Quote:
Originally Posted by theiman
I am copying and pasting this from John Cherwa's daily newsletter on So Cal Racing. John is the LA Times horse beat writer and he puts out a free newsletter to those that want to subscribe. It also provides free picks, previews and reviews and free Equibase charts for all T-Bred races at the 3 So Cal tracks. He wrote about the topic 2 days ago, with answers from track reps.
If you want to subscribe, its free no charge here is the link http://www.latimes.com/newsletters/l...s=mcnewsletter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, what is it about Los Alamitos that has it cancelling show betting whenever there is even a whiff of a minus pool? It was especially stark last Saturday when the six-horse Beverly J. Lewis Stakes had no show betting. Actually, if you go back to the Summer meeting, they did it with another six-horse field.
Saturday’s card has three five-horse races and only one of them has show wagering. On Friday, there were two five-horse fields and they had show bets on only one of them.
In its Summer meeting, Los Al cancelled show bets in six races. Three were understandable because there were only four horses. Two of them had five and then there was the aforementioned six-horse race. You’re going to be surprised at who makes that decision.
~~read the rest at link above~~ |
None of this surprises me- Hialeah staged the "Chicken Flamingo" when Buckpasser ran (no PLACE betting), and there have even been betless exhibitions like Seabiscuit-Ligaroti in the past.
It is outrageous in one sense, but it helps to remember a gambling axiom- the house always wins. This is why if a slot machine puts up three 7's when it isn't supposed to, the casino won't pay off. It is why Phil Ivey lost his lawsuits over edge sorting. It is why if you card count, the casino doesn't let you play blackjack.
You can win as much as you can from other players, but they don't let you win money from the house.
