Interesting article by Beyer

[fmhealth]

The comments are compelling as well.

http://www.drf.com/news/andrew-beyer-rainbow-6-elusive-expensive-pot-gold

[DeltaLover]

Andy Beyer remains the best handicapper and ambassador of the game by a wide margin.

[thaskalos]

Andy Beyer remains the best handicapper and ambassador of the game by a wide margin.

Andy Beyer is the VOICE of the American horseplayer.

He is the game's greatest ambassador...and the only journalist with the integrity and the guts to address the game's most controversial issues.

[jasperson]

If I wait until the Rainbow pick 6 is over $1000,000 to start my play why should I worry about those suckers that paid the 52% take out before I started my bets?

[Robert Goren]

Andy Beyer remains the best handicapper and ambassador of the game by a wide margin.I am not so sure about the best handicapper part, but he is a great ambassador for the game. I have never understood why TV broadcasts of the triple crown races and the breeder's cup don't use him.

[Capper Al]

Good article. Thanks.

The bet looks like fun for a dime.

[DeltaLover]

Rob, take it just as a title of honor ! He was way ahead of his time when in his peak, so he deserves some praising!

[burnsy]

the economist is right. they should listen to him, its the dime increment. forget about putting 100 or 300 into it, people hit it putting 12 dollars into the thing. when people can win 500, 1200 or thousands for a few bucks its very attractive regaurdless of the big "dream" jackpot. we hit one a couple weeks ago putting 12 bucks in and the thing paid almost 600. the pool is big so even when some logical horses win its been paying well for peanuts in bets. as for the takeout, if you don't go overboard......who cares? thats what the big players don't understand. people can play lowball tickets to get huge odds in return. if you are playing this thing really seriously with big money, you are a nut. the bottom line is for very little money you can see a return of odds that are thousands to one, all for the price of a few coffees and a donut. thats why its not dying. who cares about take out when you are risking chump change? these days you piss away almost 10 bucks for a hard copy of the racing form. once you hit it once or twice (the consulation prize) you can play with that money for months. we play the thing like twice a week for very little money. my friends wife gives us names and numbers to throw in just in case we have a shot in the open races for glory. but we stick to the logical horses too. its not a bet that you "chase" with money, if you do you are pretty much a moron. some fool got into an argument with me when he put almost 800 into it. he actually hit it for 1100 and thought he was a genius because it paid more than the parlay. the bottom line is he risked 800 to make 300 which to me is a dumb proposition on ANY exotic bet. if you put that kind of money in....for this bet....you deserve to lose 52%. but if you are playing 12 dollar and 24 dollar tickets, twice a week, to chance a big ROI......who cares? People are bitching about the carry over and the million dollars out of circulation......that money is probably split up between thousands of bettors and people like us that take "chump change" shots at the thing.......its probably generated double that in hype and talk for the track. people bitching about it probably just bring more attention to it because i don't think the bet is dying at all. most people just throw their dimes in a jar these days, if they can take some of them and turn them into real money....that bet will never die with the pools they are getting.

[Gallop58]

This bet highlights some of the complexities of the game.
Takeout rate, minimum bet sizing, carryovers, pool size, perceptions of value.
I would venture to guess that the casual and $2 bettor has fun playing it, the informed die hard doesn't like the theoretical idea of it but plays it anyway because he's a gambler at heart not an investor. The pros who try/can make a living rail against the whole premise and focus on all the reasons it shouldn't work (Beyer) and the whales don't touch it until the math comes out right from their quant built mainframes.
The 52% takeout is a bit of a disengenuous and inflammatory statement. The takeout is 20%. The carryover is aggressive to build pool size. To call the carryover takeout is just stirring the pot. It is not supposed to appeal to the "serious" player. It's supposed to appeal to the guy who wants to take a shot.
Serious players should be on their knees thanking the heavens that there's something going on that excites casual players into seeding the pools in exchange for excitement and enjoyment. I'd guess that this wager has more ability to drive increased conventional handle than any attempt to lure slot/poker players to bet on the races.
You can't have a healthy ecosystem when the whales eat the sharks and the fish were all eaten 20 years ago...

My 10 cents...

[Robert Goren]

It will interesting to see if there is a spike in tne other pools, now that this thing has hit the million mark. Today is not true test because of AQU being dark. Tomorrow, friday and saturday should tell more of the story.

[Gallop58]

I'd guess that this wager has more ability to drive increased conventional handle than any attempt to lure slot/poker players to bet on the races.
What's seems interesting is that I'd guess that the buzz of a million dollars, even with the difficulty and lottery like math involved, will actually get some of the poker guys to wander over and drop some play money down, or the slot player might actually find the other part of the facility to ask " I don't normally bet horses, but how do I get a ticket for that million dollar thing?"
Is that long term, industry building "stickiness" and player conversion, probably not, but it sure doesn't chase them away.
The "pros" will argue that if people would just focus on lowering the takeout and forget about the gimmicks all will be sunshine and roses. Ain't gonna happen.
A multi-pronged approach is called for.
Now I'm in for 20 cents...

[1st time lasix]

All these "jackpot" carryovers are a simply terrible play.... and I will only venture in on the last day with a forced payout. The little guy is much better off going after a pick five or pick six carryover using a couple singles. Even pooling his resources with others to go after a sequence that will payout the entire pool if hit. I once caught a small carryover pick six at Hawthorne that paid me 6 k for a lousy twelve bucks! The game is hard enough and the risks are high...why play a fool's wager? You have to have a sequence of long shots that actually come in to get compensated from the consolation. All improbable shots in at least four races now to even have a chance at the whole prize. Better off playing doubles or pick three with that type. Of course.... i don't play lotto either...but each year i have meaningful gambling winnings to declare to the IRS. If someone considers it just fun- pure gambling....I recommend .10 supers with bombs in the one or two hole in big fields for action. Just me.....

[burnsy]

[Now I'm in for 20 cents...[/QUOTE]
No, it won't make "converts" overnight....but you are onto something that horse racing can't understand or wants to swallow...its basic econoimics. supply and demand. the slots love their penny players. there are tons of penny and nickle machines at EVERY casino. yes, they have 5 dollar and 25 dollar spins too. but they understand the people that want to "take a chance" with no strings attached....racing does not get this. in this society most people don't have the desire, skill or time to dope out the racing form...they could give crap. but give them low increments to wager with a chance to win big odds and they are all over it. make some of the bets as simple as picking numbers or names and then its only a dime or 50 cents and the person that knows diddley about racing may bet. they could give a damn what take out even means when they are risking small money for a big pay out...or any payout at all. i mean when you hit at those machines many times its 20 to 1000 credits....which in pennies is 20 cents to 10 dollars....but young people, old people and many women love that crap. do you hear slot players talking about take out even though you know its a huge amount? they hardly ever think about it, if at all. these people don't even care to do the math...they want to gamble at low stakes....why not let them? the "country club" attitude will get you no where, especially when the other gambling outlets are already eating you for lunch...people love the slots, the scratchies and the lotto tickets and horse racing is still like 20 years behind them. then they have the nerve to complain about the dime bet when penny and nickle bets are making casinos a fortune. its playing a number for crying out loud....look how much the numbers pull in here in NY...they do it twice a day now...so dumb. they don't understand gambling and MOST gamblers...walk around the "penny" machines for about 10 minutes, or any corner store that sells lotto and scratchies...when the last time they complained about participation?

