The 10 cent superfecta killed the BC Sprint avg payout

[Dodgersv]

Now that today's Sprint race is over... my suspicion of the average superfecta payout came true. Based on my data the payout was averaging about 24k for 2 dollars. Today's payout was indicative of the new trend to come.

Folks... the 2 dollar superfecta payouts is one of the key points why BC day exists in terms of wagering. The astonishing payouts added "hoopla" and intrigue for many of us. It is probably one of the most achievable win wagers that one can attain in horse racing... with some thought and money behind it. By the way when I say money, I'm not talking about anything over 600 dollars.The risk was worthwhile.

Can anyone really say that the 10 cent super will help expand the sport? I truly believe the payouts drive the fan base. Doesn't everybody dream of hitting a big one?

The worst thing that can happen is extending the 10 cent super to the Kentucky Derby. By the way the average payout is 23k for 2 dollars.

What do you think?

[Dodgersv]

Superfecta Payouts for 2006 and 2007 BC:

Breeders' Cup Juvenile Fillies (G1)
2007=$1 Superfecta (4-10-7-3) Paid $3,280.80
2006=$1 Superfecta 1-4-7-12 paid $4,690.10

Bessemer Trust Breeders' Cup Juvenile (G1)
2007=$1 Superfecta (2-7-3-10) Paid $275.60
2006=$1 Superfecta 1-9-7-3 paid $1,957.90

Emirates Airline Breeders' Cup Filly and Mare Turf (G1)
2007=$1 Superfecta (6-2-4-3) Paid $1,185.60
2007=$1 Superfecta 2-4-5-7 paid $131.00
TVG Breeders' Cup Sprint (G1)
2007=$1 Superfecta (2-7-4-8) Paid $1,374.40
2006=$1 Superfecta 1-2-7-6 paid $56,955.80

NetJets Breeders' Cup Mile (G1)
2007=$1 Superfecta (8-13-7-9) Paid $1,750.30
2006=$1 Superfecta 10-7-8-4 paid 49,292.50

Emirates Airline Breeders' Cup Distaff (G1)
2007=$1 Superfecta (4-12-8-5) Paid $3,418.50
2006=$1 Superfecta 1-13-14-12 paid 19,297.10

John Deere Breeders' Cup Turf (G1)
2007=$1 Superfecta (6-4-2-3) Paid $1,234.60
2006=$1 Superfecta 9-8-10-5 paid 16,019.00

Breeders' Cup Classic Powered by Dodge (G1)
2007=$1 Superfecta (4-8-6-2) Paid $2,146.20
2006=1$ Superfecta 11-3-2-9 paid $4,393.10

Say good bye to the nice payouts. Just like fellow pace advantage quotes:


Originally Posted by 1st time lasix
I no longer play into pools that allow ten cent "all" types of players. I feel it dilutes the overlay return.

[alysheba88]

You are comparing results from one year to another to make what point? With no reference point of odds?

Did you happen to compare exactas and trfiectas? What about win/place and show?

[ryesteve]

What do you think?I think you're comparing apples and turds. Average payouts mean nothing without relating them to the odds of the horses hitting the board. The avg payout this year was so much lower this year primarily because it was a relatively chalky BC. Without taking that into account, you have no way of assessing the impact of dime supers.

[Dodgersv]

Aly... we are taking about the modification of the superfecta. If you want I can give payouts of other BC days... strictly superfecta payouts of course.

[Dodgersv]

Okay Rye... explain the payout for the Fillies and Mare Sprint from yesterday. Lets see:

The winner went off at 8/1
2nd place off at 43/1
3rd place off at almost 6/1
4th place off at 18/1

yet, the payout for a 1$ super was $6,787. If you watched payouts for many years... the sequence above before 10 cent supers would have paid easily over 15 grand. Do you need empirical evidence?

[Robert Fischer]

months prior to the BC pre-entries, I was going to planning for the sprint super , but the lack of field size and the strength of the probable favorte (midnightlute) forced me to go else where.

[njcurveball]

Have you considered the 2nd race Super?

