![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]() I don't know -- a dedicated horseplayer that does not bet or even watch the Breeders Cup? To me, they would be the ultimate outlier.
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() It's extreme I'll give you, but a guy that's strictly a gambler could care less. You and I are clearly in between the extremes, we gamble but we also enjoy the sport. Hardcore gambler just cares about winning. He doesnt care who is the best ever unless its making money for him. Guys that run around claiming its only about the gambling and then get gushy on Derby day crack me up.
__________________
facilis descensus Auerno |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Regardless of what people thought of the quality of the card on Saturday, they didn't shy away.
11 races (6 claimers) - total handle of $11,958,086 (with mostly sloppy/off-turf) The same Saturday on the calendar a year ago had 3 claiming races, a G1 turf stake, and was fast/firm and handled $11,927,406 (it did go up against the Arlington Million card, which is a weekend later this year). Monmouth Park ran 11 races in similar wet conditions on Saturday, handled $3,801,312. A year ago, they ran 12 races fast/firm and handled $6,191,436 |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() and when the slot money disappears there will have to be an overhaul of the racing calendar in New York.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Yeah might try out the no days schedule
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I can't believe this thread is still going on. This card would barely have qualified as a Saturday card at Aqueduct never mind Saratoga. The baby races are fun, if you like that sort of thing, but the combination of the reduced field size and the rain made those miserable as well. There were more races that were instant passes than there were races worth looking at, and for Saratoga that is bad news. It was a terrible card, let's leave it at that and hope for better over the final 3 weeks.
__________________
"I don't need nice horses at Philly, just ones with conditions."---Cannon Shell ![]() |