Betting against bridge jumpers
 

After seeing the payouts from Tapizars race, I was curious if anyone ever looked into this as a possible angle? Seems you could have a pretty high failure rate and still a positive ROI.

I don't know what the long term ROI is, but it's a fun way to cash every now and then.

DrugS is on the case. He will report shortly.

Kinda was directed that way. :)

I mean who else has that much time on his hands.

Some guy named Randall Scott.

If only.

Exhibit A http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40967

Actually, that got my day rolling on Saturday. If you see it and the show pool is about 90% on one horse, it's well worth it, especially in races with smaller fields. You lose maybe $4 or $6, in bigger fields, maybe $18 or $20. So the smaller the field, the greater the chances...and there are rarely 90% show jumpers in a race with a big field, so you are more often to lose $4 or $6 or $8.

Any time I see them jump, I play against. But is often especially lucrative in harness racing with their smaller fields anyway. I have seen the Meadowlands pay $200+ per horse before, smaller venues, sometimes bigger.

Thank you. Well explained and totally logical.

With the introduction of net pool pricing, it makes even more sense to try and beat the bridgejumpers, because even if the favorite does come in, and unfortunately they usually do, if a longshot comes in with him, you can still get a decent show price on the other horse, maybe in the $5-6 range, whereas back in the old days everybody would have paid $2.10. Saturday was a bad day to take a plunge, as both Tapizar and Comma to the Top had huge show wagers on them, totalling over $300,000, and of course both lost.