5-1 winnner, then 16-1, 16-1, 5-1

11 Coco Belle................. $13.40 $7.40 $5.80
12 Intentional Fever.......... $14.40 $10.20
5 Control System............. $10.60

DD 1-11 $396.40
EX 11-12 $249.00
SF 11-12-5-1 $18501.40

Pretty nice! :ThmbUp:

[BillW]

A 25% rake didn't help any! :ThmbDown:

[BombsAway Bob]

Okay Rye... explain the payout for the Fillies and Mare Sprint from yesterday. Lets see:

The winner went off at 8/1
2nd place off at 43/1
3rd place off at almost 6/1
4th place off at 18/1

yet, the payout for a 1$ super was $6,787. If you watched payouts for many years... the sequence above before 10 cent supers would have paid easily over 15 grand. Do you need empirical evidence?
How about this scenario? It was a NINE HORSE FIELD, & The two Capt. Obvious picks were both intent on the lead... if speed kills, you chuck them both & play the bet using closers..only the second place horse was difficult to make a case for. That payout was a little short, but acceptable.
This was a CHALKY YEAR! The folks who made out were the bettors that played the Pick-4..that 15% Takeout sure makes eating favorites more digestible!
---DIME SUPERS ARE GREAT!:ThmbUp: "Get Wiser"..6th@AQU. Sun,Oct.28- "Ya Never Know.."
www.myspace.com/bobgrant3 (http://www.myspace.com/bobgrant3)

[Dodgersv]

Wow...Bob that's very good handicapping! I hope you got some winning tickets for the Fillies and Mare Sprint race otherwise I can only assume you did a obvious Monday quarterback analysis of the race.

I tried looking for a similar past BC Sprint outcome in terms of odds placing and superfecta result for the purpose of demonstrating my argument. The closest I got was the 1997 race. Consider the following:

Place Horse Odds
1st Elmhurst 16/1
2nd Hesabull 15/1
3rd Bet on Sunshine 7/1
4th Exotic Wood 6/1

Super pays=20,127.90

now based on this outcome, which is pretty similar to the F&M Sprint race from Friday, wouldn't you feel a little cheated on your payout Friday. In fact, with Miraculous Miss at 43 to 1 coming in second, which was the longest odd horse among all, shouldn't the payout paid more?

[stu]

Can anyone really say that the 10 cent super will help expand the sport? I truly believe the payouts drive the fan base. Doesn't everybody dream of hitting a big one?


How big of payout do you really need? In poker, you will never get more
than 9::1 on any single wager. With a 9::1 cap, that game has tremendous growth.

[Zman179]

The only time a dime superfecta comes back nice is when four chalks come in; all those dimes inflate the payoff.

As long as you're betting dimes with longshots in huge pools like in the BC, you're gonna get back less.

[Pace Cap'n]

No empirical evidence has been presented to support the claim that the payoffs are adversely affected by the dime super. It would seem to me just as likely that the dime players are equally capable of picking losers as winners.

What I have seen first hand at the simo, is players buying $30 worth of dime tickets and they don't even have a racing form, and some not even a program. If they are making money on that, then we are in the wrong business. Handicapping business, that is.

[Zman179]

No empirical evidence has been presented to support the claim that the payoffs are adversely affected by the dime super.

Think about this. At lower to medium sized tracks, when some bombs came in the number, you had a chance at getting an all for 4th; it gave you a chance at cashing a nice ticket even when you were a little off. Now, that possibility is eliminated. That has to factor in somewhere.

[BombsAway Bob]

Wow...Bob that's very good handicapping! I hope you got some winning tickets for the Fillies and Mare Sprint race otherwise I can only assume you did a obvious Monday quarterback analysis of the race.

