|
|
 |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: At what minimum odds would you have been willing to bet "All Others" in Pool 1? | |||
| 1-1 |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| 3-2 |
  
|
2 | 5.41% |
| 2-1 |
  
|
4 | 10.81% |
| 5-2 |
  
|
2 | 5.41% |
| 3-1 |
  
|
11 | 29.73% |
| 7-2 |
  
|
6 | 16.22% |
| 4-1 |
|
2 | 5.41% |
| 9-2 or higher, or never |
|
10 | 27.03% |
| Voters: 37. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
02-17-2010, 06:40 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I don't get this thinking, either, Danzig. Yeah, if you can pick the one out of 375 "All Others" horses that's going to win, you're better off waiting until Derby Day. But maybe you liked some other "All Others" horse last year besides Mine That Bird. Were you better off waiting for Derby Day to bet the horse you liked? Betting "All Others" in Pool 1 can't reasonably be compared to waiting until Derby Day to bet a single "All Others" horse. In the pool you have 300+ horses that can win the bet for you. If you liked an "All Others" horse last year, chances are excellent that it wasn't Mine That Bird. But your "All Others" Pool 1 bet would have paid off anyway. --Dunbar
__________________
Curlin and Hard Spun finish 1,2 in the 2007 BC Classic, demonstrating how competing in all three Triple Crown races ruins a horse for the rest of the year...see avatar photo from REUTERS/Lucas Jackson 
|
|
#2
02-17-2010, 07:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
