talk about living in a fantasyland? you throw out statements like "that's money to them", please explain how it money to them.

yes I laugh at you because you have offered no facts. I handicapped that race pretty closely and was on the mark. It is posted in the other thread. No one tipped me off that Currency Trader was the play. I liked the look of his form and speed, and the fact that Baze was riding him instead of the outside horse. I was suspect of the FPX form translating to SA for these cheap horses. its actually way more absurd to accept your idea that it was a thrown race and that people like Migliore participated in it, than it is to accept that it was legit. btw, how many other races were thrown yesterday in your opinion? and even if you are correct that it was thrown, how does throwing one race lead to catching the pick six? how exactly did all the jockeys that supposedly participated in the fix actually make a profit? saying you watched races for 25 years means nothing to me if when you make statements like this. it reminds me of the oldtimers that have been at the track for 50 years and you see them muttering to themselves when they lose talking about crooked jockeys, fixed races, etc. always some big conspiracy is the reason that they lost.
I'm not naive enough to think that cheating is never part of the equation, but to imply that it involves almost the entire jockey colony and that you are so sharp that you can catch it just by observation of the race is preposterous.
reminds me of another poster we have that realized that a buzzer was used by a jockey just by looking at the results chart! we sure have some sharpies on here.

People who lose will make every excuse why they did. About the only legitimate rider beef yesterday IMO would be Espinoza on Frankel's in the 5th, he butchered that ride. If you're riding the best horse, don't get trapped on the rail like that trying to save too much ground.

I like Scuds, because he provides a unique approach and isn't afraid to take a shot on a bomb, but this is a little out of hand.

I didn't say Mig was involved.I said it was an illusion to think he was gunna get up when they gave that gift of a clear lead away to Currency Trader.That was the fake race yesterday(the 6th.)This is why they get away with throwing races: people don't(in their heart) want it to be true.I understand that,but the facts are that nobody at all was interested in going with this horse for the 1st quarter mile.This was not a race without early speed.They have to be atleast close up to the front,or they simply don't win races.So,to not be interested in pushing the early pace at all is opposite of these horse's ability. It's ugly,but it was a fake race from the start. Look,you had 3 days to cap that race.If that is the way you thought it was gunna go early on,then you're a genius.Any race that you give a need the lead type an easy lead like that is gunna result in making money(if you know it's gunna be alone like that.) You don't think it's an advantage to know that information? A 6-1 SINGLE? Come on.We would all love that.To me,that's an obviously thrown race,but it's a free country.If you think it was fair,then you have that right.It's not what I saw.I saw a huge edge given out to one particular horse.

I don't doubt monkey business goes on from time to time. But pick6 has way too many moving parts from a race fixing standpoint.

If you know the absolute result of 1 leg (which is impossible even if you have a few jocks on board) it is still a VERY risky proposition..

If you are going to go that far, you need to cover ALL in the remaining legs. Otherwise the orchestration would be potentially useless (and costly). Assuming 9 horse fields that is $118K in tickets. If things got chalky, you're a loser anyway....

Also, the other folks involved would further dillute the payout. I'm sure the parlay would be no where near 5X.

Maybe with two races fixed the concept would work. But the chance of fixing two races in a 6 race sequence, at a major track, on a high profile CO day, without the cat getting out of the bag, seems remote at best.

the horse was only 6:1, you didn't have to be a genius to come up with it. that horse had won before yesterday one third of its races this year (2/6).
even if you did nothing more than look at the last race speed figures for the entire field, that horse stood out. the real handicapping was to pick McNasty, i would have been much happier if he would have got up. he wasn't so obvious, but I thought the 7 was obvious and a rather generous price.

pgm# / bris spd / tg#
1 / 77 / 13
2 / 85 / 10
3 / 77 / 13
4 / 73 / 14
5 / 85 / 6
6 / 79 / 10
7 / 87 / 9
8 / 83 / 9
9 / 66 / 15
10 / 81 / 8
11 / 69 / 15
12 / 84 / 11

the seven had the best last out bris speed and tied for third best last out tg#.

bottom line, it doesn't take a conspiracy to see how this horse wins that race. most often the simplest explanation is the correct one.
how good of a pick six conspiracy is it when you just have a few jockeys hold back and let a horse have an easy lead? is that anything you would invest in? you still have a difficult $2 pick 5 to contend with. if it were me i'd take the sure thing and just put a few thousand to win at six to 1. except I would have to really think about it because how sure is it that a horse like that would win even if he were given and easy lead? as it turns out he barely won.
who was in on the conspiracy anyway. the two rushed up on the rail and denied the seven the ability to cross all the way over, the 2 12 and 8 all sure seemed to be pressing pretty hard, and didn't look at all like they were trying to lose. the 11 certainly didn't. the truth is he wasn't given an easy lead and there is nothing suspicious looking about it. if that was a conspiracy as you alledge it sure was a risky one and poorly executed. the seven finished a neck in front of two horses and one half length in front of a third.