I tried looking for a similar past BC Sprint outcome in terms of odds placing and superfecta result for the purpose of demonstrating my argument. The closest I got was the 1997 race. Consider the following:

Place Horse Odds
1st Elmhurst 16/1
2nd Hesabull 15/1
3rd Bet on Sunshine 7/1
4th Exotic Wood 6/1

Super pays=20,127.90

now based on this outcome, which is pretty similar to the F&M Sprint race from Friday, wouldn't you feel a little cheated on your payout Friday. In fact, with Miraculous Miss at 43 to 1 coming in second, which was the longest odd horse among all, shouldn't the payout paid more?
FIRST OFF, I'm NO REDBOARDER! You asked how that payout could be so low! I never said I hit the bet!
(Actually, my Dime Supers in the race were:
(all)(10)(1,6,8)(1,6,8) & (10)(all)(1,6,8)(1,6,8))
Second, the idea that you pull out the 1997 Sprint for your argument is a HOOT! I pulled out My BC sheets from '97..ARE YOU KIDDING ME? THAT WAS A 14-Horse Field,(12 betting interests and the mutuel field(remember those?) of Carmine Lake, Trafalger, & Pas de Response! The top TWO finishers were 20/1 ML; That's a REAL CLOSE comparison of the two races!
Show me some 9 Horse Fields where Supers paid over $6,700 for $1! GOOD LUCK! & Bombs Away, Bob www.myspace.com/bobgrant3 (http://www.myspace.com/bobgrant3)

[BombsAway Bob]

Have you considered the 2nd race Super?

5-1 winnner, then 16-1, 16-1, 5-1

11 Coco Belle................. $13.40 $7.40 $5.80
12 Intentional Fever.......... $14.40 $10.20
5 Control System............. $10.60

DD 1-11 $396.40
EX 11-12 $249.00
SF 11-12-5-1 $18501.40

Pretty nice! :ThmbUp:
C'mon, don't confuse him with facts that ruin his argument!

[Dodgersv]

This posting is directed to Aly, Rye, Robert, Bob, Stu, Zman, and ,especially, Bill W because he seems to get it more. I've read many of your postings in the past, and for the most part you guys sound intelligent. My point for writing this thread was to bring attention one of the few betting opportunities that "has" diminished. We all know that gambling is a long term losing proposition. Heck, the industry knows it and some gamblers are willing to admit it. So as savvy gamblers, we try hard to find winning plays and strategies. This is the only way we know we'll survive in the game. But when the industry changes the inputs and outputs of the game such as the superfecta... opportunities are effected.

Look guys... I don't want to go into a rant about who's right or wrong. The industry is trying anything to stay afloat, and we gamblers as part of the game will either suffer or gain benefit. I think for the most part gamblers who look for action will benefit and those trying to beat the game will suffer.

Breeder's Cup day,for me, has always been the target for a big payout. The only day in horse racing when horses,trainers have good intentions, the races are fantastic, and the gambling opportunities could be a life changer. To refer to Stu's posting... the biggest payout possible is is required in order continue playing the " the king of sports." . Unfortunately, because of the depression this industry is undergoing... drastic changes are inevitable in terms of field of play. Meaning whatever we're doing to beat the game might ultimately become obsolete.

[First Run]

I agree with you, Dodgerv! What's next 10 cent trifectas and exacts! For the serious gambler, these people just hold up the lines at the machines. If it was me, I would get rid of them all together.

10-cent Superfecta are for those people who can not handicap a race or should not be at the track gambling. What happened to the Sport of Kings!

I am even in favor of bringing back the $5 exactas....why dilute the pool with people who can't handicap a race!! Looks like some of the people who replied to your message fall into this category. Next year is another year and it will probably pay 1/2 as much.

[ryesteve]

This posting is directed to Aly, Rye, Robert, Bob, Stu, Zman, and ,especially, Bill W because he seems to get it more. I've read many of your postings in the past, and for the most part you guys sound intelligent. My point for writing this thread was to bring attention one of the few betting opportunities that "has" diminished. We all know that gambling is a long term losing proposition. Heck, the industry knows it and some gamblers are willing to admit it. So as savvy gamblers, we try hard to find winning plays and strategies. This is the only way we know we'll survive in the game. But when the industry changes the inputs and outputs of the game such as the superfecta... opportunities are effected.
Except in this case, they're affected positively for the "savvy gamblers". Dime supers encourage players to spread all over the board (kinda like someone who has $80,000 to blow on a pick six ticket). When a lot of players are spreading so thin, it inflates the payoffs on supers that are hit by players who structure their tickets intelligently. The people who get hurt are lotto-style players. I don't really have sympathy for them.

