Enhanced Del Mar Pick Six

[Baron Star Gregg]

The new twist on the Pick Six...Those picking all six winners will continue to get 70% of the pool, but the remaining 30% will be split two ways. Those with consolation tickets will be paid 15% of the pool, while the final 15% will be carried forward until there is a lone Pick Six winning ticket.

At this point why pay on consolation tickets at all? Does this even stand a chance of being successful? I'm going to have to be much more selective as to when I play the Pick Six. Am I wrong or have they lost their minds?

[AndyC]

The new twist on the Pick Six...Those picking all six winners will continue to get 70% of the pool, but the remaining 30% will be split two ways. Those with consolation tickets will be paid 15% of the pool, while the final 15% will be carried forward until there is a lone Pick Six winning ticket.

At this point why pay on consolation tickets at all? Does this even stand a chance of being successful? I'm going to have to be much more selective as to when I play the Pick Six. Am I wrong or have they lost their minds?

The lifeblood of a P-6 player is the consolation payoffs. It is what keeps you in the game chasing the score. To cut that payoff in half to fund a jackpot bet takes a lot of money out of play.

[spiketoo]

The lifeblood of a P-6 player is the consolation payoffs. It is what keeps you in the game chasing the score. To cut that payoff in half to fund a jackpot bet takes a lot of money out of play.

Exactly! Consols help with my churn when there is a C/O.

Can I change the title to Del Mar Phucks up P6???

[cj]

If Belmont had these rules in place bettors would have collected $2026 yesterday instead of $4052. That matters a lot to the regular P6 player.

[ronsmac]

It's probably not the smartest move. On the bright side, if there's no single winning ticket the last week or two.The whales get a double bonus. All of the carryover money,plus all of the money from those suckers who play the 96 dollar tvg tickets that'll be given out over and over. Those tickets have zero chance of winning.

[Psychotic Parakeet]

A vacuous move indeed. How is this an improvement?

[MonmouthParkJoe]

I read this yesterday and almost fell out of my chair. I know personally speaking I dont play the pick 6 for the consos as the article points out, but why take more money out of the players pockets?

Even if the effective takeout for the rest of the jackpot bets is extremely high with the single ticket provision for the entire payout, the trade off is the low base wager. This delmar bet makes no sense to me, at all

[AndyC]

"Most Pick Six players indicated that consolation pools weren’t the reason they played the bet and Del Mar officials emphasized that the consolation prizes weren’t being taken away, but rather adjusted to allow for half of it to be reallocated to the “Jackpot” pool."


I certainly never played the P-6 for the consolations but I was able to continue playing the P-6 because of the consolations. Talk about spinning an answer to fit your needs/wants.

At $2 a pop I would suspect that the Jackpot will not go too many days without a single winner. It is a big boy bet requiring a big bankroll effectively eliminating the small to midsize P-6 player.

[SandyW]

Dumb, and stupid that is what this new pick 6 is. Good luck on the handle not dropping like a rock.

[AndyC]

It is easy to sit back and complain and I have certainly been guilty on this thread. So I am offering Del Mar a suggested change to their new P-6 that should suit everybody.

They should request a takeout change from the current 23.68% to the W-P-S takeout of 15.43% for the P-6. The change in takeout should be used entirely to fund the jackpot. On their current proposal, the jackpot would get 11.45% (.15 X 76.32%) of the pool each day and with mine they would get 8.25%. This way all parties are happy and the expected increase in handle should cover the reduction in takeout percentage.

Del Mar should also look at seeding or setting a minimum Jackpot payout so the jackpot lured bettors won't have to sit on their wallets waiting for the build.

[dilanesp]

Andy's proposal is a good idea.

But there's obviously a rift here between how tracks view the pick 6 (as a lottery type wager) and how horseplayers do (as a serious, beatable bet for high bankroll players).

This problem is not going away.

[the little guy]

It is easy to sit back and complain and I have certainly been guilty on this thread. So I am offering Del Mar a suggested change to their new P-6 that should suit everybody.