[lamboguy]

All these "jackpot" carryovers are a simply terrible play.... and I will only venture in on the last day with a forced payout. The little guy is much better off going after a pick five or pick six carryover using a couple singles. Even pooling his resources with others to go after a sequence that will payout the entire pool if hit. I once caught a small carryover pick six at Hawthorne that paid me 6 k for a lousy twelve bucks! The game is hard enough and the risks are high...why play a fool's wager? You have to have a sequence of long shots that actually come in to get compensated from the consolation. All improbable shots in at least four races now to even have a chance at the whole prize. Better off playing doubles or pick three with that type. Of course.... i don't play lotto either...but each year i have meaningful gambling winnings to declare to the IRS. If someone considers it just fun- pure gambling....I recommend .10 supers with bombs in the one or two hole in big fields for action. Just me.....i chased the thing twice already, both on saturdays. i hit the thing both times on $120 plays. i don't plan on playing it until the last 2 days of the meet. i doubt that only 1 person will hit it now no matter what the sequence is. if i was the house (gulfstream park) i would play it myself to make sure that more than 1 person hits it. if no one hits this thing in the next week i expect to see $2 million a day pumped into this bet. this bet has capabilities of being like a lottery jackpot. by the time this thing gets hit, it has the potential of cleaning out half the horse players of north america.

[castaway01]

This bet highlights some of the complexities of the game.
Takeout rate, minimum bet sizing, carryovers, pool size, perceptions of value.
I would venture to guess that the casual and $2 bettor has fun playing it, the informed die hard doesn't like the theoretical idea of it but plays it anyway because he's a gambler at heart not an investor. The pros who try/can make a living rail against the whole premise and focus on all the reasons it shouldn't work (Beyer) and the whales don't touch it until the math comes out right from their quant built mainframes.
The 52% takeout is a bit of a disengenuous and inflammatory statement. The takeout is 20%. The carryover is aggressive to build pool size. To call the carryover takeout is just stirring the pot. It is not supposed to appeal to the "serious" player. It's supposed to appeal to the guy who wants to take a shot.
Serious players should be on their knees thanking the heavens that there's something going on that excites casual players into seeding the pools in exchange for excitement and enjoyment. I'd guess that this wager has more ability to drive increased conventional handle than any attempt to lure slot/poker players to bet on the races.
You can't have a healthy ecosystem when the whales eat the sharks and the fish were all eaten 20 years ago...

My 10 cents...

It's not "stirring the pot" when it's a fact that the takeout is, in effect, 52 percent unless you are the one person lucky enough to hit on a day no one else does. I think Beyer's article made solid points about how it's a bad bet, as it is one of the worst bets in racing as far as money invested versus money returned (except if it carries over to the last day of the meet and then they have to pay it out). Whether or not it excites casual bettors and attracts them to the game, it's a bit early to say that is happening. One thing in its favor---the lottery has a similar takeout, and there are millions of people who throw money into that on a daily basis. So, hey, you never know---maybe this bet will revive the game.

[mountainman]

They should call this insane wager "The Highlander," since there can be only 1. And I'd prefer to not have my head lopped off by squeaky-voiced Christopher Lambert.

[burnsy]

It's not "stirring the pot" when it's a fact that the takeout is, in effect, 52 percent unless you are the one person lucky enough to hit on a day no one else does. I think Beyer's article made solid points about how it's a bad bet, as it is one of the worst bets in racing as far as money invested versus money returned (except if it carries over to the last day of the meet and then they have to pay it out). Whether or not it excites casual bettors and attracts them to the game, it's a bit early to say that is happening. One thing in its favor---the lottery has a similar takeout, and there are millions of people who throw money into that on a daily basis. So, hey, you never know---maybe this bet will revive the game.

I don't know about revival but anything helps. but you made the best point...PEOPLE DON'T THINK ABOUT THE THINGS HORSEPLAYERS DO. they just gamble for the chance at winning or to have fun. everyone here knows its not a great bet...horse racing is not a great bet ,especially if you are not an expert. yes, its better than these bets but people DON'T CARE. horse people don't understand that people will bet low increments for a CHANCE at winning. these people that try to analyze the bet don't even get it. your chances of winning lotto, slots and scratchies are like getting hit by lightning but people play that crap by the millions. its not even a question of good bet vs. bad bet...of course its not a great bet...but for a dime who gives a damn? do people sit there at the lottery outlets and slots worrying about take out? if they really did, no one would play. all the garbage that people talk about is basically that....garbage. the racino here takes in more money in a week than many tracks see in months or a season......oh yeah, granny in the corner on her penny machine has her calculator out to figure out the take out.....NOT....if people did that and cared. no one would play. the machines at aqueduct have broke records.....yeah people bet on the basis of the take out or their chances of winning...thats a lie...the other forms of gaming prove that...like i said 20 to 30 years behind. people will bet on two roaches racing across a room...they bet on wheels spinning where you don't even know what you need to win! yet the educated fools don't want to expand the menu based mostly on pride. so they use take out and how good the bet is to argue the point...most people that gamble could care less about those things so they take their business elsewhere. thats how it really works. horse racing has not been the only legal bet for decades...and they still don't understand that. but the indians do, they are crushing with the slots. in the 1920's and 30's the street number (illegal) in many cities was usually based on horse races so no one could fix it. 80 or 90 years later and they still have not caught on.

[DeltaLover]

No, it won't make "converts" overnight....but you are onto something that horse racing can't understand or wants to swallow...its basic econoimics. supply and demand. the slots love their penny players. there are tons of penny and nickle machines at EVERY casino.


I agree with most of what you are saying here albeit I you are still missing something..

A real horse player is a very unique creature having very characteristics to share with gamblers from any other field.

During the years I have make a distinction of a real horse bettor and a more casual which I find it interesting. When I was a regular in Casino's Sport Books I realized that most of the bettors there were just trying to get lucky winning a few bucks so they could have enough to go back to their main game which usually was poker, craps or baccarat. They would never loose a substantial amount betting horses simply because they were only trying it when they were close to been broke! None of them have the tiniest clue for the game, even the very few of them holding a program were completely ignorant about handicapping.

A real horse player is one who grew up with the game, who thinks about it every single minute of his life and believes in his ability to have a better opinion than anyone else in the word about the game. A real horse player does not care too much when loosing a race, at least not as much as he cares when he slips to any other form of gambling losing his hard earned horse profits to it.

