Bridgejumpers going nuts!

[Kentucky Bred]

Is there a system seller somewhere touting a new way to make a guaranteed 5% on your money by betting on "sure things" to show?

It seems to me we've been hearing about a lot of bridgejumpers lately. They seemingly have bloomed with the spring weather.

At CD today in the 9th race Derby Trial Stakes, of the $882,165 bet to show in the pool, $811,882 was bet to show on #3 Midas Eyes who won impressively. That is over 92% of the pool!

First of all, it seems that most bridgejumpers wait for 5 horse fields where the track allows show wagering. More tracks are starting to protect themselves so I'm seeing more of these crazy bets in the 6 horse field.

Also, most of these bets seem to occur when there is very little competition. In this race Lukas/Velasquez had a horse which just ran a big race at Keeneland

--Pat Byrne (great trainer) had a multiple stakes winner--

Champali, a solid stakes horse with Pat Day, among others.

Anything could have happened in this race. Mr. Bridgejumper would have had to win 20 of these races in a row in order to BREAKEVEN!

I don't know. I guess the $40,000 in profits makes for a good day at the races. I'm sure the wine will flow tonight. But you know out there is a race that doesn't run to plan.

They don't call them "bridgejumpers" for nothing.

Kentucky Bred

[BillW]

I would think a "show all" ticket (less the fav) would be profitable in these cases :)

Bill

[kenwoodall]

Bridgejumper overall profit cannot be that big % wise. Maybe these are syndicates or people who just want to show a big ticket win even at a loss. A few hundred $$ bet to show on the favorite will often result in less payoff not worth the effort. 1/3 of the show pool on favorites can result in very low payoffs. You need a show betting success rate of about 70% and not just on favorites to break even, and 80% before you do not have to look at the toteboard at all to stay in the black. I'm at 84%.
If you want to bet the small field vs. the favorite try nothern California Russell Baze at the 4, 5, or 6 posts with speed inside of him. He is about 12% wins there and I am in the black betting the field with 4 or 5 entries.

[pic6vic]

Here's a different take on the bridgejumpers. By betting outrageous amounts too show it allows you to bet every horse in the race and not lose money. Of course you have to have different amounts on each horse including the fav, but it is posible. Take this race and try it. I have in the past and it works.

[ThoroTech_SoCal]

Pic6vic,

That works great for everyone but the bridgejumper!!! In other words, the situation can't be created, but only taken advantage of by others when it exists (and limited in the amount that can be wagered by the overall size of the show pool).

Again, I agree this certainly is possible, but never know what that last minute money posted after post time can do to the so called profitable opportunity.

Bill

[pic6vic]

ThoroTech

You are correct

[mikekk]

I really wish someone in the media could "corral" one of them and let us know the thought process that they go thru.

I've always wondered why, if you have a spare $200G's, an extra crummy $10G's is worth all that risk. I'd love to have an explanation.

Also, has anyone noticed that, once it starts it doesn't go away...until the inevitable loss? My only track experience with a jumper was about 10 years ago. This guy hit at least 10 in a row. Then he lost. Then he lost again. Goodbye.

What the H*LL are they thinking about???

Mikekk

[Kentucky Bred]

The argument is that, of course, where else can you get such a return for so little time? Decent argument, in my opinion.

The problem, as I see it, is that we disagree in the evaluated risks. There is no room for error. So, it is the ultimate form of gambling out of control.

But what I suspect, as I am thinking about it, is that the ability for people to now bet directly into the pool without a betting service. This is new. (Relatively) Remember, it was not too long ago that bettors had to go to the track and put the cash through the machines. All in real cash! Now it is a click. I think we will continue to see these huge show pools. Nobody took 800 grand to Churchill Downs on Saturday, that's for sure.

I've probably told this story before but I got my illustrious start in horseracing betting while in college in LA. My system was betting favorites to show that couldn't lose. I built that bankroll from the intial $1000 I scraped together to $4,000. No lie--it took awhile. I needed to win every single time. I did. And then that day came. I went up to the window and took out $4,000 in cash and said "4,000 to show on number 4 please". Number four was second after dueling the whole way and then 3rd... and then 4th at the wire." I looked at the huge stack of $50 show tickets I was holding and was instantly cured of this betting foolishness.

It won't be long before we are reporting about some absolutely wacky show prices.

Kentucky Bred

[midnight]

Then there are the guys who are betting these huge numbers through the OTB's that offer rebates. There are supposedly a couple of places in the United States that offer a 6% rebate on money bet (I haven't been able to find them) and at least one major one that gives up to 3% back. Also there are a few states that mandate a $2.20 payoff. If you're betting $20,000 at an OTB that rebates you 6% and at a track that requires a $2.20 minimum payoff, you suddenly have 2,320 profit for your $20,000, or 16% on the money instead of 5%, which means you have to hit 86.25% winners to break even instead of 95.25% at $2.10 and no rebate.

[Kentucky Bred]

I knew about the rebates but guaranteed minimums is new to me. Wow! I guess it could make some sense. I still wouldn't do it though but these are some good explanations as to the reason why.

Kentucky Bred

[ponyplayer]

Kentucky Bred, Yesterday at Bay Meadows (4/30) 3rd Race, the big favorite ran out, prices:
#4 Flying Alibi 19.60 6.80 28.40
#3 Bikers Sis 5.00 23.00
#5 Remember Dorothy 11.80

That bridge jumer ate the big one.

[rastajenk]

At least they have an excellent choice of bridges out there.

[Pace Cap'n]

Originally posted by rastajenk
At least they have an excellent choice of bridges out there.


ROFLMAO

[lousycapper]

to make money with as little risk as possible.

When I was a toddler my folks took me to Hollywood Park. All I remember is Mom and Dad shaking their heads when a rumor circulated that a woman had bet a huge amount to show on one of your "bridge jumpers" and had lost. It was later reported she bet $500,000. All that for a 5% return? Sounds pretty dumb to me.

-L.C.

[BMeadow]

Places that offer rebates through the pari-mutuel pools do not offer rebates on races in which there is a minus pool. In fact, they do not even accept bets on races on any horse in which it is likely there will be a minus pool. You can get a few percent at offshore books even on these races, but they have low betting limits.

Your chance of betting $50,000 to show for a $2.10 payoff, then scoring rebates for the same bet, is nonexistent.

[midnight]

Somebody explained somewhere a while ago that it was theoretically possible for both the bridge jumper and the faders to both have an advantage. It had something to do with the minus pools (minimum payoff) and hitting about 97% of the bridge jumper show bets. The problem was that it wouldn't work in practice because the bettor had to have total control over the show pool.