They should request a takeout change from the current 23.68% to the W-P-S takeout of 15.43% for the P-6. The change in takeout should be used entirely to fund the jackpot. On their current proposal, the jackpot would get 11.45% (.15 X 76.32%) of the pool each day and with mine they would get 8.25%. This way all parties are happy and the expected increase in handle should cover the reduction in takeout percentage.

Del Mar should also look at seeding or setting a minimum Jackpot payout so the jackpot lured bettors won't have to sit on their wallets waiting for the build.

This is a very clever and interesting idea. There is one major reason it would never happen.

[1st time lasix]

I will never play a jackpot-type play..... unless it is mandatory payout day. I want to get properly paid in full for the risk I take. The Del Mar announcement has effectively ended my handle on their pick six. There are other pools (and other tracks) to consider with my handicapping decisions.

[GMB@BP]

If Belmont had these rules in place bettors would have collected $2026 yesterday instead of $4052. That matters a lot to the regular P6 player.


The article quoted big pick 6 players stating the consolation payoffs meant little in their playing the bet.

I find that very difficult to believe, wonder who these players were.

I dont play the bet but my bankroll churn sure would be affected by a 50% reduction in consol payoffs.

[zawaaa]

:faint: welp, should be a fun little exercise for the math nerds -- if nothing else :faint:

[cj]

The article quoted big pick 6 players stating the consolation payoffs meant little in their playing the bet.

I find that very difficult to believe, wonder who these players were.

I dont play the bet but my bankroll churn sure would be affected by a 50% reduction in consol payoffs.

I'm with you, that doesn't jive with the P6 players I know.

[AndyC]

This is a very clever and interesting idea. There is one major reason it would never happen.

I know. Getting the horsemen, track and legislature to agree on any change takes an act of God.

[the little guy]

I know. Getting the horsemen, track and legislature to agree on any change takes an act of God.

That too, but I think the lower takeout will discourage a significant part of their Pick-6 handle from playing, believe it or not.

[thaskalos]

That too, but I think the lower takeout will discourage a significant part of their Pick-6 handle from playing, believe it or not.

Then...why not just RAISE the Pick-6 takeout? It might encourage a significant part of their Pick-6 handle to play more. No?

[the little guy]

Then...why not just RAISE the Pick-6 takeout? It might encourage a significant part of their Pick-6 handle to play more. No?

Do you really want to play smart ass with me? I mean, I'm always game, so let me know.

There is something known as optimal takeout rate...right?

[thaskalos]

Do you really want to play smart ass with me? I mean, I'm always game, so let me know.

There is something known as optimal takeout rate...right?
Sorry TLG...I don't get to converse with you much, and I just couldn't pass up the chance. :)

[castaway01]

These halfway ideas rarely work in anything in life. If you want a jackpot bet instead of a traditional Pick 6, then switch to a jackpot bet. If you don't, then don't halfway it (or 15% it, or whatever you'd call this). Just doesn't make sense.

[the little guy]

Sorry TLG...I don't get to converse with you much, and I just couldn't pass up the chance. :)

I get that:-)

[v j stauffer]

Do you really want to play smart ass with me? I mean, I'm always game, so let me know.

There is something known as optimal takeout rate...right?

OMG

[ReplayRandall]

OMG

Just let it go, Vic.....Take it easy, you know how this raises your blood pressure...:cool:

[AndyC]

That too, but I think the lower takeout will discourage a significant part of their Pick-6 handle from playing, believe it or not.

I am familiar with the concept of optimal takeout but I have never seen people bet less because the takeout was reduced. The optimal takeout is where the track makes the most profit. (Total Bets X Takeout Rate)

What makes you believe that people will not bet because of lower takeout rate? I could see a rebate reduction for some players but usually the low takeout horizontal bets will increase handle significantly.

[AndyC]

These halfway ideas rarely work in anything in life. If you want a jackpot bet instead of a traditional Pick 6, then switch to a jackpot bet. If you don't, then don't halfway it (or 15% it, or whatever you'd call this). Just doesn't make sense.

How is this a halfway idea? The original P-6 is left intact so those players will continue and the payoff is enhanced by a jackpot. Win-win.

[Poindexter]

Do you really want to play smart ass with me? I mean, I'm always game, so let me know.

There is something known as optimal takeout rate...right?

How would racetracks know what the optimal takeout is when they have never tried it and certainly never will. It is like me opening up a burger stand next to In and Out and Mcdonalds. I start off charging $20 per burger, that isn't working so i go to $17.50 a Burger, I sell a few more but not enough more to justify making $2.50 less on the ones I was already selling, so time to go back to $20. Nowhere in my mindset am I looking to compete with the competition and sell my burgers for $7.99(after all my Burgers are bigger and better).

Welcome to racing's world of optimal takeout.

[EasyGoer89]

How is this a halfway idea? The original P-6 is left intact so those players will continue and the payoff is enhanced by a jackpot. Win-win.

If you're a small bankroll player you're never really going to be in a position to be a solo winner. Also, those 24 and 48 dollar tickets are going to hit exactly 5 winners much more than 6 winners, if you hit exactly 5, you Lose a big chunk of money you aren't realistically going to ever recover. It doesn't FEEL like a win win for too many people.

[AndyC]

If you're a small bankroll player you're never really going to be in a position to be a solo winner. Also, those 24 and 48 dollar tickets are going to hit exactly 5 winners much more than 6 winners, if you hit exactly 5, you Lose a big chunk of money you aren't realistically going to ever recover. It doesn't FEEL like a win win for too many people.

I agree that would be the case in the new Del Mar P-6. I put my proposed version in reply #10. There would be no reduction in consolation payoffs.

[cj]

How is this a halfway idea? The original P-6 is left intact so those players will continue and the payoff is enhanced by a jackpot. Win-win.

I think he meant Del Mar's version, not yours.

[AndyC]

I think he meant Del Mar's version, not yours.

Upon further review, my post as written has been reversed and there is no disagreement with the post I replied to. Thanks for clearing the fog that has engulfed my head.

[dilanesp]

Do you really want to play smart ass with me? I mean, I'm always game, so let me know.

There is something known as optimal takeout rate...right?

I have had a lot of disagreements with TLG on other threads, but this is absolutely right. There's an optimal percentage from a revenue standpoint, amd it's not necessarily the number that maximizes total handle.

[dilanesp]

How would racetracks know what the optimal takeout is when they have never tried it and certainly never will. It is like me opening up a burger stand next to In and Out and Mcdonalds. I start off charging $20 per burger, that isn't working so i go to $17.50 a Burger, I sell a few more but not enough more to justify making $2.50 less on the ones I was already selling, so time to go back to $20. Nowhere in my mindset am I looking to compete with the competition and sell my burgers for $7.99(after all my Burgers are bigger and better).

Welcome to racing's world of optimal takeout.

I'm not going to defend all racetrack decisions on takeout, but I am pretty sure that racetracks have access to sophisticated internal studies on optimal takeout.

[cj]

I have had a lot of disagreements with TLG on other threads, but this is absolutely right. There's an optimal percentage from a revenue standpoint, amd it's not necessarily the number that maximizes total handle.

That wasn't really the discussion though. He didn't mention optimal takeout from a racetrack point of view.

I think the lower takeout will discourage a significant part of their Pick-6 handle from playing, believe it or not.

I'm sure TLG has thought this out and has a reason for stating that. I'm interested in hearing it. Rebates possibly?

[cj]

I'm not going to defend all racetrack decisions on takeout, but I am pretty sure that racetracks have access to sophisticated internal studies on optimal takeout.

They do, and they have ignored them at every turn.

[cj]

Upon further review, my post as written has been reversed and there is no disagreement with the post I replied to. Thanks for clearing the fog that has engulfed my head.

No worries Andy, I'm usually in a foggy state so I understand. I read from bottom up and had a moment of clarity.

[dilanesp]

They do, and they have ignored them at every turn.

I am going to go off on a tangent for a moment.

I'm a bit of a passenger rail buff. Not hard core, but I like a relaxing two day train ride once in awhile.

But I can't stand the enthusiasts who dominate Internet discussions of Amtrak, who are called "foamers" (because they foam at the mouth when they see a train).

And the reason is because if you go to any of their websites, or the website of the foamers' lobby, the National Association of Rail Passengers, what they do is take Amtrak's financial reports and go through all sorts of machinations to prove that long distance trains and sleeping cars make money for Amtrak.

The problem is, if that were true, Amtrak would of course gladly expand the service. They don't, because, of course, it isn't true. Amtrak has the real numbers. They know how much it costs them. Which is why when Amtrak does cutbacks, it almost never does them on popular commuter lines (indeed, they add service on the Acela, the commuter services out of Chicago, and the San Joaquin and Surfliner trains in California). They have been trying for 46 years to get costs down on long distance sleeper trains. And before that, their private railroad predecessors did the same thing. Turns out there's these inventions called the airplane and interstate highway which really destroy the market for sleeper trains.

End of digression.

My point, of course, is that I suspect the takeout studies don't exactly say what a lot of horseplayers think they say. I'm not saying that lowering takeout is a money loser. I suspect that in certain situations, it could be a moneymaker. But you'd need a significant amount of handle coming on track or from non-rebate players, you'd need attractive races that people want to bet on at the lower takeout, and you'd need a pretty carefully calibrated reduction (e.g., the exotic takeouts might go down less than a lot of people here would like).

And I bet the studies also show that where wagering product is particularly attractive, takeout could be profitably raised. Churchill could probably get away with a pretty high takeout on the Derby, for instance.

Finally, I bet that the studies show that takeout reductions are subject to a significant matching effect, where if one of the big players did one, its competitors could probably blunt its effect by lowering takeout themselves, which would leave the market at a less profitable equilibrium. This is a familiar problem to the airlines, which have to be somewhat careful about discounting because of this. The discount is only profitable if the competitors don't match it.

Now, that's just based on my background knowledge as a lawyer with a fair amount of economics training. I'm not saying any of that conclusively. Perhaps takeout reductions can more broadly attract business than I think. I'm not weighing in on that.

But what I am pretty sure of is that the major players have studied this, and like Amtrak and the sleepers, have concluded that broad-based across the board takeout reductions are unlikely to be profitable for the major players in the industry. Instead, they nibble around the edges (such as with the Players' Pick Five in Southern California).

People who run major, multi-million dollar businesses with national reach, are not stupid, and do not ignore their economic studies.

[AndyC]

I'm not going to defend all racetrack decisions on takeout, but I am pretty sure that racetracks have access to sophisticated internal studies on optimal takeout.

Optimal takeout for me is 0%. I doubt that lowering the takeout rate will cause a decrease in handle, as suggested. Lowering the takeout for the track may not, however, be optimal for maximizing take. If there were sophisticated internal studies on optimal take you would have to believe that there would be a big push by the tracks to get to that level.

[thaskalos]

I'm not going to defend all racetrack decisions on takeout, but I am pretty sure that racetracks have access to sophisticated internal studies on optimal takeout.

What good does it do to have access to "sophisticated studies on optimal takeout"...if you are unwilling to abide by what these studies show you?

[JustRalph]

I have to guess that CH RB thinks every pick 6 player is a high roller. Or those are the ones they care about. This has to kill the guy that dips in 10-12 times a year. He won't be doing it at Del Mar until the last day

Great thread btw. You guys are sharp on this kind of stuff 👍

[ronsmac]

I have to guess that CH RB thinks every pick 6 player is a high roller. Or those are the ones they care about. This has to kill the guy that dips in 10-12 times a year. He won't be doing it at Del Mar until the last day

Great thread btw. You guys are sharp on this kind of stuff 👍
I don't know how much if affects the guy that dips in 10 times a year. Maybe that guy gets 5 out of 6 one or two times mayne three unless he's really spending or he's really ,really good.