Australia: The Final Group 1 Of The Australian Season

A field of 17 fillies and mares will race to be crowned the final Group 1 winner of Australia's racing season, when the $600,000 Tattersall's Tiara is run this Friday night at Brisbane's Eagle Farm racecourse (first post: 9:43 p.m. ET / 6:43 p.m. PT). The seven-furlong feature highlights a nine-race card and created a conundrum for one of Australia's elite riders. 

Melbourne jockey Craig Williams has reaped the benefits of a decision to base himself in Brisbane throughout Queensland's “Winter Racing Carnival,” as COVID-19 flare-ups have caused state border closures resulting in restricted opportunities for some of his peers. Williams has collected a G1 victory, three G2s and a pair of listed stakes, and he stole the show at Eagle Farm two weeks ago by winning three stakes races across the second half of the card. The astute rider was the first to identify an outside bias, which he exploited to full advantage at odds of 16-1, 11-1 and 7-1. If a fan were leaning over the outside rail enjoying a hot dog during the finale, “Willo” almost could have snatched it as he brought Brooklyn Hustle from last of 15 at the 1/8-pole. That win, in the G2 Dane Ripper Stakes, would normally guarantee a return mount for Williams in Friday night's Tattersall's Tiara. Both races are restricted to fillies and mares, and five of the last seven Tatt's Tiara winners have come through the Dane Ripper. However, another of Craig Williams' wins two weeks ago was the G1 Stradbroke Handicap, in which Tofane defeated males and repaid the faith of her owners, who withdrew the soon-to-be 6-year-old from a broodmare sale last month.   

“It was like choosing between my daughters, which no parent wants to do. It was a really tough decision,” said the 44-year-old winner of 64 G1 races in six countries.

Ultimately, Williams has stuck with Tofane (4-1 favorite), whose only two starts at seven furlongs have yielded two G1 wins over males. Brooklyn Hustle (10-1) will have the services of veteran local jockey Michael Cahill, who won a pair of G1s during the last full-length Winter Racing Carnival in 2019. Odeum, one of two 3-year-old fillies, is the 6-1 second choice off an excellent second to Brooklyn Hustle, whom she meets 5 1/2 pounds better for a ½-length defeat.

Savatiano (7-1) is the most likely of a Godolphin trio to “wear the Tiara.” The 6-year-old daughter of Street Cry finished 3rd as favorite when the race was last run, in 2019. Hugh Bowman seeks a 100th G1 win aboard Subpoenaed (10-1), the best fancied of three entrants for trainer Chris Waller, with whom Bowman collaborated to famous effect throughout the record-breaking career of Winx.

As a successful Queensland “Winter Racing Carnival” draws to a close (following a pandemic-abbreviated version in 2020), optimism abounds that the state will be granted an increase in G1 races next season. Queensland currently hosts eight of Australia's 74 G1s, but Zaaki's victories in the Gold Coast's Hollindale Stakes and Eagle Farm's new Q22 give those races an excellent chance for elevation from G2 status. The 2021-22 season begins on Aug. 1, with Sydney's “Royal Randwick” set to stage the country's first G1 – the Winx Stakes – on the night of Aug. 20. In the meantime, Australian racing will continue to offer big fields and tremendous wagering value from multiple tracks on a nightly basis. 

The Eagle Farm card will be broadcast live on TVG this Friday night (first post: 9:43 p.m. ET / 6:43 p.m. PT) alongside cards from Randwick, Newcastle and Belmont. All races will be livestreamed in HD on the new Sky Racing World Appskyracingworld.com and major ADW platforms such as TVG, TwinSpiresXpressbet, NYRABets, WatchandWagerHPIbet, and AmWager. Wagering is also available via these ADW platforms. Fans can get free access to live-streaming, past performances and expert picks on all races at skyracingworld.com. 

