No one had the pick 5 yesterday, so it starts with a 44K carryover.

Define "clever" please.

it's still a guaranteed payout.
and i can imagine the howls of outrage had the track done so. unethical at best.

'Opportune' clever..

Always best time to play "Jackpot" type pools......the day or two leading up to mandatory ( while other are saving bullets for the big day, thus eliminating a lot of competition ) and random weekday Off Turf days ( those days seem to make people disinterested in the card).

That said, I am dissappointed that it got taken down, but not shocked at the timing of when it was poached. :(

that must have been agonizing watching that stretch run. can you believe that hoss kept running.


Clever.....what you used to be.
Clever.....what the boss is now.
Clever.....what I think is the beaver's last name.

anything clever today ?

http://www.drf.com/news/horse-owner-...arly-7-million

By the owner of MAGIC JACK

Always nice to see the millionaires get richer :rolleyes:

If the owner of Magic Jack is a millionaire and the Cleveland Browns are worth half a billion dollars than I'm worth $3.5 million at least. Just has to be.

Bio of Dan Borislow

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Borislow

Hitting this bet made its way into the Wikipedia Bio. Ha.

Class warfare? Who cares how much money this guy has?

You do realize guys like this often help to create large pools and underlays creating opportunities for the rest of us, right?

It was a ballsy play. He figured correctly that most people would wait for the final day. It was ballsy in that he spent 7 K into a sequence that had a high likelihood to carry and probably would've lost money on a carry.

He spent $15k, not 7.

I have no bitterness for Dan Borislow, but let's not kid ourselves. He made a play that 99% of the wagering public couldn't possibly afford and got incredibly lucky. The stars were aligned for him.

I'm honestly amazed that people are acting like this was some sort of impressive display of handicapping or betting. . . It was a terrible bet, and he was extremely fortunate to be the only deep-pocketed person to try something like that (at least successfully).

It is funny that Gulfstream did all they could to rig the sequences for Sunday and Monday and things worked out exactly the opposite of what they were going for.

If they had only put the other baby race in the sequence, or avoided putting either one in. . .

I completely agree. That money, or the bulk of it, could have just as easily ended up being more money added to the mandatory payout if things didn't go his way.

Someone could go all in every race if they have enough money, it doesn't mean that they will be the sole ticket holder or that they will cash and be profitable off the bet.

In fact if more people did this, the chances are greater that the pools would just get larger for a mandatory payout as opposed to someone taking it down this way.

I think that some don't realize that this may be a benefit going forward. The next time one of these pools gets huge and gets close to a mandatory payout day there will probably be a few whales like the winner or groups that are going to dump a play like this into the day before the payout thinking they can do the same thing. Maybe even a few others will do it two days before or three days before, all of whom are much more likely to either miss or cancel each other out by not being the unique ticket holder.

People should not forget that there were five other horses in the race that would have carried the pot to Monday, two of whom almost beat this wager on the wire. The bet and that $15K would not have looked so great if one of those other two won the bob.

I agree with this.

I also wonder why more people don't make the logical extension that this is not the first time he has made a play like that. I wonder what his Rainbow-6 P&L looked like before Sunday.

It looked pretty good late on Sunday, however!

The rule of thumb, I believe, is that "wildly emotional displays after winning are only proper when the potential winnings equal 10 percent of your annual income."

Annual income, is open for interpretation I suppose. But I've always thought it meant money you make via paycheck from a company.

For instance, if some rich guy from New York City wins the same amount as some chronically unemployed degenerate -- it would be far less acceptable for the guy with the seven-figure net worth to act emotional about it. Where as the virtually unemployed bettor should, in theory, get a little bit of a pass.

Borislow pulled off a great "hit" -- but the people who are acting like it was some genius display of bankroll management, are confusing it with extreme luck, imo.

Borislow is a guy who takes outlandish shots. He paid Jerry Bailey $25,000 to ride his hopeless Talk Is Money in the Kentucky Derby after he blew an easy lead in the Tessio at Pimlico in his final prep, and had been dusted all winter in Florida. Bailey collected the 25k and eased his horse after six furlongs.

Borislow ran ads in the DRF, day after day, trying to argue to Eclipse award voters that Toccet deserved 2yo championship recognition over Vindication -- that was a gross waste of money, because an undefeated Breeders' Cup Juvenile winner will always get that vote.

People laughed at the imbecility of Borislow for paying Bailey 25k to ease his horse. People laughed at the money he wasted in advertising, for a failed bid to make Toccet a 2yo champion. At least, now, he gets the last laugh, for the moment.

Guy loves the track and bets a lot or so he says. that works for me.

:tro:

yeah, i wonder how he was on the year before the hit.

I don't have bitterness either , I'd of liked to see it hit by a few people who it would be life changing for : as Tim Ritvo said,

" Gulfsteam President and General Manager Tim Ritvo said while he was naturally disappointed to lose the potential to handle as much as $20 million on Monday’s card with the loss of the Rainbow Six jackpot, he congratulated Borislow for his big win.

“Obviously, we’re heartbroken and disappointed, like everyone else, losing the chance to see how high the pool might have gone to on Monday,” said Ritvo. “But the bet was originally designed with the hope of giving one of our customers the chance to make a life-changing score with the kind of payout we had today.”.