Horse racing is in desperate need for real horse players, not rail birds looking to take a shot. Extreme gimmicks like GP P6 is not a bet a real horse player will ever even think of playing... Bayer is analyzing the reasoning really well.

For some strange reason, racing authorities seem not to get it. They keep on underestimating our level of intelligence for decades, treating us like sheeps to the slaughter, like the complete idiots who no matter what they will always come back to gamble regardless of the betting conditions offered.

[JohnGalt1]

I know it's unrealistic because it's a 10 cent bet, but I prefer the $1 or $2 traditional pick 6 because at least they pay 5/6.

And yes I have played the Rainbow 6 a few times if I could come up with a ticket I thought had chance to win.

[ceejay]

If today's action does not prove the horrible nature of this bet, I don't know what will. Lots of long prices including 2 >$35 horses with no favorites still yielded 2 winning tickets and another carryover. Pick 5 had 0 winners and carryover as well.

[BIG49010]

If today's action does not prove the horrible nature of this bet, I don't know what will. Lots of long prices including 2 >$35 horses with no favorites still yielded 2 winning tickets and another carryover. Pick 5 had 0 winners and carryover as well.

Your correct, if they couldn't hit it today, it will build until the end of the meeting. Frank Stronach and the people at Gulfstream look like geniuses!

[mannyberrios]

Mr Bayer is 100% correct about everything he said

[PIC6SIX]

I agree with you 100% Burnsy. I too hit it on a small ticket of 3 dollars once. I was having a bad day and about to leave the track almost busted and played a 3 dollar ticket twice. Got back 316 dollars twice. Your logic and my logic coincide. I love it when the pool is over 1 million since the big players are increasing the payoff for the small player. I do not agree with Beyer on this issue at all.

[Light]

This sport needs a wake up call and so does Mr. Beyer. I'd rather play a bet with a 52% takeout, where my ability to make money off of it is 20x better (due to coverage), than a bet that has a 28% takeout and crap coverage because the base bet is 20 times higher.

You don't need to hit the jackpot to make money off this bet. It paid $111K today for a dime. $2 P6 players would drool just for half that payout. Saturday it paid $1000 for basically chalk. What's wrong with that? No Mr. Beyer, most players are not playing it to hit pie in the sky. They are smart players who realize this is a bet they can work with to make 20% or 30% ROI or more. Try doing that with the $2 P6. You'll be broke before you do the math.

[MightBeSosa]

Nah, this is great. I don't play it, but who wants well heeled syndicates of professional horseplayers winning all the big pots.

The rules keep them out of pot for fear of getting their clocks cleaned.

[cj]

Judging by the results today, it is a terrible bet. For it to only pay 110k given those winners is ridiculous.

If you enjoy playing the lottery, then this bet might have some appeal. Otherwise, you are the sucker at the table while Gulfstream rakes in your money.

[MightBeSosa]

Judging by the results today, it is a terrible bet. For it to only pay 110k given those winners is ridiculous.

If you enjoy playing the lottery, then this bet might have some appeal. Otherwise, you are the sucker at the table while Gulfstream rakes in your money.

What do you think it should have paid. Any idea what the parlay was?

The payoff was actually light, but considering its a 10 cent ticket, and they only return a fraction of the pool, not totally out of line.

[Dahoss2002]

I agree with you 100% Burnsy. I too hit it on a small ticket of 3 dollars once. I was having a bad day and about to leave the track almost busted and played a 3 dollar ticket twice. Got back 316 dollars twice. Your logic and my logic coincide. I love it when the pool is over 1 million since the big players are increasing the payoff for the small player. I do not agree with Beyer on this issue at all.
Wow you hit it twice? If that was today you coulda screwed yourself outta 1.5 million.

[plainolebill]

If it attracts fans to the sport it serves a good purpose. We talk a lot about shrinking pools and a dying sport maybe this is a first step in turning it around. Any kind of excitement generated is a good thing imo.

[PaceAdvantage]

This sport needs a wake up call and so does Mr. Beyer. I'd rather play a bet with a 52% takeout, where my ability to make money off of it is 20x better (due to coverage), than a bet that has a 28% takeout and crap coverage because the base bet is 20 times higher.

You don't need to hit the jackpot to make money off this bet. It paid $111K today for a dime. $2 P6 players would drool just for half that payout. Saturday it paid $1000 for basically chalk. What's wrong with that? No Mr. Beyer, most players are not playing it to hit pie in the sky. They are smart players who realize this is a bet they can work with to make 20% or 30% ROI or more. Try doing that with the $2 P6. You'll be broke before you do the math.Hey now! Look what finally brought you in out of the cold...I'm shocked I tells ya...shocked!!!!

[castaway01]

This sport needs a wake up call and so does Mr. Beyer. I'd rather play a bet with a 52% takeout, where my ability to make money off of it is 20x better (due to coverage), than a bet that has a 28% takeout and crap coverage because the base bet is 20 times higher.

You don't need to hit the jackpot to make money off this bet. It paid $111K today for a dime. $2 P6 players would drool just for half that payout. Saturday it paid $1000 for basically chalk. What's wrong with that? No Mr. Beyer, most players are not playing it to hit pie in the sky. They are smart players who realize this is a bet they can work with to make 20% or 30% ROI or more. Try doing that with the $2 P6. You'll be broke before you do the math.

Tell us about the hundreds of times it paid 110K.

Actually, you chiming in makes me feel better about my opinion. I hedged with that whole "lottery success" angle, but knowing you're for it reassures me I was right.

[cj]

What do you think it should have paid. Any idea what the parlay was?

The payoff was actually light, but considering its a 10 cent ticket, and they only return a fraction of the pool, not totally out of line.

13.60
36.40
52.00
13.40
34.80
21.80

The $2 parlay comes to $8,177,756.84, so the 10 cent parlay would be $408,887.84. It paid 1/4 of that, no thanks.

[andicap]

Bad bet. Great idea. The lottery is incredibly popular on its ridiculous takeout. People still play it, week in and week out even tho most are losing money.

People are looking for a dream for a little bit of money. This provides it. Doesn't mean I have to play. If it brings new people into the game looking for a big hit for a little amount of money, that's great. What's worse are the 25% (and higher) takeouts on serious bets == those are what really drains a bettor's pockets because he's putting so much more of his bankroll into the pot.

[classhandicapper]

The reality is that it's a 20% take and not 52% take, but most players will lose their bankroll rapidly because it "ACTS" like a 52% take while you are dreaming about hitting the jackpot. Mathematically, it's probably not a bad bet relative to some other exotics. But from a bankroll management and sanity perspective, IMO it's a terrible bet.

[cj]

The reality is that it's a 20% take and not 52% take, but most players will lose their bankroll rapidly because it "ACTS" like a 52% take while you are dreaming about hitting the jackpot. Mathematically, it's probably not a bad bet relative to some other exotics. But from a bankroll management and sanity perspective, IMO it's a terrible bet.