[thaskalos]

Dodgersv, althought I get your point about the monsterous payoffs that the $2 superfectas create, I think you underestimate the investment necessary for a realistic chance at hitting one. I have been playing supers almost exclusively for about a year now and I find myself routinely betting $48 to $81 and even up to $144 trying to hit it for $1. People accuse me of not really handicapping but that's not true. The bet is very hard to beat consistently-and very hard on the nerves-when you don't spread out especially in full fields.
The 10 cent super offers a benefit you have not considered. It is tax friendly. The horseplayer no longer has to suffer the indignity of having to fill out a tax form every time his $81 investment returns $601 because the goverment looks at it as a 600-1 return rather than the 7-1 return it really is-and all he has to do is play it for a dime multiple times. Do the superfecta payoffs decline as a result of 10 cent supers? Probably, but so what? What good is a monster payoff if you miss it? The 10 cent super gives you a chance to hit it with a reasonable investment. Remember, its not the payoff but the ROI that really matters.

[Donnie]

No offense to anyone on this board, but the same case could be made about the win hole this year.....could it not? They seemed depressed.

My take on the lower supers this year:

1. Off track conditions kept many people away from the races to begin with (75,000 ontrack last year, 41,000 on track this year).
2. Many people staying away from these "betting opportunities" depressed the entire handle by 43.5%.
3. Shorter fields make for more "all" button hits in the super more-so than in probably any other pool.

I don't doubt that the dime Supers are affecting the payouts, but there were too many other factors at play this weekend that contributed to a very unconcise analysis. Personally, I played 2 races. Usually I play the entire card.

[alysheba88]

I agree with you, Dodgerv! What's next 10 cent trifectas and exacts! For the serious gambler, these people just hold up the lines at the machines. If it was me, I would get rid of them all together.

10-cent Superfecta are for those people who can not handicap a race or should not be at the track gambling. What happened to the Sport of Kings!

I am even in favor of bringing back the $5 exactas....why dilute the pool with people who can't handicap a race!! Looks like some of the people who replied to your message fall into this category. Next year is another year and it will probably pay 1/2 as much.

I dont know about you but I love betting against people who dont know how to handicap a race. Secondly, I know plenty of "big bettors" who dont have a clue

[alysheba88]

No offense to anyone on this board, but the same case could be made about the win hole this year.....could it not? They seemed depressed.

My take on the lower supers this year:

1. Off track conditions kept many people away from the races to begin with (75,000 ontrack last year, 41,000 on track this year).
2. Many people staying away from these "betting opportunities" depressed the entire handle by 43.5%.
3. Shorter fields make for more "all" button hits in the super more-so than in probably any other pool.

I don't doubt that the dime Supers are affecting the payouts, but there were too many other factors at play this weekend that contributed to a very unconcise analysis. Personally, I played 2 races. Usually I play the entire card.

That was my point too. That there are so many other factors- most specifically the odds on the horses who ran 1-2-3-4. The only way to do an exact comparison is to compare races with the same number of horses and then the same odds horses running 1-2-3-4

[1st time lasix]

I have been quoted as an experienced exotic player who is against 10 cent supers. {Many simulcast facilities don't all them even if they are offered elsewhere which creates an uneven playing field. That is another story for another thread}. I don't like them despite the obvious advantage of onerous tax evasion. They have altered my play. At the tracks that allow them.....I do not try to use them as a feature play any longer. I will only use them as a "saver" or hedge to my play in the exacta or trifecta. Example: Say though my work I believe two horses are an overlay with a handicapping chance to win/place. They are my featured opinions and my major play. I might key them in the exacta or tri....perhaps the pick four..... and then for a small 10 cent denomination ....play them underneath the all button in the super in case some chaos occurs. In essence "hedging" my feature bet. I see no reason to let a guy with no handicapping skill dilute my play by saying all, all, 123, all. That is opposite of what i do at a venue that still offers the super at one dollar minumum with the lower takeouts. . At those tracks I use the tri or the super as my feature play. I believe that in order to be a winner at the end of the year ...you must have a bet small to win big philosophy. A few big days or a few large $ winners cover all loss expenses. Hey.....everyone is entitled to their opinion. Best of luck to all!

