How are payoffs more than the pool?

[dragon49]

I'm looking at historical data for a project, and came across this:

http://www.equibase.com/premium/chartEmb.cfm?track=MNR&raceDate=04/15/17&cy=USA&rn=4


In this race, the superfecta pool was $6,860, but the payout was $10,262.60.

Sorry if this is a "newbie" question, but please explain how this works.

Thanks

[MONEY]

Mountaineer offers 50 cent supers.
That price is for a $2.00 superfecta.

In reality only $1.00 worth of supers was paid out for $5131.00.
The pool $6,860.00 minus the takeout.

[dragon49]

Mountaineer offers 50 cent supers.
That price is for a $2.00 superfecta.

In reality only $1.00 worth of supers was paid out for $5131.00.
The pool $6,860.00 minus the takeout.


Ty - but how the **** am I supposed to understand the Equibase results when it reports that the payout for a $2.00 superfecta was $10,262.60?

[davew]

Ty - but how the **** am I supposed to understand the Equibase results when it reports that the payout for a $2.00 superfecta was $10,262.60?

what about the places that offer 10 cent supers? you will really be confused

[thaskalos]

[/B]53678]Ty - but how the **** am I supposed to understand the Equibase results when it reports that the payout for a $2.00 superfecta was $10,262.60?

I recall a couple of years ago at Evangeline, when it was reported on the TV monitors that the $2 superfecta for a particular race paid $150,000...even though the superfecta pool only held about $20,000 total. Two dime-supers won for $7,500 each...but the track projected the payoff out to a $2 wager...just so they could advertise a "life-changing score". That unscrupulous practice was carried out quite often at several tracks back then...but, thankfully, you don't see it much anymore.

[dragon49]

I recall a couple of years ago at Evangeline, when it was reported on the TV monitors that the $2 superfecta for a particular race paid $150,000...even though the superfecta pool only held about $20,000 total. Two dime-supers won for $7,500 each...but the track projected the payoff out to a $2 wager...just so they could advertise a "life-changing score". That unscrupulous practice was carried out quite often at several tracks back then...but, thankfully, you don't see it much anymore.


So why doesn't Equibase just report the payout for the cheaper superfectas and state that nobody hit the $2.00 one?

[thaskalos]

So why doesn't Equibase just report the payout for the cheaper superfectas and state that nobody hit the $2.00 one?

Maybe Equibase is too busy doing other things...and they don't notice the "discrepancies" in the payoffs that they report.

[VigorsTheGrey]

All US tracks ought to report all wagering outcomes based on a $1 wager regardless of the minimum wager amount...that form of standardization, IMO, would be welcome by nearly everyone...

[jay68802]

All US tracks ought to report all wagering outcomes based on a $1 wager regardless of the minimum wager amount...that form of standardization, IMO, would be welcome by nearly everyone...

Come on Vigors, standardization from tracks and reporting agencies? Your radical views are inspiring but this industry would implode if this happened.

[dragon49]

I have a follow-up question which is important:


How much would a single winner $2.00 superfecta ticket have paid off?

If more than one $2.00 ticket had the winning superfecta numbers, can I do the simple math and divide the single prize by the number of winners?

[VigorsTheGrey]

Come on Vigors, standardization from tracks and reporting agencies? Your radical views are inspiring but this industry would implode if this happened.

Hope springs eternal I guess....

[jay68802]

Hope springs eternal I guess....

Like my mother always told me, "You are not dumb as a rock, you are smart as a stone.":headbanger:

[Red Knave]

How much would a single winner $2.00 superfecta ticket have paid off?

To paraphrase Money

The pool $6,860.00 minus the takeout = $5131.00

If more than one $2.00 ticket had the winning superfecta numbers, can I do the simple math and divide the single prize by the number of winners?If all the winners had $2 tickets, then the answer is yes.

[dragon49]

To paraphrase Money

The pool $6,860.00 minus the takeout = $5131.00.

I saw the post but thought this meant that nobody hit the $2.00 superfecta and the payout was for one of the cheaper supers that the track offers.

[MONEY]

I saw the post but thought this meant that nobody hit the $2.00 superfecta and the payout was for one of the cheaper supers that the track offers.

You're not getting it.

Let's say that after takeout there is $9,000.00 in prize money left in the super pool.
If just one person hits it for $2.00, he would collect all $9,000.00.

An only winner that bet just 10 cents, would also get all $9000.00.
In this case equibase would report the $2.00 payoff as $180,000, even though there was no $2.00 payoff.

If one person hits for $2.00 and another one hits for 10 cents,
The one that hit for $2.00 would get $8,571.42, the 10 cent winner would get $428.57.

