9/18 (WO): Woodbine Mile, Northern Dancer (G1's), Canadian (G2)

Originally Posted by hockey2315

I know Woodbine is sooo progressive, good for bettors blah blah blah. But can someone explain to me why they place big races so poorly on their cards? It can't be a good idea to break up the big stakes with these terrible claimers/Ontario bred races. An all-stakes PK3 would generate way more handle.

People like me, who rarely play Woodbine unless its a big race like today will only focus on the three major stakes races. Since its spread out from race 5 to race 10, I am forced to handicap 6 to 8 races if I am playing the pick4. and rolling pick 3s. If they had put the races together back to back to back I will only handicap 3-5 races. On track, the people will stick around longer to watch all 3 stakes races 3 hours as opposed to 1.5 hours with 3 big races together.

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by helicopter11

People like me, who rarely play Woodbine unless its a big race like today will only focus on the three major stakes races. Since its spread out from race 5 to race 10, I am forced to handicap 6 to 8 races if I am playing the pick4. and rolling pick 3s. If they had put the races together back to back to back I will only handicap 3-5 races. On track, the people will stick around longer to watch all 3 stakes races 3 hours as opposed to 1.5 hours with 3 big races together.

Or people won't want to or won't feel comfortable handicapping those races and therefore won't play as much. That's how it is for me at least, and I play Woodbine a lot. Why take a few very attractive wagers and spread them out into more barely attractive wagers? I really don't think you're increasing handle that way.