I don't think 20% is reality. Since it almost never gets hit, the 40% that goes to the carryover is pretty much a takeout. Tell the people that got a 1/4 of the parlay that the takeout is only 20%.

[OTM Al]

If it acts like a 52% take bet then it is. Does it really matter where the money for takeout goes? You don't see it either way?

This bet, the more I think of it, is brilliant. It just never got the chance to work right the last couple years, but we are seeing it now. Combine greed with big dick syndrome with a "low" pricepoint and no one cares what the take is or the fact that even when it has paid huge, it is far less than the parlay. People that act informed on this board who scream about takeout are going nuts for this bet. Half a million paid into this thing on a Wednesday is amazing to me though, but maybe it is because it is the first Wednesday with no NYRA. Today will tell a better tale. But I'm laughing at those who now say takeout doesn't matter on this one (last day excluded). I'm waiting for a .10 Pick All with a 10% take and a 50/50 split that gets a big money seeding....Can't wait to be told how great that will be.

[aaron]

Overall,of course the lower the take,the better it is for the player.That's a given,so let's put that aside. According to what I am seeing on this board then the only time to bet the rainbow is the last day of the meet. Also,the only time to bet the normal pick 6 is when there is a carryover. While,I agree in theory in terms of making money,I'm not so sure. First of all,I believe you should play a pick 6 or any other bet when you think you can hit it.

[cj]

Overall,of course the lower the take,the better it is for the player.That's a given,so let's put that aside. According to what I am seeing on this board then the only time to bet the rainbow is the last day of the meet. Also,the only time to bet the normal pick 6 is when there is a carryover. While,I agree in theory in terms of making money,I'm not so sure. First of all,I believe you should play a pick 6 or any other bet when you think you can hit it.

What is the point of hitting the P6 if there is no carryover and $2500 gets bet into the pool?

[OTM Al]

Overall,of course the lower the take,the better it is for the player.That's a given,so let's put that aside. According to what I am seeing on this board then the only time to bet the rainbow is the last day of the meet. Also,the only time to bet the normal pick 6 is when there is a carryover. While,I agree in theory in terms of making money,I'm not so sure. First of all,I believe you should play a pick 6 or any other bet when you think you can hit it.

You should play it when you feel you have an advantage, such as possiblly when there is a carry (that can be won....) or when there is a mandatory payout or when you think you've got a couple good shots at a price that others aren't seeing. This bet takes away a lot of those possibilities and instead encourages wild spreading because of the price, the exact behavior that will all but assure no one hits the pot.

[Robert Fischer]

I don't think 20% is reality. Since it almost never gets hit, the 40% that goes to the carryover is pretty much a takeout. Tell the people that got a 1/4 of the parlay that the takeout is only 20%.

This.
It only ceases to "act" like a 52% take if you hit the only ticket. In that unlikely case, it will "really" be a 20% take.

[aaron]

You should play it when you feel you have an advantage, such as possiblly when there is a carry (that can be won....) or when there is a mandatory payout or when you think you've got a couple good shots at a price that others aren't seeing. This bet takes away a lot of those possibilities and instead encourages wild spreading because of the price, the exact behavior that will all but assure no one hits the pot.
I agree,but I may feel on a certain day this bet or even the $2.00 pick 6 is within my grasp with a small investment. Chances are,I am going to be wrong,but I won't be overly spreading and if you say invest $20-$30 in the Pick 6 and hit for $1500-$2000,what's wrong with that. I am not saying to go overboard,just play these bets when you can shift the odds. An example of this could be a day when you have a few singles and one or two are good prices.If you hit those singles you have taken away some of the advantage that the spreaders have.

[bob60566]

What is the point of hitting the P6 if there is no carryover and $2500 gets bet into the pool?

Say you are $52 P6 player do you have better chance in $2500 pool or in carryover pool when the whales move in for the kill $52 v whales

[cj]

Say you are $52 P6 player do you have better chance in $2500 pool or in carryover pool when the whales move in for the kill $52 v whales

Your chances of "hitting" a bet don't really change if you bet $52. What changes is whether or not you have an advantage. Betting $52 into a $2500 is probably NEVER an advantage. Even if you have to share a big pool with the big betting syndicates, you most likely will still get more than you would hitting alone in a small pool.

[Robert Fischer]

Whats going to happen on the last day of the meet? Jackpot Day...

Everybody acts like that is the day the avg. joe gets "rewarded". Isn't that going to be the day that the syndicates and whales step up to the plate and cut the pie ?


The payout is normally what? about $10-20,000? and the ticket will cost $6.40 for 2 horses in each race. If you don't mind wasting $6.40, and want a lottery style ticket for a chance at $20K, it's not a big deal. If you start thinking you have a chance at $1,000,000 because you don't understand the rules, and/or you start betting 50-100 dollars a day on it, it's pretty wasteful.

[Robert Fischer]

The payout is normally what? about $10-20,000?

Saturday it was only $1,000

[RunForTheRoses]

Does anyone know how often it is "hit" but there are more than one winner? It would realy suck if you put in a decent size ticket, catch some long ones but alas someone else also picks 6. I guess that is why many of you are calling it a "suck"ers bet.

They really make it nice for someone like me who will wait until closing day and give it a whirl with all that extra money in there. I didn't play last year but two years ago played a modest ticket and had the first 5 and was alive with the two favorites in a cheap Mcl on the turf, unfortunately it did not hit but I'll try again this year. The payout was very generous.

[RunForTheRoses]

2011 paid even better than I thought:

http://www.equibase.com/premium/eqbPDFChartPlus.cfm?RACE=12&BorP=P&TID=GP&CTRY=USA&DT=4/24/2011&DAY=D&STYLE=EQB

Did they have the bet last year?

[aaron]

What is the point of hitting the P6 if there is no carryover and $2500 gets bet into the pool?
I am only talking about Nyra pools or the Rainbow.I understand there is no upside in those type of pools.

[Vinman]

2011 paid even better than I thought:

http://www.equibase.com/premium/eqbPDFChartPlus.cfm?RACE=12&BorP=P&TID=GP&CTRY=USA&DT=4/24/2011&DAY=D&STYLE=EQB

Did they have the bet last year?

Just as a point of clarification for those who may not recall....because NYRA was closed on Easter Sunday, 4/24/11, the Rainbow 6 mandatory payout was made a day earlier, on 4/23/11. The final day's pool per the Equibase chart was $3,597,006, with a $3,279.26 payout for 6 of 6. Just change the "24" to 23 on the link with your cursor and that chart will come up.

Vinman

[therussmeister]

Say you are $52 P6 player do you have better chance in $2500 pool or in carryover pool when the whales move in for the kill $52 v whales
If you have $52 to invest in one pool, your best chance to make $2500 is with a superfecta.

[bob60566]

If you have $52 to invest in one pool, your best chance to make $2500 is with a superfecta.

The point was should the small bettor play the p6 when the whales are in or out.

[Robert Fischer]

$4,429 today

[cj]

The parlay today was $1793. I think the argument can be made that tickets including the logical horses might be the overlays now as people are chasing bad horses trying to be the lone winner.

In other words, there are a lot of really dumb tickets out there so if you get a fairly formful card and pick a good winner or two, you'll get paid well.

[therussmeister]

The point was should the small bettor play the p6 when the whales are in or out.
And my point was the pick 6 is not a good bet with such a small pool. I don't follow the pick 6, but I'm guessing that when the pool is big enough to attract the whales, it will still pay more than $2500 despite multiple winning tickets.

[therussmeister]

13.60
36.40
52.00
13.40
34.80
21.80

The $2 parlay comes to $8,177,756.84, so the 10 cent parlay would be $408,887.84. It paid 1/4 of that, no thanks.
The reason it only paid 1/4 of the 10 cent parlay is the same reason the 10 cent parlay, if such a thing were available, wouldn't really pay $408,887.84. The pools are too small.

In fact, if you were really able to play a 10 cent parlay on those horses, it would have paid less than the rainbow 6 paid.

[cj]

The reason it only paid 1/4 of the 10 cent parlay is the same reason the 10 cent parlay, if such a thing were available, wouldn't really pay $408,887.84. The pools are too small.

In fact, if you were really able to play a 10 cent parlay on those horses, it would have paid less than the rainbow 6 paid.

I know, and that is a big part of why it is such a bad bet.

[DeltaLover]

I know, and that is a big part of why it is such a bad bet.
:ThmbUp:

[castaway01]

Does anyone know how often it is "hit" but there are more than one winner? It would realy suck if you put in a decent size ticket, catch some long ones but alas someone else also picks 6. I guess that is why many of you are calling it a "suck"ers bet.

They really make it nice for someone like me who will wait until closing day and give it a whirl with all that extra money in there. I didn't play last year but two years ago played a modest ticket and had the first 5 and was alive with the two favorites in a cheap Mcl on the turf, unfortunately it did not hit but I'll try again this year. The payout was very generous.

The payout is generous for all the reasons previously described here. On closing day they have to pay it out, and then you get the same takeout-defying benefits you get with any other large Pick 6 carryover day (provided you hit it). That day is the one time it really is a good bet.

[AndyC]

This sport needs a wake up call and so does Mr. Beyer. I'd rather play a bet with a 52% takeout, where my ability to make money off of it is 20x better (due to coverage), than a bet that has a 28% takeout and crap coverage because the base bet is 20 times higher.

You don't need to hit the jackpot to make money off this bet. It paid $111K today for a dime. $2 P6 players would drool just for half that payout. Saturday it paid $1000 for basically chalk. What's wrong with that? No Mr. Beyer, most players are not playing it to hit pie in the sky. They are smart players who realize this is a bet they can work with to make 20% or 30% ROI or more. Try doing that with the $2 P6. You'll be broke before you do the math.

Coverage is a legit concern but even if you had $10 billion in the pool the coverage wouldn't change the 52% take-out. For a "smart" player to have a 30% ROI they would need to have a pretty good Ouija board. It is easy to bet a perceived in the win or exacta pools but how does one go about spotting one in the P-6 pools? Ones big enough to overcome 52% plus give you a 30% ROI?

[Friuli]

13.60
36.40
52.00
13.40
34.80
21.80

The $2 parlay comes to $8,177,756.84, so the 10 cent parlay would be $408,887.84. It paid 1/4 of that, no thanks.

cj
I must respectfully disagree with your logic because it is, I believe, based on faulty mathematics. Your parlay figures assume that the money you are rolling forward from race to race has zero effect on the odds of the winning horse. Correct me if I am wrong, but does a parlay not simply roll your winnings over into the win pool of the horse you have selected in the upcoming race. While a $0.10 parlay would have negligible effect on the win pool in the first 3 races, it would likely have some effect on the 4th race and certainly impact the odds of the last two races. Using the values from the day in question, given that the entire WPS pool in the 4th race of the series, the 8th race on the card, was 218,000, would not a bet of $300 or so dollars on a horse slightly depress its odds? If the difference is too small to measure, simply go forward to the next race, the 9th. The WPS pool for this race was a robust $265,000. Your parlay would have added over $2000 to the winning horses pool. I think that we can agree that this amount would have had at least some effect on the winning odds. Now let us look at the last race, the 10th. The entire WPS pool is $235,000. Your parlay would add some $30,000 or so to the win pool of the winner whose odds were 9.9 - 1. One would have to assume that her odds would have been significantly lower. Without having the actual pool numbers in front of me, I would guess that the actual parlay pay out would have been much, much lower, and therefore much closer to the P6 payout.

Please understand, I do not disagree with your conclusion, after all, it is your money to do with as you see fit, but I do find your argument to be flawed. Now, if I am mistaken in my conclusions, I am certain that someone on this board will help me to understand this better and point out the flaws in my argument.

[Capper Al]

The comments are compelling as well.

http://www.drf.com/news/andrew-beyer-rainbow-6-elusive-expensive-pot-gold

The question is whose interest does Andy represent? After reflecting on his article for a while, I have concluded it is the Whales as opposed to the small guy. What the rainbow pick 6 does is nullify the Whales' advantage. They've lost the certainity of being able to massively wheel their way to victory.

[Tom]

I think he represents himself.

[cj]

cj
I must respectfully disagree with your logic because it is, I believe, based on faulty mathematics.

I was never implying that you could actually win that much money if you bet all those horses in a parlay in the win pool. The parlay price has always been used as a guide in horse racing to show the value (or lack of value) in multi-race bets.

[cj]

The question is whose interest does Andy represent? After reflecting on his article for a while, I have concluded it is the Whales as opposed to the small guy. What the rainbow pick 6 does is nullify the Whales' advantage. They've lost the certainity of being able to massively wheel their way to victory.

Tom has it right. Isn't it Beyer just saying what he believes, as he always does?

[AndyC]

The question is whose interest does Andy represent? After reflecting on his article for a while, I have concluded it is the Whales as opposed to the small guy. What the rainbow pick 6 does is nullify the Whales' advantage. They've lost the certainity of being able to massively wheel their way to victory.

The problem is that the Rainbow P-6 nullifies any chance at an advantage by anyone, period. I really don't understand how making a bet unfair for everybody is somehow a good thing.

[Vinman]

The problem is that the Rainbow P-6 nullifies any chance at an advantage by anyone, period. I really don't understand how making a bet unfair for everybody is somehow a good thing.
What's wrong with a wager that doesn't favor any class of bettors...such as those with large bankrolls, for example? If you don't like the current version, you can simply wait until the closing day mandatory payout.

[cj]

What's wrong with a wager that doesn't favor any class of bettors...such as those with large bankrolls, for example? If you don't like the current version, you can simply wait until the closing day mandatory payout.