A native of Brisbane, Australia, Michael Wrona has called races in six countries. Wrona's vast U.S. experience includes race calling at Los Alamitos, Hollywood Park, Arlington and Santa Anita, calling the 2000 Preakness on a national radio network and the 2016 Breeders' Cup on the international simulcast network. Wrona also performed a race call voiceover for a Seinfeld episode called The Subway.

The post Australia: The Final Group 1 Of The Australian Season appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Horseplayers Drop Owner Zedan From Medina Spirit Lawsuit

A class-action federal lawsuit filed by a group of horseplayers has voluntarily dismissed owner Amr Zedan's racing stable “without prejudice” on June 23, though trainer Bob Baffert and his racing stable remain as defendants, reports the Thoroughbred Daily News.

Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on May 14, the suit claims bettors were denied winning bets on the Kentucky Derby in which Baffert trainee Medina Spirit finished first, but now is in jeopardy of being disqualified after Baffert revealed the horse failed a post-race drug test.

The suit was filed by 2012 National Horseplayers Championship winner Michael Beychok of Louisiana; Justin Wunderler of New Jersey (known on Twitter as frequent Baffert critic @SwiftHitter); Michael Meegan of New York; and Keith Mauer of California. They allege they were denied winning bets on the Kentucky Derby in amounts ranging from $100 to as much as $100,000 because of Baffert's “multiple and repeated acts of doping and entering horses into Thoroughbred races, including the Kentucky Derby” that the complaint said constitutes “racketeering activity” under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and laws of the state of California, where Baffert and his stable are based.

Read more at the Thoroughbred Daily News.

The post Horseplayers Drop Owner Zedan From Medina Spirit Lawsuit appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Gulfstream: Mandatory Payout Scheduled For Saturday’s Rainbow 6

A mandatory payout of the 20-cent Rainbow 6 pool is scheduled for Saturday's program at Gulfstream Park.

The popular multi-race wager has gone unsolved for the 13 racing days since a lucky ticketholder broke the jackpot May 29 for a $400,000 payoff.

The Rainbow 6 carryover jackpot is usually only paid out when there is a single unique ticket sold with all six winners. On days when there is no unique ticket, 70 percent of that day's pool usually goes back to those bettors holding tickets with the most winners, while 30 percent is carried over to the jackpot pool. However, on mandatory-payout days, the entire pool is paid out to the bettor or bettors with the most winners in the six-race sequence.

The Rainbow 6 jackpot pool will be guaranteed Friday for $650,000. Should the Rainbow 6 go unsolved, it will open up the possibility of a life-changing payoff for Saturday. Gulfstream's feature Saturday will be the $75,000 Not Surprising.

An additional Rainbow 6 mandatory payout is scheduled for Wednesday, June 30 on the final program of the fiscal year. A racing program will also be conducted on Thursday, July 1, the first day of the new fiscal year.

The post Gulfstream: Mandatory Payout Scheduled For Saturday’s Rainbow 6 appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Campbell: What’s In A Name? Study Finds Bettors Unduly Influenced By Horses’ Names

This commentary originally appeared on HorseRacing.net on June 21 and is reprinted here with permission.

The handicappers of America are in a highly speculative business. It is not quite the lumber market of late, but … For some, it ranges somewhere between wildcatting out in West Texas, and base jumping off the KL Tower in Malaysia, figuratively speaking.

When it comes to “horseplayers,” they combine a strange concoction of superstition with past precedent. One would like to think that they are scientists more so than tarot card readers. Some are on the phone, pacing slowly; either doling out tips, or intently listening to a supposed qualified source. When the anonymous deliver, they are instantly known by all, a soothsayer of renown. Think town crier. When it doesn't — think the stocks in the square.

Racetrack culture is full of genuine and original “wildcatters,” who are just waiting for you to ask them the “Question.” That question being, “Who do you like?”

Betting methods are endlessly fascinating. Participants devour the Form in all sorts of ways. Some wait right up until the race goes off to look at it, while others prepare days in advance, hoping to unearth some numeral or meaningful sign that their selections can lead to cashing tickets. Everyone who participates in making a wager receives a permanent record, either on paper or digitally, of an opinion that at one point they thought might be correct.

At different points in the year, casual horseplayers arrive on the scene like tourists. Wearing their shiny white tennis shoes, cameras around the neck at the ready, and holding up their trifold maps like in one of those string of Chevy Chase Vacation films. They are hoping to “stump the chumps.” If they win, exuberance is a tidal wave, but if they lose, they might not return — at least until next year. More professional track-goers know better, and they can temper wins and losses.

Over the course of my own experience in different betting milieus, I have often wondered about how much the names of horses can influence the wide spectrum of those that place bets. Are they really as good as they think they are, those novices to the veterans, when it comes to dealing with this issue? Could they be unduly influenced by such an arbitrary thing as this appears to be?

A recent article in the Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics entitled, “Sonic Thunder vs. Brian the Snail: Are people affected by uninformative racehorse names?” probed some of these questions. In other words, turning to those that examine behavioral economics might provide some intriguing answers.

In this particular study, a triad of scholars from the Department of Business Administration at the University of Zurich (Oliver Merz, Raphael Flepp, and Egon Franck) wanted to take a deep dive into the world of “effects.” That being how decision-making and market efficiency play in the world of horse racing. Our sport, they tell us, is particularly interesting because data is readily available to measure things like investment, choice, and result.

What they uncovered was some fascinating material about the habits of mind when it comes to choosing horses. Betting decisions they say are affected by uninformative racehorse names. They looked at over 400,000 contests between the ten-year span of 2008 to 2018, developing a long list of words from the Oxford Dictionary to cover anything that related to the word “fast.”

What they mined from countries across the globe (including the U.S.), is that when a “fast-sounding” horse was entered in any given race, the probability of them winning was “overstated.” To put it another way, the returns, the ability to cash a ticket, were actually lower compared to bets on others.

Wait, what, you say? A horse with the name “speed” was overly bet when compared to one with “slow” in it?

Correct. With all the collective knowledge available in the sport of horse racing, and with all the professional supposed “opinions” that are out there, something as trivial as this could have a major impact on the betting market. I find that both disturbing and captivating.

Of course, betting on a horse always has elements present where bettors do not have all of the knowledge at their disposal they could to make could be called an “informed wager.” But choosing a horse based on its name only, I would say is universally scoffed at by those that consider themselves “in the know.” Ask any of the National Horseplayers Championship (NHC) players in Las Vegas when they attend the tournament there, if they make their selections based on names, and you would probably get some wry smiles along with legions of shaking heads. It is simply not done, they will say.

However, we are talking about the depths of the human mind here, aren't we? It has twists and turns, fissures like a maze. As Freud and Jung began to tell us in German over a 100 years ago, the subconscious is a tricky business.

That is why we need departments in colleges and universities that examine topics such as behavioral economics. It can follow lines of inquiry, cross-pollenate, and uncover truths we might not have thought existed. By the end of the piece, the authors make some rather sweeping suggestions about society at large, and whether this kind of “effect” plays out on a larger scale. They are on to something. Has horse racing once again provided the world with a window into actions of a much broader audience? Perhaps.

What we do know is that track culture has a niche of behavior that is intimately tied to one's own pocketbook. Just like buying on Amazon during “Prime Day,” or purchasing a stock on Robinhood, those decisions about why we do what we do, reflect greatly on who we are as both individuals, and as a collective, “people.” We might not want to admit it, but sometimes those choices turn out to be pretty uninformed.

The next time you are out at the racetrack, surveying the PPs for a race at say, Belmont, watch out for those “speed” horses. As for those names, your mind might be leading you down the wrong path. That goes double for you, wildcatters. Knowledge in this case, is not as apparent as it might seem.

J.N. Campbell is a turfwriter based in Houston.

The post Campbell: What’s In A Name? Study Finds Bettors Unduly Influenced By Horses’ Names appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights