AL Gutierrez ride on Cougar Guy (5th) at Portland Meadows Oct 19

[Stillriledup]

Seemed like he thought this was a 3 furlong race, he was running in 2nd behind the big favorite turning for home and then inexplicably stopped riding. Put the horse under a hammerlock and dropped back from 2nd to 3rd. Was i seeing things or was i just dreaming? I don't normally wager on Portland Meadows, but if their riders are going to pull shenanigans like this, maybe i'd be better off not playing these races.

[jballscalls]

that wasn't Tony Guterriez, it was leading jockey Joe Crispin. me and the equibase folks both commented on that ride afterwards

[Stillriledup]

The racing form said guiterrez, i didnt notice any big flashing lights saying crispin was riding. At any rate, it was a criminally bad ride. I'm sure he'll have some excuse and the judges will let it slide.

[toussaud]

this is why, i do not. wager. on.small.bush.leauge.tracks.

we talk about takeout utnil we are blue in teh face. give me a somewhat high takeout where i can pretty much i'm going to get at least a decent ride because of the quality of jockies versus 10% takeout on tracks like thistle and portland meadows. even the best ones there, do somethings sometimes that just man. i saw one ride where the leading jockey at evg downs a few months ago got boxed in on ike a 2-5 shot, by one horse lol. how do you let one horse box block you the entire freaking stretch i have no idea.

[jballscalls]

The racing form said guiterrez, i didnt notice any big flashing lights saying crispin was riding. At any rate, it was a criminally bad ride. I'm sure he'll have some excuse and the judges will let it slide.

well the lights aren't blinking, but they are neon blue and scroll through the changes all day long, plus it said the name in post parade.

but your point about it being a lousy ride is one i agree with.

[newtothegame]

Guys...I am a little confuased here....
And honestly, not at all trying to be smart or indignant in my response.

Why would you NOT want these scenarios? If you know at Bush league tracks...as some have called it, that these things happen, wouldnt that present more value?

I play EVG and well in not at all a big winner...but there are some jocks who I have my ideas about how they ride and who they ride for. Namely...Gmoney. Now this is not a statistical fact (as I have not done the research) but I feel he has burried more chalks then chicken pox. When I find him on a chalk, I am almost looking always to bet against. Sometimes it pays!!!
Other times it has cost me....
But the point is that I thought we were looking for value. And I will gladly take my chances against a 2-5 with Gmoney on his back.

Next thing I am curious about is...the "2-5". Or for that matter, any chalk. Isn't it in the best interest of horse racing to have some longshots win? I mean when calvin rode MTB at 50-1 to a DERBY win, I would imagine that your average joe couldnt even tell you the horses name today. But they ALL remember the PAY OUT. Isnt that part of the allure to racing? The same could be said for most players here that are experienced....you all, I would imagine, can tell about your big scores (which included longshots) but would be hard pressed to tell us every score on a chalk.

I guess my point is why not take advantage of those quirky little bush league tracks and their nuances versus slamming them for those same qualities. Without those little "chances" to hit a big score....this game would probably be gone.

Thanks in advance...and seriously, if I am missing something...please explain.

[rubicon55]

Guys...I am a little confuased here....
And honestly, not at all trying to be smart or indignant in my response.

Why would you NOT want these scenarios? If you know at Bush league tracks...as some have called it, that these things happen, wouldnt that present more value?

I play EVG and well in not at all a big winner...but there are some jocks who I have my ideas about how they ride and who they ride for. Namely...Gmoney. Now this is not a statistical fact (as I have not done the research) but I feel he has burried more chalks then chicken pox. When I find him on a chalk, I am almost looking always to bet against. Sometimes it pays!!!
Other times it has cost me....
But the point is that I thought we were looking for value. And I will gladly take my chances against a 2-5 with Gmoney on his back.

Next thing I am curious about is...the "2-5". Or for that matter, any chalk. Isn't it in the best interest of horse racing to have some longshots win? I mean when calvin rode MTB at 50-1 to a DERBY win, I would imagine that your average joe couldnt even tell you the horses name today. But they ALL remember the PAY OUT. Isnt that part of the allure to racing? The same could be said for most players here that are experienced....you all, I would imagine, can tell about your big scores (which included longshots) but would be hard pressed to tell us every score on a chalk.

I guess my point is why not take advantage of those quirky little bush league tracks and their nuances versus slamming them for those same qualities. Without those little "chances" to hit a big score....this game would probably be gone.

Thanks in advance...and seriously, if I am missing something...please explain.

New to the Game, I have been around a while but do not claim to be an expert in all matters about horse racing but betting on 2-5 or the betting favorite statistically wins only about 33% of the time, which is pretty poor compared to the 66% who win the rest of the races. There is little value in a horse going off at 2-5. In my opinion I like to see at least 2 to 1 or better if you have to bet a favorite. You are better off for value on your wager by not betting on the betting favorite and look for mid shots and long shots, especially when the morning line favorite is vulnerable. The best jockeys can only do so much, IMO it is better to look at the horse itself and next look at the trainers record. The ROI tends to be better for me with that approach in my opinion. Good luck to you.

[Stillriledup]

Guys...I am a little confuased here....
And honestly, not at all trying to be smart or indignant in my response.

Why would you NOT want these scenarios? If you know at Bush league tracks...as some have called it, that these things happen, wouldnt that present more value?

I play EVG and well in not at all a big winner...but there are some jocks who I have my ideas about how they ride and who they ride for. Namely...Gmoney. Now this is not a statistical fact (as I have not done the research) but I feel he has burried more chalks then chicken pox. When I find him on a chalk, I am almost looking always to bet against. Sometimes it pays!!!
Other times it has cost me....
But the point is that I thought we were looking for value. And I will gladly take my chances against a 2-5 with Gmoney on his back.

Next thing I am curious about is...the "2-5". Or for that matter, any chalk. Isn't it in the best interest of horse racing to have some longshots win? I mean when calvin rode MTB at 50-1 to a DERBY win, I would imagine that your average joe couldnt even tell you the horses name today. But they ALL remember the PAY OUT. Isnt that part of the allure to racing? The same could be said for most players here that are experienced....you all, I would imagine, can tell about your big scores (which included longshots) but would be hard pressed to tell us every score on a chalk.

I guess my point is why not take advantage of those quirky little bush league tracks and their nuances versus slamming them for those same qualities. Without those little "chances" to hit a big score....this game would probably be gone.

Thanks in advance...and seriously, if I am missing something...please explain.


We agree that the little tracks present tremendous opportunities if you know where to look. I just think that not riding mounts out to the finish is seperate from the nuances you speak of. Dinky tracks can still have nuances even if all riders ride their mounts out to the finish.

[Gapfire]

betting on 2-5 or the betting favorite statistically wins only about 33% of the time, which is pretty poor compared to the 66% who win the rest of the races.

Horses in the 2-5 odds range win about 59% of the time. Still a bad bet, but they win a lot more than the 33% average for favorites.