Gee.. Where's the righteous indignation?

[DEES3]

Ok, I'm a lurker here 99 percent of the time, but your Ebonics spelling is so amazingly annoying, and spread across so many threads at the moment, that I have to ask: what the hell are you doing? Been rereading Huck Finn or something?

[my miss storm cat]

Originally Posted by DEES3

Ok, I'm a lurker here 99 percent of the time, but your Ebonics spelling is so amazingly annoying, and spread across so many threads at the moment, that I have to ask: what the hell are you doing? Been rereading Huck Finn or something?

* * *

(Nice job translating, NTamm!)

[JohnGalt1]

Originally Posted by Kasept

For all the glassy-eyed carrying on over Gulfstream's 'horseplayer friendly' innovations, how is it that no one seems concerned with bettors being patently screwed by the entry snafu in Thursday's 5th? At the start of the multi-race carryover sequence, it was discovered only in the paddock that the Michael Dubb ownership entrymate (#1a) Sr. Henry had no intention of running. Whether Rick Dutrow hadn't notified the racing office or the racing office hadn't notified the public, it was an egregious error that defrauded anyone who bet the entry, in which Sr. Henry was the more potent partner. Bill Mott's Carson Hall (#1) went off as the 2-1 favorite, and never lifted a hoof finishing 9th of 10.

With him went money bet on the supposed entry in straight and exotic pools, the P6, P5, three P3's and two DD's. This is the same pattern of disregard that Gulfstream has exhibited in recent years when taking races off the turf after P4 sequences have started. Bettors in New York are spoiled when it comes to this kind of situation, because racing law there requires a remaining portion of an entry to run for purse money only should their other half not make the gate, and players get protected. Even though there isn't a requirement by law in Florida for a pre-race entrymate scratch, the stewards certainly have the discretion to declare the remaining entrant a 'purse only' runner. The failure to do so is far more telling about Gulfstream's concern for the horseplayer than a 15% takeout wager.

Still waiting on the outcry from the professional horseplayer advocates...

In cases like this, don't most/some tracks just have the remaining part of the entry run for purse money only?

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by JohnGalt1

In cases like this, don't most/some tracks just have the remaining part of the entry run for purse money only?

Anywhere that actually takes the operation of pari-mutuel wagering seriously and invokes responsible parameters to protect the bettor.

[tector]

I wish I could say I was surprised, but I'm not. There is very little protection for the Florida horseplayer.

[DEES3]

at least this time I can understand your reply without an interpreter.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Scav

Where is HANA now? LOL at them

Amazing how much this comment rubbed people the wrong way. They were so mad that instead of addressing it here they chose to wait and address it where it was safe.