bridge jumper woot

**picantel** · 11-03-10, 03:23 PM

Aw my #3 payed only $12.80 to show. Just had $20 on it. Had $5 on the other 2 horses which paid $20.80 and $23.20. Not bad. I still miss the old days when some fools put 100k to show on a horse a bunch of times and lost. $300 show tickets lol on a $2 bet.

**andywend** · 11-03-10, 03:45 PM

I don't remember ever seeing $300 for a $2 show bet and I have been a huge follower of horse racing for the last 30 years.

A little interesting tidbit:

Back in the late 1800's/early 1900's, many racetracks had $5 minimum WPS wagers and those same tracks ran limited races so many of the fields would have 18-20 horses in them.

I have a DRF chart book which lists all the charts of every race run in June 1916. Many of these races featured horses going off at 800-1, 900-1 and a few horses went off at over 1000-1.

Since the minimum bet was $5 (worth about $105 in todays terms), people wouldn't just bet on hopeless longshots the way they do now.

One of the races in June 1916 was won by a horse who paid over $4,000 for a $5 win bet. Interesting stuff.

**ATP123** · 11-03-10, 05:31 PM

there was an oddball flattrack i noticed last week with them doing that, betting like 90% show money and it wasnt even on the favorite and of course they ran off the board. was a while last year at saratoga harness i thought they were doing something on purpose betting 1000 to show on a number 8 at the track thats 99-1 so the others that come in pay balloons.

**ATP123** · 11-03-10, 05:33 PM

the most ive ever hit on one and couldnt believe it, i was about ten years old and my dad allowed me to bet $2 show each race and the horse was #3 with rick pugliese at saratoga, came in 3rd at only about 10-1 and paid 92.40. my dad ripped that ticket out of my hand and ran to the window before they discovered there was some kind of error in the payouts but alas someone went nuts on a 2-5 shot and the winner of the race pays 9 to win and 40 to show

**picantel** · 11-03-10, 05:51 PM

Originally posted by andywend

I don't remember ever seeing $300 for a $2 show bet and I have been a huge follower of horse racing for the last 30 years.

A little interesting tidbit:

Back in the late 1800's/early 1900's, many racetracks had $5 minimum WPS wagers and those same tracks ran limited races so many of the fields would have 18-20 horses in them.

I have a DRF chart book which lists all the charts of every race run in June 1916. Many of these races featured horses going off at 800-1, 900-1 and a few horses went off at over 1000-1.

Since the minimum bet was $5 (worth about $105 in todays terms), people wouldn't just bet on hopeless longshots the way they do now.

One of the races in June 1916 was won by a horse who paid over $4,000 for a $5 win bet. Interesting stuff.

Yep it was like 15-20 years ago. During a period of a couple of weeks some people were putting 100k to show on certain horses. I saw at least 2 run out of the money. One of them was at either hawthorn or balmoral harness(cannot remember which). Jim Curran was driving the 1/9 fave and instead of leaving he said in the middle of the field parked the entire mile and hand rode the horse down the stretch to finish 4th. The track was losing a fortune from the show bets and it was obvious to everyone he intentionally ran out of the money lol. The other was a thoroughbred race in which some undefeated horse went of 1/9 and ran like crap out of the money.After the group got blasted the 100k show bets stopped. Insane.

**robmpink** · 11-03-10, 07:22 PM

I remember maybe in maybe 95 a race at the meadowlands (harness) where there was 3 entries racing as #1. None of them came in the money Two horse paid about $150ish to show. Another paid $50 some. I remember the $50 horse having a name like soccergoal or soccermania or goalmania.