It isn't that it doesn't favor any of them, it is that Gulfstream is basically raking in 20% of the pool on a bet where nobody will ever really have the slightest of edges. I've argued that there are so many bad tickets being played now that it isn't as bad as it was, but it still isn't a good bet for ANYONE.

[Valuist]

When is closing day? Hopefully nobody hits until then and then it will be absolute bedlam. I remember the pool got pretty big in 2011.

[Robert Fischer]

It isn't that it doesn't favor any of them, it is that Gulfstream is basically raking in 20% of the pool on a bet where nobody will ever really have the slightest of edges. I've argued that there are so many bad tickets being played now that it isn't as bad as it was, but it still isn't a good bet for ANYONE.

It's interesting seeing people defend this wager.

[Robert Fischer]

When is closing day? Hopefully nobody hits until then and then it will be absolute bedlam. I remember the pool got pretty big in 2011.

I think it's 4/5.

It will be bedlam. It could be like the Kentucky Derby there :D.

I'm interested in how the market behaves that day. Everybody keeps saying that the last day will be a great value to players. I would expect that some syndicates and some whales will make sharp leverages into the pool, reducing at least some of the value. Are we going to see a ticket pay below the parlay on the last day also??

[AndyC]

What's wrong with a wager that doesn't favor any class of bettors...such as those with large bankrolls, for example? If you don't like the current version, you can simply wait until the closing day mandatory payout.

You beg the question, what bet favors players with large bankrolls? I think most bets favor players with more skill than the other players. If bankroll were the determining factor of success there would be many groups of small players getting together to take advantage of such a situation. I just don't see it and I have never been solicited in 40 years of betting to join a group to pool money and bet like a whale.

[AndyC]

Everybody keeps saying that the last day will be a great value to players. I would expect that some syndicates and some whales will make sharp leverages into the pool, reducing at least some of the value. Are we going to see a ticket pay below the parlay on the last day also??

How can someone make a sharp leverage into the pool to reduce the value?

[Robert Fischer]

You beg the question, what bet favors players with large bankrolls?

$2 pick 6 minimum with carryover. Average players can't properly cover, but play for the gambling aspect adding to the value.

[Robert Fischer]

How can someone make a sharp leverage into the pool to reduce the value?

If the carryover is creating an overlay, you play large amounts/denominations of strong tickets.

[cj]

You beg the question, what bet favors players with large bankrolls? I think most bets favor players with more skill than the other players. If bankroll were the determining factor of success there would be many groups of small players getting together to take advantage of such a situation. I just don't see it and I have never been solicited in 40 years of betting to join a group to pool money and bet like a whale.

People pool money for P6 tickets all the time.

[AndyC]

If the carryover is creating an overlay, you play large amounts/denominations of strong tickets.

I am not sure what you mean by "strong" ticket. For me personally, I view my ticket as being strong if I have a perceived probability of winning each leg of at least 70%. That might require 512 combinations and even at that the probability of hitting is roughly .75 to the sixth power or about .18. So playing multiple tickets of a "strong" ticket doesn't really seem like a great way to go.

What typically happens with the big carryovers is that there are many small tickets with the logical horses (favorites) played creating lower than expected payoffs when the card runs to form.

[AndyC]

$2 pick 6 minimum with carryover. Average players can't properly cover, but play for the gambling aspect adding to the value.

If I am a good handicapper and play a smaller ticket my probabilities of hitting are not diminished by the size of ticket that another player bets. I am not adding to the value for anybody. On the contrary, bettors who indiscriminately cover horses that are weak or non-contenders are adding to the value for me.

[Light]

Coverage is a legit concern but even if you had $10 billion in the pool the coverage wouldn't change the 52% take-out. For a "smart" player to have a 30% ROI they would need to have a pretty good Ouija board. It is easy to bet a perceived in the win or exacta pools but how does one go about spotting one in the P-6 pools? Ones big enough to overcome 52% plus give you a 30% ROI?

To me it's a no brainer. Would you rather take a bet with 52% takeout and have a chance to hit it or take the same bet with 26% take out and practically zero chance to hit it?

Here are the consolation payouts since the beginning of Feb.

Feb.
1 $14,000
2 $1,000
3 $15,000
6 $111,000
7 $4,400
8 $3,500
9 $1,590
10 $16,000

When you consider that taking 2 horses in each leg only costs $6.40 as opposed to $128 in the $2 P6 format, it's a no brainer where you stand to make a better ROI.

Personally I don't play it. Not because I think its a bad bet,but I don't like playing serial races with 3yo's or lightly raced maidens because you usually have to spread too much in those races so it ruins the advantage of the bet for me.

[AndyC]

To me it's a no brainer. Would you rather take a bet with 52% takeout and have a chance to hit it or take the same bet with 26% take out and practically zero chance to hit it?

Here are the consolation payouts since the beginning of Feb.

Feb.
1 $14,000
2 $1,000
3 $15,000
6 $111,000
7 $4,400
8 $3,500
9 $1,590
10 $16,000

When you consider that taking 2 horses in each leg only costs $6.40 as opposed to $128 in the $2 P6 format, it's a no brainer where you stand to make a better ROI.

Personally I don't play it. Not because I think its a bad bet,but I don't like playing serial races with 3yo's or lightly raced maidens because you usually have to spread too much in those races so it ruins the advantage of the bet for me.

ROI has nothing to do with the denomination of the bet. The expected ROI in the long run for the Rainbow P-6 is -52% or $.48 returned for every $1.00 bet. In the traditional Calif. style $2 P-6 the long run expected ROI playing nothing but carryovers is 0% or $1.00 returned for every $1.00 bet.

If better bet coverage somehow made the take-out vanish I would be using that strategy in every pool. Why not bet all horses to win? Or all horses in an exacta?

[Robert Fischer]

I am not sure what you mean by "strong" ticket. For me personally, I view my ticket as being strong if I have a perceived probability of winning each leg of at least 70%. That might require 512 combinations and even at that the probability of hitting is roughly .75 to the sixth power or about .18. So playing multiple tickets of a "strong" ticket doesn't really seem like a great way to go.

What typically happens with the big carryovers is that there are many small tickets with the logical horses (favorites) played creating lower than expected payoffs when the card runs to form.

If I am a good handicapper and play a smaller ticket my probabilities of hitting are not diminished by the size of ticket that another player bets. I am not adding to the value for anybody. On the contrary, bettors who indiscriminately cover horses that are weak or non-contenders are adding to the value for me.





With multi-race wagers, you deal with low probabilities.

The maximum ROI on any pick 6 is for a handicapper to do a perfect job(this doesn't mean perfect selecting 100% of the results, but before the race, with the information available to select the best valued horse in each leg) and play a straight ticket.

Lets say you have a 25% win chance in each leg with the highROI selection. Over 6 legs that equates to about a 1 in 5000 chance of winning.

Unfortunately dealing with 1 in 5,000 odds you subject yourself to long losing streaks, and may not win one of these in your lifetime.
Lets say you somehow made 100,000 of these wagers in your lifetime. The most you should lose in a row would be 57,559. So you could be 100 grand to the red during any serious losing streak.

