Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
I always found you very smart and reasonable....and now you are saying we are foolish to cancel show wagering because someone may bring $100 million to the track to make a show bet. Or maybe that someone has nine figures sitting around in an ADW account. By the way...a $100 million show bet would earn $5 million....but that's sort of irrelevant.
You always struck me as bright....and now you are telling me you think that the bet taker is only liable for the 5% the show bettor wins. Did you think this one through or just decide to attack? Serious question.
I am happy to discuss this with you, but for a guy that seemingly posted sensibly for years, you sure changed your tune quickly here. Much like just accepting what Joe Morris said at face value ( while ignoring Nick's response to you ).
|
First off, thanks for the kind words! Even if I've given you cause to re-think them, I appreciate it.
I'm sorry if my post seemed hostile. I was admittedly somewhat ticked at your "What else could I be referring to?" after I asked, "Are you referring to the financial liability of the minus pool or something else?". You could have simply said "Financial liability of the minus pool." (The reason I'd asked was that you had written earlier "There is an argument that races with bridgejumpers put the tracks in a situation where they have a rooting interest against a horse.", and I thought maybe there was a liability angle there that I was missing.)
Still, I didn't intend my numerically challenged response ($500K is indeed NOT 5% of $100M, so that's downright embarrassing!) to be hostile. I was trying to think how big a minus pool would have to be to impact a major track's bottom line. Can you give me an example of the level that would start to be painful.
I did take the Joe Morris comments at face value. I don't know a thing about the man beyond what was written in the article. Without other info, I'd normally think a person in that position would be competent. (Yeah, I'm sure there are plenty of counter-examples.)
If you're still willing to discuss it, I guess my question now is why can Santa Anita allow show betting in races for which NY tracks would not allow show betting?