[boomman]

No offense to anyone on this board, but the same case could be made about the win hole this year.....could it not? They seemed depressed.

My take on the lower supers this year:

1. Off track conditions kept many people away from the races to begin with (75,000 ontrack last year, 41,000 on track this year).
2. Many people staying away from these "betting opportunities" depressed the entire handle by 43.5%.
3. Shorter fields make for more "all" button hits in the super more-so than in probably any other pool.

I don't doubt that the dime Supers are affecting the payouts, but there were too many other factors at play this weekend that contributed to a very unconcise analysis. Personally, I played 2 races. Usually I play the entire card.

Donnie: You make some valid points as to why handle was lower. But I do want to point out that long term handle (especially when comparing handle to the dinosaur $5 exactas mentioned by someone on the board) has always increased as wager minimums have decreased and that is why you're seeing this happen (not to mention the tremendous tax benefits someone mentioned as well, as the 300x wager and $602 minimum to sign is GREATLY affected when you cut the minimum wager by 90%). The point I'm making is this: When you allow folks to bet smaller increments, THEY BET MORE! The perfect example is someone on here mentioning that people were spreading $30 worth of superfectas (300 combinations) while standing in line with no idea of what they were doing. You guys think they would be giving their money away like this at $1 increments? Maybe so, but I doubt that they would be as inclined to do so. Even though I very rarely use a slot example when talking about horse racing handle, one really comes into play here, and that's the fact that penny slot machines (which were all but gone the last 20 years) have made a sudden resurgence. Why? Because the smaller the denomination, the more thay bet, such as 20 lines @ 10 coins per line. Smaller denominations can lead to shorter pay-offs short term, but more handle in the pools (especially by novices) can only be a good thing long term!:)

Boomer

[Donnie]

Boomer-
I agree with you. Over the long haul handle should increase. My wife is a slot player. She was thrilled to see the penny slots....until she figured out she was now playing $2 a spin vs. her old .25 a spin!! Now she rarely ever plays the penny slots! Hope this doesn't happen to the superfecta.

In the case stated here, I think the observations are based on extremes. Too many variables also contributed to the point Alysheba was making in that lower odds horses were winning....the more compact the field, the closer together the odds....show me a 5 horse field with a 20-1 or higher running in it. Rare. Lucky to get a 10-1 in a 5 horse field.

As a sidebar-- since switching to Brisbet I discovered something that I never imagined was possible, but I am making more money on my exacta bets than I am on my win bets. I always considered myself a marginal exacta player, at best. Since I do not have the ability to play everyday, I "felt" that I was better in win betting; never kept betting records. Currently showing a much higher ROI in my exacta column than my Win column. Emprical data bore this out. Currently shifting my play to the exacta tickets.

[Dodgersv]

This is my last post. To everyone regardless of the outcome, I predict the 2008 Kentucky $1 super, only if the 10 cent super is allowed, will pay less than $ 8,500 dollars. Remember it typically pays about 23k for 2 dollars.

[Ron]

Last post ever?

I thought the 10 cent supers were great because then I could clear out the dimes in my account. Now I have ended up with pennies in my account. I can't wait until there are penny bets.

[Dodgersv]

How funny that's exactly what my buddy told me last night and like I told him... you never know.

By the way Ron... more cow bell!!!

[Quesmark]

1 group that benefits from .10 supers are racetrack management.
With the bet priced at a dime it affords lots of players access to the pool,and gives them a realistic chance of winning.
More winners means smaller payouts to many people,it distributes the pool to more hands, and that translates to churn as some/most of the proceeds get re-bet on the next super.If payouts are larger it's mostly sharps/pros taking down the pool,and they're more likely to hold onto a large part of the gain,and not throw it right back.
This churn is a big reason for expecting reduced super payouts as there are lots of tickets with lots of combinations slicing up every pool,whereas before it took a big bankroll to realistically play the super pool,and have a reasonable expectation of winning.
For a bettor that focused on supers the .10 has taken away some of their edge,but tracks benefit by increasing turnover and subjecting "winnings" to the takeout more often.

