Shan:
I\'ve been at it for about 35 years, and without having kept track of such
things,I am pretty comfortable saying that the \"put ups\" and \"take downs\"
have pretty much evened out over the course of my wagering career.
Stewards\' decisions, like the numerous inexplicable rides given by jockeys,
like the equipment changes which never seem to get announced, like the instances
where you\'ve had a winning bet turned into a refund when the part of an entry
you never really cared about gets scratched, are variables over which we have
very little control.
It would be interesting to know what percentage of all races contested over the
course of year are affected by a stewards take down/put up. Another interesting
query is what percentage of races in which there is an inquiry do stewards take
action?
Strange that you are bailing on California racing, which has become the
wagering venue of choice in Living Room Downs. Reasons:
1) The Friday night cards from Hollywood (post time 10:00 PM Eastern) are a
great way to end the work week and begin the weekend.
2) TVG (which provides the video feed for Living Room Downs) does not show the
tracks I would prefer to bet on, Churchill and Fair Grounds,as Racing\'s arcane
and self defeating gerrymandering of simo signals and wagering access continues.
3) Aqueduct, Philly and Hawthorne racing (featured on TVG, along with Turf
Paradise) are, as Walt \"Clyde\" Frazier might say,\"dismal and abysmal\".
To jump threads, for those who are encouraged by Slots in Maryland, my feeling
is that Slots will allow Racing to survive, but will not signal the return of
quality racing to Pimlico and Laurel. My opinion is that increased purses at
tracks in Pennsylvania and at Delaware Park have really done nothing to improve
the quality of Racing in those venues.
