Quote:
Originally Posted by TheYeoman
Interested to hear if posters find that they have better success at smaller tracks. Any truth to the idea that there may be advantages to be had from less sharp/CAW money in some of these pools, particularly the win pools? I guess the counter would be that the pools can be so small that any kind of late money can more drastically change the odds compared to much larger pools, but I'm hoping that on balance that disadvantage might be outweighed.
|
My last small-track visit was to Portland Meadows the year before they closed. It was very enjoyable as to atmosphere, facilities and the crowd. I had a winning day despite never having followed it, and prices, especially place and exactas were better than I expected. Maybe all of this was just coincidence, but I was looking forward to returning on my next visit, which didn't pan out.
In my own experience, success at smaller vs. larger tracks has been tied to specializing on the trainers, horses and jockeys who run there. My one-day of luck at PM was just getting lucky. The more tracks I've tried to play simultaneously affects my bottom line negatively..
As to sharper or CAW money, I thought NYRA and Fla tracks were tougher to compete. For a while I did focus on Belmont and Aqu, and did better than I expected. Sar and Ky tracks were the toughest in my mind to compete with sharp money.
