I\'ve checked the racing statutes, and I can\'t find anything that says we are *required* to bet the Preakness.
Can I get a ruling on this?
I just don\'t get a sense that there will be any value in betting the Preakness; as another poster pointed out, even if you beat Big Brown, you still have to sort out the second-tier crowd and find the winner.
(Some here are licking their chops waiting for the opportunity to do so, and I applaud you for your courage, and wish you well. I\'m taking a different path, however.)
In the years in which I have been playing close attention to the Preakness undercard instead of just focusing on the Preakness, there have been some fantastic wagering opportunities: obvious contenders paying $14+ to win...stickouts that would have paid $4.80 any other day paying $8 instead...generous exactas and serial bets.
There are no guarantees in this game, but I\'ll bet that I find three or four top-notch wagering opportunities on the undercard Saturday, and I\'ll pay for that bet with my time and effort spent handicapping and outlining a wagering strategy.
The Preakness, IMO, is shaping up as a \"watcher\", a waste of time handicapping and betting. There will be plenty of dead money to be found in the races leading up to it, too. Get some.