Quote:
Originally Posted by MaTH716
I think it's a very grey area. Obviously we all want to believe that we are betting on what is a level playing field. But honestly do you think that is the truth?
Has there ever been a time where you saw a horse that you really didn't like based on his PP's, but felt you must include just because of the trainer? It's sad to say, but I really believe that bettors (and I know I have done it on many occasions) include the "this guy has the juice thinking" into their handicapping. Unfortunately it's something that has to be done. What consolation is it to the bettors if a trainer gets a positive weeks after the guilty horse knocked you or someone else out of their pick 4?
The bottom line is, there are only two options players have. Either find another type of gambling or just go with the flow and handicap accordingly.
|
My disagreement with you, Math, was when you insinuated "gamblers...... don't care" about the integrity of the game & only care about the next posttime. I think
we (and I'm including you) want to see a certain degree of honesty and , more importantly much harsher penalties for repeat drug abusers. It's a sad state of affairs when we have to abandon any handicapping principles & include the "juice" trainer in our picks. I, personally try to avoid betting races in which certain "supertrainers" have an entry; and definitely avoid betting tracks where these same type of trainer tend to congregate.