[Dodgersv]

1 group that benefits from .10 supers are racetrack management.
With the bet priced at a dime it affords lots of players access to the pool,and gives them a realistic chance of winning.
More winners means smaller payouts to many people,it distributes the pool to more hands, and that translates to churn as some/most of the proceeds get re-bet on the next super.If payouts are larger it's mostly sharps/pros taking down the pool,and they're more likely to hold onto a large part of the gain,and not throw it right back.
This churn is a big reason for expecting reduced super payouts as there are lots of tickets with lots of combinations slicing up every pool,whereas before it took a big bankroll to realistically play the super pool,and have a reasonable expectation of winning.
For a bettor that focused on supers the .10 has taken away some of their edge,but tracks benefit by increasing turnover and subjecting "winnings" to the takeout more often.

Damn, you nailed it Quesmark!!!

[Pace Cap'n]

Do y'all suppose the $2 super players pitched the same fit when the $1 wager became available?

[ryesteve]

This is my last post. To everyone regardless of the outcome, I predict the 2008 Kentucky $1 super, only if the 10 cent super is allowed, will pay less than $ 8,500 dollars. Remember it typically pays about 23k for 2 dollars.
And I predict that if War Pass wins at 7/5, you're still going to say "I told you so!" when the super doesn't pay 23k

[Softshoesureshot]

New poster here......

I have definite feelings on this subject. The .10 superfecta is a nightmare, especially when you are trying to get a bet in on a race at a simulcast facility somewhere. The closest track to me is Los Alamitos, so there are times when I am waiting behind a few geniuses who are trying to make their score from $2.60............

Has anyone read Dick Jerardi's views on this subject? He's a writer back east who wrote a really funny article a year or two ago on this subject. It's very funny, and worth looking up.

The tax argument is a good one, and I hear you on that, but I still feel the .10 superfecta is gratuitous and unnecessary. Just my opinion, of course, and you will share mine if you ever are stuck behind a guy trying to make 4,000 different combos from his $4.90 voucher while you are trying to catch the 3rd race at Aqueduct.

[Robert Fischer]

It is what it is.

If you play the game you should know the dynamics of the different available wagers, and understand what changing something like "minimum bet" does to these dynamics.

Personally I love the .10 on the synthetic-turf tracks and on the mid level tracks.
I prefer not to see the .10 at racing's better tracks.
I am strongly opposed to the .10 super on racing's biggest days.

[Dodgersv]

New poster here......

I have definite feelings on this subject. The .10 superfecta is a nightmare, especially when you are trying to get a bet in on a race at a simulcast facility somewhere. The closest track to me is Los Alamitos, so there are times when I am waiting behind a few geniuses who are trying to make their score from $2.60............

Has anyone read Dick Jerardi's views on this subject? He's a writer back east who wrote a really funny article a year or two ago on this subject. It's very funny, and worth looking up.

The tax argument is a good one, and I hear you on that, but I still feel the .10 superfecta is gratuitous and unnecessary. Just my opinion, of course, and you will share mine if you ever are stuck behind a guy trying to make 4,000 different combos from his $4.90 voucher while you are trying to catch the 3rd race at Aqueduct.

Softshoe... I was at Los Al on Friday to bet on the BC. It seems these 10 cent superfecta guys are everywhere there. If I had the chance... I'd propose that these guys get their own dedicated machines. It's an outrage. By the way, I'm not the only guy who agrees with this there at Los Al.

[eastie]

Do y'all suppose the $2 super players pitched the same fit when the $1 wager became available?

NO WAY ! the dime super is ruining everything for me. the dollar super gives you shot without costing you an arm and a leg, but the dime lets any idiot hit them by using longshots they couldn't handicap if their lives depended on it. The dime super is the devil.

[alysheba88]

And I predict that if War Pass wins at 7/5, you're still going to say "I told you so!" when the super doesn't pay 23k

Exactly. That is the point I have tried to make. Pay offs are not in a vaccum here. I mean the odds of the horses finishing 1-2-3-4 are just a little bit of a factor right? Just a little? :)

[stu]

Would one of the wise old-timers describe how the players reacted when the minimum exacta wager went from $5 to $2? Is it similiar to this discussion?