I used to play regular p6 pools once in a while with small tickets, until i finally realized, with Steve Crists commentary in his books and interviews, that it was a very bad play, and should stick to p3,4's... But I'll admit i did play the GP R6 on Saturday thinking that i could hit it and share a few hundred payoff to fund a play on monday and feel ok with it. I didnot hit it and wasnot going to play Monday unless i did.

Then there is Ken Ramsey , who had this to say in the DRF Mike Welsch article,

" Ramsey said he plans to single two of his four starters – Joes Blazing Aaron in the seventh race and Cage Fighter in the ninth – on his Rainbow Pick Six ticket.

" “I’m going to take two singles and wheel the other four races, hoping to get a big price or two,” Ramsey said. “I think Wall Street Kitten [in the fifth race] is ultimately going to be a stakes horse, but he may need a race on Monday. Tohaveandtohold is also very live in the last race. He had a bad trip in his only previous start, is training well, and looks about as good as anything else in that race. But I’m not singling a bottom-level maiden making just the second start of his career.”

Ramsey estimates that the cost of his main Rainbow Pick Six ticket will be $4,100. He also plans to take a few smaller tickets as well.

“If one of my two singles wins, I should hit the thing,” Ramsey said.

I always remember golfer Lee Trevino's quote:

Pressure is when you play for five dollars a hole with only two in your pocket.
Lee Trevino

You know what you are right. Ballsy is relative to ones Bankroll. it was probably not much more than he throws at say the Breeders cup day

Are you serious at taking Ritvo's comments at face value? I am sure that Tim Ritvo and Gulfstream Park don't want the whales and syndicates dumping huge money into their pools. :rolleyes:

Do you understand how pari-mutuel wagering works for the tracks?

What do you think Tim Ritvo's job title would be without that money?

The same as it is now, "Mr. Kathy Ritvo."

You know what , you are right.

I used to go to the Meadowlands for simulcasting in the good old days. Then came the , downturn and all the Wall streeters and their handle / rebates left. and the clubhouse was knocked down. Of course Gov.Christies nonsupport played a substantial part.

And whan Stronach knocked down a great GP track to build an abomination GP Taj Mahal and village of shops and restaurants with 800 seats to view the races.,? That was good ? So few folks sit and view the races

Sure, they all want the whales, money, and sure i understand pari-mutual wagering,Point. BUT, Tampa and Oaklawn do business a different way which i respect and support more.

The notion that "the bet was originally designed with the hope of giving one of our customers the chance to make a life-changing score with the kind of payout we had today" is preposterous.

The bet was not put in place for that reason, it was put in place to generate a pk6 pool that could rake in a lot more money for the track since the traditional pk6 play at Gulfstream was not able to generate the pool sizes that are generated in Southern California or New York.

The bet is designed for people to spend their money chasing an almost impossible dream with a minimum designed to draw any size player regardless of how much they can afford to spend. As Doug has pointed out on numerous occasions, the level of takeout makes it a sucker bet for the vast majority other than the mandatory payout day.

This bet helps the small player (on any day other than a mandatory payout) as much as the lottery helps the poor who dump a percentage of their money into that.

No it isn't. Can't spell preposterous without "PR." That's what that statement is meant to be, and a bunch of money getting won sometimes is basically like the track spending a lot on advertising to create a 'you can win millions too, America!' feeling. It's not true most of the time, but who cares? That's the case with a lot of gambling or tracks and casinos wouldn't do it. I think if you ask most people if the odds are in their favor to pull in a score like that, they'll reasonably figure 'nope.' Is anybody really kidding themselves unless they've got a gambling addiction and it's the next score with their last $20 that'll bring it on home for them? We all know the game.

People get mad when someone who isn't poor or middle class wins the lotto. It does seem weird that they play a game of chance with no ability to reason their way into a win and take money that poor people put in to add to riches they've already got, so I get the frustration. Literally anybody could put in $1-2 and take down the Powerball or whatever. Putting more money in it doesn't increase your chances, it's still several 1 in XY million chances. Racing's a different game where you can make educated guesses so it makes sense to put more money into it. A lot of people with money bet a lot or put money into the game in other ways, enabling higher purses, etc. so we have races to watch in the first place (obviously that's overly simplistic, but c'mon, it adds up when enough people put thousands at a time on race days). Dan bets with his pocket book in the form of bets and buying horses. Frankly I don't object to them getting a big payout. The DRF.com conspiracy theorists are tearing him a new one in their comments with no proof, just resentment. It sounds like sour grapes rather than evidence of wrongdoing to me. Sometimes people who put up a lot of money get more of it back.

Last time I heard, it's illegal for a horse owner to bet against themselves? I remember a top trainer in Ca. getting fined or suspended for collecting on a bet that was not for his horse in the same race. While the carryover did not happen, the tracks should look into his betting activities, since this is not fair to the public. Can you imagine he is alive going into the last leg and he is rooting for a longshot to beat his horse, while you sitting there with a bet on his horse?!!! At least Pete Rose bet on his own team.

To win or lose??

That is an interesting point.

Does anyone really think owners don't bet against their horses?

No, but it does not make it right.

It would be interesting to know what the actual rule is today. I know when I owned horses 25 years ago the rule was you had to single your horse in multi's for the exact reason you point out. At one point you could only bet your horse on top even in exactas but then they switched it to permit you to have a boxed exacta ticket.