HP pick 6 for Monday

[pic6vic]

There was a carryover of $110,000 going into Monday's pick 6.
The first five races of the pick 6 were run and then there was a power failure. The last race was not run and all exotics were paid with one less race. Example pick 3's first 2 winners, pick 4 first 3 winners. The pick 6 was paid to those that had 5 and it paid $20,000.00. However, Hollywood decides that the carryover will not be part of this payout and will carryover $110,000 for Thursday. What about all the players who played the pick 6 because the carryover. Now they get less money for hitting 5. I do not know if this is in the rules of the pick 6, but it does not seem fair to me. What do other oick 6 players think.

[Show Me the Wire]

pic6vic:

The correct solution is the 5 out of 5 should be treated as the winners and the whole pool should be distributed. However, this is not in the best interest of CD. CD by keeping the rollover insures more commissions and potential profits to its bottom line.

CD is placing its economic interest over its fiduciary duty to the wagering public. Since the decision maker is the entity that would profit the California Racing Board should rule on the distribution.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

[cato]

Nobody hot the P6--they hit 5. It seems like a fair solution to me. I assume that there are rules or guidelines to cover this and so, in fact, they had no discretion on the matter, but if they did just make up the rule after the power went out, it seems fine to me (to me, either way of handling it is defensible)

Take care, Cato

[rrbauer]

CHRB rules are if the six races aren't run, then the carryover is not paid out.

[PurplePower]

Originally posted by rrbauer
CHRB rules are if the six races aren't run, then the carryover is not paid out.
This was my post under "Bettors screwed again".

Texas rules regarding payout
Texas' Rules of Racing state that if a race of a "Pick N" is cancelled, all money wagered into the pick six that day is paid to those holding tickets with most winners. It further states that any "carryover" amount NOT be paid on that day but carried over to the next wagering day. I am not sure about California, but I suspect the rule there is the same.

Section 321.312:
m) Except as otherwise provided by this subsection, if one or more races in the pick (n) are canceled or declared a "no race", the amount contributed to the major pool for that performance shall be added to the minor pool for that performance and distributed as an extra amount in the minor pool to the holders of the tickets that designate the most winners in the remaining races. All contributions to the major pool from prior performances shall remain in the major pool, to be carried forward to the next performance to be paid in the major pool for that performance (Italics & underscore mine)

When I teach a Trainers' Exam prep class, most taking those classes are surprised to learn that some actions taken by racing officials are prescribed by the Rules of Racing and are not just capricious acts designed to harm that inidividual trainer.

In this case, Churchill Downs, Inc. did not make the decision as to how that wager would be paid, the Legislature of the state of California made that decision. Track management makes enough decisions that don't seem to follow logical reasoning, but every now and then they are just following the rules.

Now, how will I invest my $10 into that pick six today?

[Show Me the Wire]

PurplePower:

I think CD should hire you or have a person such as yourself on their staff that understands correct public relations.

My post stated the decision should be made by the CHRB rules and not the track management. CD management allowed the peception they were making the decisions on how the distributions would work.

Holders of pick 3 wagers were paid for 2 out of 3, holders of pick 4 wagers were paid for 3 out of 4, so it would only make sense wagers on the pick six would have been handled the same.

The CD gang only needed to (at the time the payouts were announced) publicly state that they had no choice but to roll the carryover to the next racing day because of CHRB rules. Instead they needed people such as yourself to explain CD's compliance with CHRB rules.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

The more I experience the less I know.

[PurplePower]

Originally posted by Show Me the Wire
PurplePower:

I think CD should hire you or have a person such as yourself on their staff that understands correct public relations. ......

The CD gang only needed to (at the time the payouts were announced) publicly state that they had no choice but to roll the carryover to the next racing day because of CHRB rules. .....

I have never understood racetrack administration philosophy of "don't tell" what is going on. I proposed that we run a promotion called "It's a Secret" and let the fans guess what our promotion was for that week. We make them do that with most other aspects.

I say, "Tell it like it is, take our lumps when we have them coming, fix what can be fixed and move on down the road." If something can't be fixed, then junk it and get a new policy that can move on down that road.

[cj]

Just because its a rule doesn't make it right. Picture yourself as the guy sitting there with an "all" in the last race including some nice prices early on. You are loving life. Then for apparently no reason, the race is cancelled due to a power outage. It would be one thing if it was a weather or safety issue, but a stinking power outage. It is simply not fair.

On another note of tracks not divulging info, what is with Illinois announcing no more P6 betting, but failing to say what would happen to the pending carryover. I would think this would be priority 1 in the press release, but as usual I would be wrong.

CJ