This is why players buy higher hit% at the cost of some ROI in multi race wagers.

Playing 1 or 2 horses a race, does get you an edge if you are skilled, but exposes you to almost random results.

Consistently profitable players get hit% while still being a positive expectation bet. On carryover days(not 52% 1 ticket carryovers) more of these combinations can be purchased, but that also decreases the payout. It's a trade off.

[Light]

The expected ROI in the long run for the Rainbow P-6 is -52% or $.48 returned for every $1.00 bet.

ROI is not determined by take out.

[AndyC]

With multi-race wagers, you deal with low probabilities.

The maximum ROI on any pick 6 is for a handicapper to do a perfect job(this doesn't mean perfect selecting 100% of the results, but before the race, with the information available to select the best valued horse in each leg) and play a straight ticket.

Lets say you have a 25% win chance in each leg with the highROI selection. Over 6 legs that equates to about a 1 in 5000 chance of winning.

Unfortunately dealing with 1 in 5,000 odds you subject yourself to long losing streaks, and may not win one of these in your lifetime.
Lets say you somehow made 100,000 of these wagers in your lifetime. The most you should lose in a row would be 57,559. So you could be 100 grand to the red during any serious losing streak.

This is why players buy higher hit% at the cost of some ROI in multi race wagers.

Playing 1 or 2 horses a race, does get you an edge if you are skilled, but exposes you to almost random results.

Consistently profitable players get hit% while still being a positive expectation bet. On carryover days(not 52% 1 ticket carryovers) more of these combinations can be purchased, but that also decreases the payout. It's a trade off.

So bigger tickets only yield a higher hit percentage and not a higher ROI. My point is simply that a whale does virtually nothing to my expectations or payoffs. The only way a whale hurts me is if his selections are superior to my selections. My problem is being able to withstand long losing streaks and not what a whale may or may not be doing in the pool.

[AndyC]

ROI is not determined by take out.

Collectively ROI is determined by takeout. Individually it is determined by your skill to overcome the takeout. If you think that a 52% takeout is easily overcome by skill in blind pools I will respectfully disagree.

[Light]

Roi is affected by take out. It is not determined.

[AndyC]

Collectively it is determined and individually it is affected.

[Light]

The affect of take out is minor when determining ROI.

[Light]

Let me illustrate what I'm saying.

I give you a bet that has 0% take out. But your odds of hitting it are 1 million to 1. ROI will be negative

I give you another bet with a 95% take out but your odds of hitting it are 60%.
ROI will be positive.

Take out had no affect in determining ROI between the 2 bets.

[AndyC]

I give you another bet with a 95% take out but your odds of hitting it are 60%.
ROI will be positive.

Take out had no affect in determining ROI between the 2 bets.

Let's run with your example. There are 100 people in a pool each betting $1 so that there is $100 bet in total. The take is $95 leaving $5 for the winners. In order for you to have a positive ROI there would have to be less than 5 winners. From an odds standpoint it would mean that you are betting on something that the group as a whole has rated as having a 4% chance or lower of happening or odds of 24-1 or higher. Yet you are such a good handicapper that you will be able to win this bet at a rate of 60%.

The more likely scenario with a hit rate of 60% is that you would have 60 winning tickets amongst the group dividing up $5 which would give you back 8.3 cents for your dollar. Not a pretty ROI even with a 100% hit rate.

[Light]

If the average size of a bet pool is $100 and take out is 95% the bet would have been scrapped and you'd be a fool to have bet into it. The example was purely illustrative.

Last point I'll make on this. With a real life illustrative point this time. Last Sunday,at Aqu, I played one 10 cent, 4 horse super box. Cost me $2.40 and returned $91. No genius required. It was the top 4 out of the top 5 betting choices that prevailed.

Would I have made this bet if the old $1 super standard was in effect? No. It would cost me $24 and supers are not my forte or bet of choice. I would not feel comfortable putting that amount of money into a risky bet. Everyone knows, anything can run 4th.So with the $1 super format, my ROI in this case would be 0%. With the 10 cent super format, my ROI is over 3700% for 2013 @ Aqu with supers.I don't even know what the take out for the super @ Aqu is and I don't care. The payout was way better than I expected.

Same for the GP 10 cent P6. The P6 is not my forte or bet of choice. But if the card looks favorable to me, I will not hesitate to play it. Two horses per each leg costs $6.40. Certainly within the average players wallet. It is not within the average player's wallet @ $128 a pop. My Roi, in this 10 cent bet, like the super, has a much better chance of being positive than at the larger $2 denomination, regardless of take out, because it is affordability and coverage that is the key here to your ROI.

[AndyC]

If the average size of a bet pool is $100 and take out is 95% the bet would have been scrapped and you'd be a fool to have bet into it. The example was purely illustrative.

You could change the pool to $100,000,000 and the math won't change. Yes it was illustrative, that was the point.

[cj]

Let's run with your example. There are 100 people in a pool each betting $1 so that there is $100 bet in total. The take is $95 leaving $5 for the winners. In order for you to have a positive ROI there would have to be less than 5 winners. From an odds standpoint it would mean that you are betting on something that the group as a whole has rated as having a 4% chance or lower of happening or odds of 24-1 or higher. Yet you are such a good handicapper that you will be able to win this bet at a rate of 60%.

The more likely scenario with a hit rate of 60% is that you would have 60 winning tickets amongst the group dividing up $5 which would give you back 8.3 cents for your dollar. Not a pretty ROI even with a 100% hit rate.

What if everyone bet the same horse for $1? You are forgetting minimum payoffs in your example.

[AndyC]

What if everyone bet the same horse for $1? You are forgetting minimum payoffs in your example.

Good one! I would venture to say that your scenario is more likely to happen then the one envisioned by Light.

[melman]

What if everyone bet the same horse for $1? You are forgetting minimum payoffs in your example.
Let's put aside the skill level, good very good handicapper. With the higher takeout bets consider the ADVANTAGE the big player gets in REBATES. I do not know what the rebates are for the rainbow6 but the general rule is the higher the take out the higer the rebate. It's not just the skill level of the player it's also IMO the edge the larger player gets in that he is not paying the same amount as most other people for his bet.

[classhandicapper]

I don't think 20% is reality. Since it almost never gets hit, the 40% that goes to the carryover is pretty much a takeout. Tell the people that got a 1/4 of the parlay that the takeout is only 20%.

At end end of the year, players as a whole will lose approximately 20% of every dollar wagered. The probability that any individual will lose more than 20% because of the structure of the bet is very likely, but that's a different issue. If you happen to be the guy that takes down the whole pool, you will be one happy camper. I wouldn't play the bet because I don't want my success or failure tied to such a low probability event, but the take doesn't bother me.

