This rules!

Linny · #1 04-01-2009, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sightseek

Now if only someone would set up a wager where you have to pick the 1st and 3rd horses I'd be in business.

I call that the imperfecta. It would be my favorite bet.

ALostTexan · #2 04-01-2009, 09:45 AM

Often times this is actually the result of my win wagers anyway.

pointman · #3 04-01-2009, 10:09 AM

If only the Fillion's, Carmine Abitiello and some of the other old timers had the opportunity to go after a "last" wager, they would have been multi millionaires. I could just see it, going 4 or 5 wide, hanging their horses out to dry all around the track, trying to get them to break stride. This would make the stiff jobs easy!

Crown@club · #4 04-01-2009, 10:23 AM

I need a 4th place bet, and not just solely use it as a single in Supers!!!!!

cowgirlintexas · #5 04-01-2009, 10:33 AM

I need a tri that you win if you get two outta 3 right

Indian Charlie · #6 04-01-2009, 01:12 PM

my exactas usually run 2-1

joeydb · #7 04-01-2009, 10:34 AM

Interesting idea, about the last place finisher thing, but encouraging horses to slow down rather than speed up might lead to some loooooong races.

Also, does anyone know whether horses that don't finish (normally) count? I mean, if a horse is so far back that the chart callers can't get accurate "lengths beaten" numbers, but still crosses the finish line, that bet cashes right?

MaTH716 · #8 04-01-2009, 10:59 AM

If it's true (which I don't believe {especially since it's April fools}) it's a terrible idea. Not only would it be easy to manipulate, but it would be very bad for the horses. Let's say in a race there were two horses that clearly have no chance to run in the money in mid stretch they would still have to be driven for mutual purposes. That's kind of crazy. You would think that jocks would also be a little more hesitant to pull horses up too in scenarios where they think something wrong.
We all talk/care about the horses and their health, this would definitely not be good for the horses or the game. Think about the fallout from Eight Bells, and she was trying to win the Kentucky Derby. Clearly a bad idea, but I don't believe it anyway.

GBBob · #9 04-01-2009, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaTH716

If it's true (which I don't believe {especially since it's April fools}) it's a terrible idea. Not only would it be easy to manipulate, but it would be very bad for the horses. Let's say in a race there were two horses that clearly have no chance to run in the money in mid stretch they would still have to be driven for mutual purposes. That's kind of crazy. You would think that jocks would also be a little more hesitant to pull horses up too in scenarios where they think something wrong.
We all talk/care about the horses and their health, this would definitely not be good for the horses or the game. Think about the fallout from Eight Bells, and she was trying to win the Kentucky Derby. Clearly a bad idea, but I don't believe it anyway.

umm...I think we can put this to rest as April Fools

MaTH716 · #10 04-01-2009, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GBBob

umm...I think we can put this to rest as April Fools

That's what I thought, but sometimes it gets so deep around here it's hard to tell.

The Indomitable DrugS · #11 04-01-2009, 11:36 AM

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/edito...ll_edition.cgi

Scroll down about half way.