![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize"...Voltaire |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() In Pete's book (The Winning Contest Player), on pages 148-149, Moomey discusses a bit of his live bankroll theory about consolidating entries. His own entries. It seems as though, since publication, he may have expanded his theory to include playing entries under other peoples names. Clearly against tournament rules. It is worth noting because it is exactly what the article said happened with his and Roger Balls entries.
__________________
Good Luck......and may a Derby Trailer lead the way to the window! Ed |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize"...Voltaire |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Paul |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() multiple entries in and of itself was a mistake on many levels. It was only a matter of time before something like this supposedly happened
The fact that the so called biggest handicapping tournaments allow more than one entry is just plain wrong and unfair to those that have only one entry Allowing multiple entries was a flaw from day one and all the players and tournament organizers allow it or succumbed to players requesting it for one simple reason. money ! Money trumps the integrity of these tournaments |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Good Luck......and may a Derby Trailer lead the way to the window! Ed |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Good Luck......and may a Derby Trailer lead the way to the window! Ed |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]() I have mixed feelings on this. I never believed that multiple entries is a huge advantage. And since each entry adds to the prize pool where 100% of this money is paid back to the players, more entries is better.
Where it becomes problematic is when multiple entries collude to combine into one. Take an example used in the article. If someone has two entries and brings another person to control two more while working as a team, this is an issue. Then take a race with a big field and a 9-2 favorite. This allows them to bet all in on four different horses. On Friday, they were right and turned four $7,500 entries into one with over $50,000. On the other hand, I have seen them employ the same strategy and be wrong, lose everything, and be out of the contest. Bottom line-in the end, you have to have a good opinion. Multiple entries with bad handicapping opinions only mean bigger losses. I played one entry and feel like I absolutely can complete. My track record in this contest over the years demonstrates that fact. But people will always look for loopholes and to exploit them. It is up to contest officials to look out for the player and make the field as level as possible for all. Paul |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
How do you feel of about allowing unlimited entries? |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]() BCBC was trying to be nice by changing the rules regarding missing mandatory races and it was exploited. You get control of enough entries each plunging all in and you are going to eventually score. They need to go back to DQ if you don't get your mandatory bets in. It is not like they are even telling you which races to bet. You have to bet any 5 of 10 on Friday and 5 of 12 on Saturday. If anyone cannot get those in it is clearly on them. Still won't completely close the hole of players colluding though but it will make it a bit harder forcing them to bet earlier and erode their bankroll.
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|