Goofy Pick 3

[JustRalph]

I saw this at Equidaily......... this kind of crap really pisses me off. Anybody heard anything about this pick 3?

http://www.equidaily.com/images/2006/61105CD.jpg

From Equidaily:
It's great that Calder was on top of the skewed P3 payouts caused by that computer glitch... However, we're still waiting to hear from Churchill [email sent Monday 11/6, so far unanswered] with a hopefully reasonable explanation for a screwy looking P3 on Sunday 11/5. Above you see the P3 payout for the race 5-7 P3. With winners at odds of 9-1, 36-1, and 7-1 the P3 paid $12,452/$2. Meanwhile the P3 one race later, races 6-8, paid a scrawny-by-comparison $2,093/$2 with winners at odds of 36-1, 7-1, and 20-1. What gives? The R6-8 payout almost looks like a misprint. There has to be a logical explanation, we just haven't heard it yet...

[njcurveball]

A $74 winner, $16 winner, than a $42 winner and the payoff is $2.000?

The parlay is over $10,000!

Looks like they have some explaining to do!

[boomman]

If it's not a misprint then must be computer "glitch" #2!!! They better work quickly to find out what happened here-again as I've said before-no integrity (especially parimutuel wise)=no racing

[Valuist]

Are the guys from the 2002 BC P6 fiasco out of jail yet?

[boomman]

Probably-The top 'ringleader' guy only got something like 18 months-racing needs to understand that goofy pay-offs like this must be investigated to the fullest......just like Calder did

[PaceAdvantage]

Most likely related to this discussion:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32426

[Cesario!]

Never being one for conspiracies, I wonder what the effect of the largest shot being in the first leg has to do with the payouts. Practically speaking, I wonder if more people are likely to do SHOT, wide, wide than wide, SHOT, wide.

Other considerations could be the presence of different dynamics in the 5th race than the 8th race -- such as a different odds distribution favoring the selection of favorites in the pick 3 pool (altough I'm not convinced that's the case here.)

[saratoga guy]

Never being one for conspiracies, I wonder what the effect of the largest shot being in the first leg has to do with the payouts. Practically speaking, I wonder if more people are likely to do SHOT, wide, wide than wide, SHOT, wide.

The P3 in the following race -- Races 7-8-9 -- paid $2488.00/$2 [pool: $53K].
The winning-odds sequence there was 7-1, 20-1, 5-2.

[njcurveball]

Never being one for conspiracies, I wonder what the effect of the largest shot being in the first leg has to do with the payouts. .)

In most pick threes, the longer shot winning the first leg makes for a much bigger price. People will play the 10-1 or higher MLs blindly, in the other legs, but looking at the board and seeing 30-1 scares many of them off in the first leg.

Also with a lower odds horse winning the first leg, it sets up the ALL in one of the other legs. I have seen many people play 1/all/1, but rarely will I see an all on a pick 3 without a single on a low odds horse in one of the legs.

Jim