[cj]

Let's put aside the skill level, good very good handicapper. With the higher takeout bets consider the ADVANTAGE the big player gets in REBATES. I do not know what the rebates are for the rainbow6 but the general rule is the higher the take out the higer the rebate. It's not just the skill level of the player it's also IMO the edge the larger player gets in that he is not paying the same amount as most other people for his bet.

I don't have the slightest idea how rebates work on that bet.

[cj]

At end end of the year, players as a whole will lose approximately 20% of every dollar wagered. The probability that any individual will lose more than 20% because of the structure of the bet is very likely, but that's a different issue. If you happen to be the guy that takes down the whole pool, you will be one happy camper. I wouldn't play the bet because I don't want my success or failure tied to such a low probability event, but the take doesn't bother me.

Yes, if it gets hit, one person will have an astronomical ROI and the other 99.9% will lose 52% as a group.

[classhandicapper]

Yes, if it gets hit, one person will have an astronomical ROI and the other 99.9% will lose 52% as a group.

Yep. Since most people will never be one of the lucky ones to hit it, they will be screwed badly. That's why I would never consider it even though the "net" take is not bad.

[burnsy]

The question is whose interest does Andy represent? After reflecting on his article for a while, I have concluded it is the Whales as opposed to the small guy. What the rainbow pick 6 does is nullify the Whales' advantage. They've lost the certainity of being able to massively wheel their way to victory.
BULLS EYE...........thats why they are all complaining. These are people that put hundreds of thousands through the window. They HAVE TO account for take out, they are like bankers. Of course their accounting is quite accurate so the article is totally BIASED. Look what this bet is doing for the game and the fans. These guys are accountants they are NOT economist. Adam Smith 101, the price is what ever people are willing to pay. This is what they don't get, will never get because they are horse players looking at their percentage. 95% of all people that gamble are just trying to win once in awhile. If theres a bet that offers high payouts for little risk........the people which means the "MARKET" loves it. Powerball, Lotto , slots are all basically legal 50-50's, which means 50% take out. Yeah they are all hurting aren't they? lol. Then you'll hear the clowns crying about the "Horse Shortage"....a zillion tracks with not enough horses to fill the cards....again economics, owning a horse is basically now a suckers proposition for the high stakes owners so they have an overload of cheap horses with multiple owners or the sport would be even shorter on horses....its a market economics folks...if people don't see a public interest, fanfare or excitement around the sport....big money will pull back and thats whats been happening. Its nice that people can get their 10% share in a cheap horse but most stars don't come from that arrangement. People hate hearing it but there needs to be less tracks, more owners and life breathed into this game......which means bets like this bet.........star power horses that run against each other and WAY MORE public interest. I'm not here saying the game is dying, its chugging along but most of the Horse player media types are basically preaching to the choir and don't want to hear it or protecting self interests. Again basic economics. in a market like this (legal gaming)...where theres competition from every angle......A GOOD BET IS ANY BET PEOPLE WILL BUY! IF IT CAUSES A BUZZ AND FREE ADVERTISING THATS JUST A PLUS! If you don't think this game needs a shot in the arm...you are too close to it and in denial.

[AndyC]

BULLS EYE...........thats why they are all complaining. These are people that put hundreds of thousands through the window. They HAVE TO account for take out, they are like bankers. Of course their accounting is quite accurate so the article is totally BIASED. Look what this bet is doing for the game and the fans. These guys are accountants they are NOT economist. Adam Smith 101, the price is what ever people are willing to pay. This is what they don't get, will never get because they are horse players looking at their percentage. 95% of all people that gamble are just trying to win once in awhile. If theres a bet that offers high payouts for little risk........the people which means the "MARKET" loves it. Powerball, Lotto , slots are all basically legal 50-50's, which means 50% take out. Yeah they are all hurting aren't they? lol. Then you'll hear the clowns crying about the "Horse Shortage"....a zillion tracks with not enough horses to fill the cards....again economics, owning a horse is basically now a suckers proposition for the high stakes owners so they have an overload of cheap horses with multiple owners or the sport would be even shorter on horses....its a market economics folks...if people don't see a public interest, fanfare or excitement around the sport....big money will pull back and thats whats been happening. Its nice that people can get their 10% share in a cheap horse but most stars don't come from that arrangement. People hate hearing it but there needs to be less tracks, more owners and life breathed into this game......which means bets like this bet.........star power horses that run against each other and WAY MORE public interest. I'm not here saying the game is dying, its chugging along but most of the Horse player media types are basically preaching to the choir and don't want to hear it or protecting self interests. Again basic economics. in a market like this (legal gaming)...where theres competition from every angle......A GOOD BET IS ANY BET PEOPLE WILL BUY! IF IT CAUSES A BUZZ AND FREE ADVERTISING THATS JUST A PLUS! If you don't think this game needs a shot in the arm...you are too close to it and in denial.

Do you know why most Las Vegas slots payback over 90%? Because they found that if they bled the bettor too fast they would cease to enjoy the game quit playing.

Do you really think that racing should try to emulate the lottery? Many studies have shown that the people who play lotto are much more inclined to be uneducated and poor. So when someone like Beyer points out the unfairness of the bet you believe that he is just complaining. The apropos quote should be "There’s a sucker born every minute."

[thaskalos]

Do you know why most Las Vegas slots payback over 90%? Because they found that if they bled the bettor too fast they would cease to enjoy the game quit playing.

Do you really think that racing should try to emulate the lottery? Many studies have shown that the people who play lotto are much more inclined to be uneducated and poor. So when someone like Beyer points out the unfairness of the bet you believe that he is just complaining. The apropos quote should be "There’s a sucker born every minute."

"And two to take him..." :)

[cj]

For all the griping we do about takeout, doesn't the support of this bet put a stake through the heart of that argument?

[AndyC]

For all the griping we do about takeout, doesn't the support of this bet put a stake through the heart of that argument?

Not really. I would contend that the decreases in pool sizes in the last 4-5 days shows that the fun players are getting a little tired of chasing the minor rewards of tying for first.

[OTM Al]

For all the griping we do about takeout, doesn't the support of this bet put a stake through the heart of that argument?

It certainly does prove players are easily distracted by shiny objects. People can say all they want about dead money overcoming the takeout, but that money had to come from somewhere. Combine greed with big "johnson" syndrome and takeout concerns go right by the board.

[cj]

Not really. I would contend that the decreases in pool sizes in the last 4-5 days shows that the fun players are getting a little tired of chasing the minor rewards of tying for first.

Maybe people are finally realizing it is a terrible bet. Still, it took long enough if this keeps up.

[Robert Fischer]

For all the griping we do about takeout, doesn't the support of this bet put a stake through the heart of that argument?

I don't know.

I think it's a different animal.

The takeout issue (from my perspective) is more about making the traditional bread and butter WPS, EX, DD wagers as efficient a market as possible. Takeout should be set at an optimum level for market churn.

A wager like the Rainbow P6 is a jackpot wager designed to target the dopamine centers of a gambler's brain in a more enhanced way than traditional wagers.