[ArlJim78]

NO WAY ! the dime super is ruining everything for me. the dollar super gives you shot without costing you an arm and a leg, but the dime lets any idiot hit them by using longshots they couldn't handicap if their lives depended on it. The dime super is the devil.
I really don't believe this to be the case. the idiots playing the dime supers without handicapping may occaisonally it something big, but most times they are losers because if you play like this and just play a very wide ticket without handicapping, the same thing will happen to you if you played any othr wager irresponsibly. you'll hit a few nice ones but you won't be around very long because you will more often be a loser and many of the wins will result in a breakeven scenario or an actual loss. I welcome dumb money into the pool.

lowering the minimum play to a dime doesn't make anyone a better capper, or ensure that you are going to make money.

i love the dime supers, the best gimmick improvememt in many years.

[advancedcapper]

It is the same.

Just because there are more DIMES in the pool, it doesn't mean that there is a lower percentage payout. Have you ever seen the Kentucky Derby odds on early day one when the pool has a half million or so? They are almost exactly the same at post time when the pool has a gagillion in it. Same theory here. Adding more dimes will still cause the pools to pay out the same percentage-wise money than if they didn't have those dimes in the pool. Odds are odds. Just a few more small winners compared to the extra money in the pool. Are you suggesting that the people betting dimes will have more of a winning bet chance than the people betting dollars? NO WAY!

In honestly, I think the dimes are more used as back-up bets by the big gamblers and regular bets by the smaller gamblers and may even cause slightly higher payouts. But to dilute the average payout? NO WAY.

[Softshoesureshot]

Dodgersv: The proliferation of the .10 superfecta player at the Los Al simulcast facility is a growing problem. These guys can make $7.60 last a freaking week or more...I should introduce them to my wife, who spends money like she is possessed.

What's next, penny exactas? WTF? Let's restore some dignity to this sport and get rid of the dime super players. Otherwise, we will all be standing in line someday behind some guy calling out 400,000 different penny exacta combos in a 12 horse field.

[Quesmark]

It is the same.

Just because there are more DIMES in the pool, it doesn't mean that there is a lower percentage payout. Have you ever seen the Kentucky Derby odds on early day one when the pool has a half million or so? They are almost exactly the same at post time when the pool has a gagillion in it. Same theory here. Adding more dimes will still cause the pools to pay out the same percentage-wise money than if they didn't have those dimes in the pool. Odds are odds. Just a few more small winners compared to the extra money in the pool. Are you suggesting that the people betting dimes will have more of a winning bet chance than the people betting dollars? NO WAY!

In honestly, I think the dimes are more used as back-up bets by the big gamblers and regular bets by the smaller gamblers and may even cause slightly higher payouts. But to dilute the average payout? NO WAY.

advanced capper,
Hard to see that the payoffs would be the same putting the .10 factor into the superfecta vs say a $1.00 minimum.
With dimes there's a scattershot approach taken by lots of players [eg.key 1 on top of 8,1x8x7x6=336x.10= a $33.60 ticket],resulting in many winners hitting the # that wouldn't have done so with a narrower spread on $1.permutations.The .10 also allows average players to go deeper on their tickets adding #'s in the 3/4 hole.
The added money bet in the super pools isn't reflected on the payoff line,as it's first subjected to what's usually a 20% or more take ,and then unless there is a completely flukey unexpected result[eg. 1st 2 favorite's out with 2,3 longest shots on top],the post takeout pool gets divided by plenty more winners.
Dime supers allow many players, who know their stuff enough to know what combos are live, to compete that couldn't do so with a $1.unit.The percentage of winners at a dime is much higher than at $1.
With $1. the smaller tickets were generally contributing money to the pool as they rarely could cover the combinations necessary to be regular winners,so someone with an opinion could step up,back it ,and if right get a premium return.Not anymore.

The Kentucky Derby odds represent win betting with a steady $2. unit,and most people won't spread too far in placing win bets,there wouldn't be as much change expected in the pool day to day.There's lots of public information on that particular race,and once sentiment is formed stays steady.

