As Boscar and others have noted, they don’t get them all. But it does seem like anytime there’s a chance for what we would certainly classify as a score in what now is our golden era, they have it hammered. And I’m not sure what we want - if the CAW’s were totally eliminated, several jurisdictions like California are gone in maybe two years tops. And if we put the hard close at two or three minutes on wagering, then the.CAW’s don’t wager, and we still probably see the elimination of several tracks, again like California venues. But just look at the Churchill 4th race (11/14). A legit 3/1 horse on top of a second time out 17/1 horse in a full field of 12 runners. Doing the rough calculation in your head with mental math estimating the payoff, I would’ve predicted somewhere north of $150 on a two dollar wager. And while changing the odds into percentages would give those combos only about a 10% chance of winning, the payout would’ve been worth the risk for that one in 10 wager hitting. This exacta paid $104, so roughly a 33% discount on the expected payout which takes away any edge in the long run on a wager you’re only going to hit maybe 10% of the time. I will say that they missed on races 6,7,8 at Churchill yesterday as the payouts were all more than expected so as others have noted, they don’t get them all but how do you tell before the race is run given the timeframe we’re working with to make those decision?