10 cents goes into $2.00, twenty times so the $2.00 winner gets twenty times what the 10 cent
winner gets, and the total adds up to $8,999.99. The track keeps an extra penny.

If only two people hit it for $2.00, the winners would get $4,500.00 each.
If only two people hit it for $1.00, the winners would still get $4,500.00 each.
If only two people hit it for 10 cents each, each winner would get $4,500.00.

[green80]

You're not getting it.

Let's say that after takeout there is $9,000.00 in prize money left in the super pool.
If just one person hits it for $2.00, he would collect all $9,000.00.

An only winner that bet just 10 cents, would also get all $9000.00.
In this case equibase would report the $2.00 payoff as $180,000, even though there was no $2.00 payoff.

If one person hits for $2.00 and another one hits for 10 cents,
The one that hit for $2.00 would get $8,571.42, the 10 cent winner would get $428.57.

10 cents goes into $2.00, twenty times so the $2.00 winner gets twenty times what the 10 cent
winner gets, and the total adds up to $8,999.99. The track keeps an extra penny.

If only two people hit it for $2.00, the winners would get $4,500.00 each.
If only two people hit it for $1.00, the winners would still get $4,500.00 each.
If only two people hit it for 10 cents each, each winner would get $4,500.00.

So if you have the only winning ticket you would get paid the same amount if you had a 10 cent ticket or a 2 dollar ticket? If you are betting longshots where is is possible you would have the only winning ticket why not bet a bunch of 10 cent tickets rather than 2 dollar tickets.

[thespaah]

All US tracks ought to report all wagering outcomes based on a $1 wager regardless of the minimum wager amount...that form of standardization, IMO, would be welcome by nearly everyone...

I think it should be the minimum for the respective track. Just post a note on the site indicating that.
Simple.

[thespaah]

So if you have the only winning ticket you would get paid the same amount if you had a 10 cent ticket or a 2 dollar ticket? If you are betting longshots where is is possible you would have the only winning ticket why not bet a bunch of 10 cent tickets rather than 2 dollar tickets.

"If you are betting longshots where is is possible you would have the only winning ticket why not bet a bunch of 10 cent tickets rather than 2 dollar tickets."
BINGO!

[ubercapper]

All charts will display exotic payoffs based on the minimum amount in the near future.

[DGroundhog]

You're not getting it.

Let's say that after takeout there is $9,000.00 in prize money left in the super pool.
If just one person hits it for $2.00, he would collect all $9,000.00.

An only winner that bet just 10 cents, would also get all $9000.00.
In this case equibase would report the $2.00 payoff as $180,000, even though there was no $2.00 payoff.

If one person hits for $2.00 and another one hits for 10 cents,
The one that hit for $2.00 would get $8,571.42, the 10 cent winner would get $428.57.

10 cents goes into $2.00, twenty times so the $2.00 winner gets twenty times what the 10 cent
winner gets, and the total adds up to $8,999.99. The track keeps an extra penny.

If only two people hit it for $2.00, the winners would get $4,500.00 each.
If only two people hit it for $1.00, the winners would still get $4,500.00 each.
If only two people hit it for 10 cents each, each winner would get $4,500.00.

This.

There is no real effort to deceive with a life changing score in this case.

The track chooses a standard price they want to display for every pool to their betting public. Usually it is a $2 price for WPS bets. Some tracks like this $2 standard and will display all prices as a $2 price to the public via their field board or video displays. Some tracks like that inflated $2 price being displayed even if there are only a few dime winners and the total payout of the pool was nowhere near the $2 price. Some tracks like showing the 10 cent price to advertise the 10 cent super being available as an option.

The data sent to someone like Equibase likely either gets their stats in a standard format or standardizes it themselves.

Things get weirder still when you have Canadian winnings or other foreign winnings that involve a conversion rate. Usually Canada has to bet 2 candian dimes, so there might be like 14 cents in US winning dollars.

[DGroundhog]

There is no real effort to deceive with a life changing score in this case.

I meant this in regards to Equibase displaying their info.

An individual track might use a payoff like that to advertise a life changing score. That has absolutely happened.

[AstrosFan]

All charts will display exotic payoffs based on the minimum amount in the near future.

I don't believe that for one second. I also can't believe that Equibase doesn't have a second chart caller at certain tracks in racing today. How cheap can you possibly be as a company?

No wonder this game is failing right before our eyes.

[VigorsTheGrey]

All charts will display exotic payoffs based on the minimum amount in the near future.

That is great, provided that the minimum bet amounts are shown adjacent to the listing as many tracks have different minimum amounts, most commonly Harness, and do not listed the minimums, so we still won't know...