Santa Anita January 5 ROI Wagers go here
 

Please have your ROI wagers for Santa Anita posted on this thread not later than 12:00 Noon Pacific time.

Good luck to all and thank you to Real Quiet for scoring.

Race 1 $11 ex key 4 w 1-3-8 ($33)

Race 4 $11 ex key 2 w 1-7-8 ($33)

Race 7 $11 ex key 7 w 2-3-5 ($33)

Race 8 ) $100 show #6

Thanks, RQ!

Supurrsillyous Selections
 

SUPURRRFLUOUS SELECTIONS :zz:

RACE 4
#7 =====> $22 WIN
FROM THE DISTANCE
(*Probably Where He Will See The Wire!)


RACE 5
#8 =====> $30 WIN
MUTINEER {*Into Mischief!!!}


RACE 9
#4 =====> $24 WIN
EASY SHOT


RACE 10
#1 =====> $12 W/P = $24 {OMG! She's Actually Doing 'Place' Bet!} :eek:
STARSHIP CHEWY
2nd-Itis Is Taking A Toll On My Betting Process
Last Week 1 Of The Worst! Pergolicious Indeed! PurrrrGaLicious! Grrrrrrrrr :mad:

MEOW MIX + CATNIP BUFFET FOR THE 'QUIET ONE' :{>:

Race 8:
$2 Pick 3: 5,6,7,9 // 2,5,6 // 3,4,7 ($72)

$1 Pick 3: 5,6,7,9 // 7 // 3,4,7 ($12)

$1 Pick 3: 5,6,7,9 // 2,5,6 // 2 ($12)

Total: $96

Good luck to all and thank you to Real Quiet for scoring.

r9 $50 W #7

r10 $50 W #3

Race 1:
$33 win 8

Face 4:
$33 win 8

Face 10:
$33 win 4

Enjoy the day. TIGERS TIGERS TIGERS¡¡!!!!!!!!!!

The Haskell moved to a Saturday this year. We may actually be able to use it in our contest.

race 6

50 cent P5 $90

2 4 7

1 3 5 7 9

2 5 7

5

2 3 4 7

thx rq

R3. 2 Brioso $25 Win
R5. 8 Mutineer $25 Win
R7. 9 Big Bend $25 Win
R9. 3 Savagery $25 Win

Total Bets - $100

Race 5:
$25 to win on #9
$10 exacta box - #4/#9

Race 7:
$35 to win on #7

Race 8:
$30 to win on #9

R7

$1 Pick 3

2,3,5,7,9//5,6,7,9//2,5,6 = $60

$2 Pick 3

2,3,5,7,9//5,6,7,9//5 = $40

I must confess to having committed a cardinal sin of race watching in yesterday's 10th race at Santa Anita.:o I was alive to 4 horses in my Pick 3 ROI wager, and was delighted to see 2 of them (#7 Getaloadofthis and #3 Bitter Ring Home) pull away from the rest of the field and duel down the stretch. Like many horseplayers, I concentrated on the stretch duel and even allowed myself to think about the will pays on each of them as they neared the wire. #3 was going to pay about 3 times as much as #7, so my rooting naturally focused that way. I was so intent on that duel that I really didn't notice #10 Derby Factor (whom I didn't have) make a perfectly timed late move on the outside to pass them both just before the wire. In my mind, I was already heading to the window, so to speak.

Made me think that when we have a wager on a race, we watch that race very differently than if we are just watching without anything on the line. By focusing on "our" horses, we miss very interesting things that are happening elsewhere in the race. It's human nature, of course, but how many skillful rides do we miss because we are concentrating on the mistakes the jockey on "our" horse is making?

Nothing more exciting than to see your horse or horses in the lead and likely to give you a nice score and nothing more deflating to see some long shot beat them in the last jumps to the wire. One thing about it though, you picked the right sequence. I played one race before that one and hit it on my smaller bet, but still will only get less than half my $100 back. In real wagering, I could probably count the pick-3s I've played on one hand. Maybe I can count it as a learning experience? I get pretty tired of those pesky learning experiences.:D

$41.70 per $1 is a pretty skimpy payoff for a sequence that had three ML second choices as the winners, especially for races that looked quite competitive on paper. I can just imagine how much smaller it would have been if Coliseum had won the Sham.

I think it was a favorite and 2 2nd choices. The San Gabriel pretty much killed the payoff, when the 8 to 5 favorite won it which figures. I went 5 deep in it thinking it might have a better payoff and almost did. The 3 horse that ran 2nd was 6 to one. Yep, it would have likely been a pitiful payoff indeed with Coliseum, but the talking heads were right about him. Shocking to see a Baffert horse run so poorly. Horse is apparently a head case and has gate issues. I have him in future wagers in an exacta with some others. Probably can say sayonara to that.:(:zz: I wavered between him and the Sham winner and probably should have played the horse with longer odds, but very hard to go against Baffert. He and Chad Brown are a must use, in just about any race and of course, that is why his odds were so low. The public has been conditioned to think he will win every race, even when the talking heads are saying the horse has problems.

In my fantasy stable I have Chicago Style who ran in the 7th. I was focused on him the entire race and he only ran 4th. On Sunday another player I know who has Next Shares mentioned that he thought he lost but got the nose bob. Watched the replay again and finally realized a day later Next Shares did get the bob and I had an ROI and a real exacta so I guess focus is not my strong point.

They called it a nose, but I think it was more like an eyelash.:D I thought the inside horse got it, but didn't turn out that way.