey matter? Trainer matter?

[Valuist]

You know how to make a small fortune betting on bridgejumpers? Start with a large fortune.

[chickenhead]

A.) Go to small track

B.) Bribe jockeys.

C.) Head fer the windows....

[InsideThePylons-MW]

There is one sacred rule to observe when bridgejumping...........Safety in numbers. I've never came close to losing one ever. Having a 2, 3, or even 5 horse entry that fits my criteria is the key. You can't force these bets, but they come along once in a while.

A jumper has came in on a horse I own the last 3 times she raced in stakes. 160K, 180K, and 300K this week, while she was trying to break behind the gate. Lucky for him, she stayed on stride and won. Absolutely crazy to bet on a sole entry to show. Too many bad things can happen.

[Jeff P]

I have no clue why anyone would want to bet that kind of money to show. Over the past decade the number of different queries I have run against my database probably now numbers somewhere in the tens of thousands. The results I get back are tabulated by bet type and includes columns for win, place, and show. In all that time, I've never stumbled across a single factor, or combination of factors, that would make me want to bet two cents to show. About 99 percent of the time the win column returns more money than the place column. And the place column just about always returns more money than the show column.

[MichaelNunamaker]

Hi Sq764,

That is an interesting question. I would pick a small track and an allowance race where one horse appears to tower over the others. The reason is that my data shows that at the bigger tracks, the horses in general are better, so when one horse is the best of the field, the gap won't be as big as the smaller tracks.

If our bridge jumper wants to do this many times a year, the best I could do would be to bet when my picks are predicting the top horse has a greater than 50% chance of winning at a small track. This kind of horse runs in the money 85% of the time. It also happens about 600 times a year. Now, this is a _lousy_ bet. Since the 200K will push the payoff to 2.10, so our bridge jumper is going to be losing 10 cents on the dollar over a period of time.

Slightly better odds can be had by waiting for a horse that is ranked #1 on a dozen key things I measure. This happens about 30 times a year, and these horses win 87% of the time.

If those horses are bet only when they are going off at odds of less than 1-1, the ITM percentage goes up slightly above 90%. Still not enough for the bridge jumper to make a living doing this, but the best I could manage for a one time shot.

Mike Nunamaker

[JackS]

A straight maiden race with 0 Fts"ers at four different large tracks with typical large pools. Short odds below 1-1. 50K split 4 ways into different show pools "might "allow for a payoff above $2.10 at one or more tracks. Also, a home track in which a leading jock, trainer or hometown favorite will not be the leading contender but will take a disproportionate and unreasonable amount of action in the place and show pools.

[ranchwest]

My biggest argument against bridge jumping is that the track usually has a negative pool. Given a chance for an objection (or less subtle actions), the track can take the bridge jumper's action out. I'm not saying I necessarily think this would happen, but it would make me very uncomfortable if I had $200,000 riding on it.

[JackS]

The problem with this kind of bet is that the personality of a bettor like this is going to make this bet over and over again as long as he is getting away with it. One loss in anything less than 20 bridge-jumps, and losses range from minimal to huge. If minimal, losses will eventually amount to huge, or if huge immediatly, the're out of the game.

[Suff]

We don't see many Bridgers nowadays at Suffolk.. maybe 5 a year.
usually thier Bookmakers or drugdealers sitting on a bunch of cash. Tote action doesn't completley wash it.. But it does rinse it a bit.

[SAL]

I think I would pick a MSW dropper going into mcl for the first time, running against a bunch of hopeless plugs. The MSW dropper would have to have shown SOME signs of life at the level though.

[Skanoochies]

I remember back in the seventies, or early eighties, I was down at Longacres in Seattle one Sunday afternoon, (us Canadians used to love that track) and was in the fifty dollar lineup behind a sort of hippy looking dude. He pulled out a wad that made me gasp, and wagered it all on a horse to show. I think the name was Silky Steel, or something like that. Big favorite. Gate opens, Silky goes to its knees and jockey flies over its head to the track. Lesson learned for me. Cinches are things to hold saddles on I believe, and nothing more.:D

[Dan Montilion]

Ralph Nader.

Dan Montilion.

[JackS]

A few years ago, A filly/mare of the year was returning from a layoff to a field of 5 @ Hol as I remember. Ran dead last. place and show prices ranged $25 to $250+. Can't remember the horses name though. This may have been Dmr as I was playing @ a satallite.