[advancedcapper]

You couldn't be more wrong my friend. The odds are the odds. If more people play the 0.10 cent supers it puts more money into the pools and gets divided. You think the 10 cent supers hit at a higher rate than the $1 ones? NO WAY! If anything, they hit at a LOWER rate because for 'ONLY A DIME" as your theory goes, people would load up and "waste" combinations.

Do you honestly think that the 10 cent players are going to use the combinations that have a better chance to hit? If that were the case, PLEASE let me in on the secret so my $5 & $10 bets can make me millions a day.

If you bet using the reasoning you use on this subject, I have no problem booking your bets.

Play $30 in supers at 0.10 cent a pop on every race available and watch your profits go bye-bye. Did you know that almost 30% of all 0.10 cent super bets result in a LOSING play on the winning side? How many times have you hit a super for a $1 or $2 and LOST money on the race? I never did, to my memory. The people who play $30 in 0.10 cent supers need to hit a $600 super to break even. Not the recipe for winning at the track.

Take my advice. Don't worry, as the 0.10 cent players are making the pools better at the very least.

[advancedcapper]

The unit for your Ky Derby theory is wrong, as some people put $2, some people put $20 and some put $500. What is the difference in putting 0.10 cents or $5 on a super. It is no different than putting $20 on one horse and $5 on another to back it up.

ac

[Bruddah]

Why do you think Casinos have so many small denominational bets? Penny, nickle, dime or quarter, all of those small bets add up to Dollars $$$. Casinos learned the small bets payed the over head, which left more Profit $$$. Remeber, the HOUSE is getting the same percentage cut. An additional benefit is getting every level of player into ACTION = CHURN = PROFIT. :ThmbUp:

[advancedcapper]

You are 100% correct. But more oney doen't mean smaller payouts. Theoretically, more bets equals more money in the pool, equals more money paid out. It should't make the payouts more or less.

The slots pay out 935, on average if you put in a nickle or a $5 bill.

The same can be said for the supers. If there is $1,000,000 in the pool in dollars and up bets and one winner hits, the payout is $1,000,000 minus the take. If they allow 0.10 cent bets and another million is bet, than there should be 2 winners at $1,000,000 per ticket, minus the takeout. The other guy is suggesting that the 0.10 cebt bettors will dilute the pool with more plays. Percentages are percentages. They will play the same tickets, on average as the regular bettor. To assume the 0,10 bettors will play the lessor combinatins is wrong, as when the "real" combos come in, the payoffs will be higher. It all equals out.

ac

[Quesmark]

You are 100% correct. But more oney doen't mean smaller payouts. Theoretically, more bets equals more money in the pool, equals more money paid out. It should't make the payouts more or less.

The slots pay out 935, on average if you put in a nickle or a $5 bill.

The same can be said for the supers. If there is $1,000,000 in the pool in dollars and up bets and one winner hits, the payout is $1,000,000 minus the take. If they allow 0.10 cent bets and another million is bet, than there should be 2 winners at $1,000,000 per ticket, minus the takeout. The other guy is suggesting that the 0.10 cebt bettors will dilute the pool with more plays. Percentages are percentages. They will play the same tickets, on average as the regular bettor. To assume the 0,10 bettors will play the lessor combinatins is wrong, as when the "real" combos come in, the payoffs will be higher. It all equals out.

ac

First the win odds on the "tote board" for the Kentucky Derby or any other race are based on a $2. unit bet,whether there's $100. or $100,000.00 in total money bet,if someone bet $20 and the winner pays $7.00 that is 5/2 on the tote,and the payout is a multiple of that[Horseplaying 101].

In $1 super pools most small tickets players are tossing money into the void,with slim hopes of cashing a ticket.They won't be able to cover many possibilities like a player with a big stack who has a big edge.
Now .10 super pools change the dynamic as lets say some one with a budget of $24. can play a 2x7x7x7 ticket covering 240 combinations,at the $1. level this same participant needs $240. for that or has to severely reduce the ticket which reduces the chances of cashing.
With lots of bettors playing lots of permutations,no matter what their selection process is,there will inevitably be lots more winners than when fewer bettors bet more money.In economics as more units of something are produced the cost per unit generally goes down

[Dodgersv]

Okay... enough is enough. I been playing and watching superfecta payouts for the last 5 years. