Dumb Money, NHC and Slots

Jose Arias who won the whopper NHC last weekend spoke to the DRF about his big win.

Regarding the possible hedge, or odds-smack down on Fit to Rule rumor and innuendo, Jose said he, or people he knows, didn't have anything to do with it. Later on in the DRF, Peter Fornatale, looked at the situation a little more closely, and said he heard that the late hit Fit to Rule took was from on-track money.

A true Horseplayer or gambler is skeptical for one reason only (some track executive's will give you a less-flattering reason, but they are wrong): Because we have to be or we will never come close to beating this game, or any game. When you see a place-win pool size discrepancy, it triggers what it should trigger in a good horseplayer. The detective instinct.

Knowing how easy it is to i) estimate the final odds on a horse through analyzing horizontals and WPS percentages and ii) to get a bet down in this day and age by a sharp gambler who knows his math, it made some even more sure that something untoward happened. I mean, betting 10k on this horse at that odds level to increasing your chances to win this contest is not rocket science. It's barely 5th grade science.

Regardless, like any good horseplayer (for those on social media still flummoxed about this whole thing) you take the facts when the facts come and reevaluate. Some good work by Peter seems to give y'all an out.

I truly do believe, like CJ from TimeformUS, they should close betting for the last race in the future. Problem solved. With a little marketing before post time, handle for the last race might even be higher anyway.

We as seasoned customers want our takeout reduced so we receive higher payouts. One way we achieved that in the old days was having more dumb money in the pools.  In handicapping the Super Bowl this past week, it appears dumb money is alive and well in those pools.

The books opened at Seattle -2, but quickly moved to pick em, then to about Denver -2. The flash of an offence, probably the best quarterback of all time, and national exposure as the most highly watched team has made Denver America's Team.

Looking at the numbers, from those who do this kind of thing, the bookies original line is probably right. The public line is probably wrong. Seattle, who has a serviceable offence, has made top offences and QB's like New Orleans and Drew Brees look like the 1976 Tampa Bay Buccaneers. But it just isn't flashy. Flashy takes the money.

The insiders believe Manning will struggle (not because he's a "choker" or by whatever sports radio stuff is spouted these days) because the D matches up perfectly against him. The outsiders believe "He's the best QB ever.... unstoppable".

In horse racing, we rarely see it. There is just not enough money out there from the public where the odds need correcting, or there is not enough money to even out the pools from the syndicates. A couple examples, off the top of my head: Zenyatta in the Breeders Cup in 2010 at 4-5 (she was probably closer to 2-1 or 5-2 fair; with her running style against good horses on dirt was not unstoppable by any stretch) and the Belmont Stakes place pool when a horse has a shot at winning the Triple Crown. There are others. If you remember some, shoot us a comment.

John Campbell recently talked about slots, and the horsemen. He believes the money should be used better before its gone. His comments were analyzed in today's HRU here (pdf page 5)

Have a great day everyone.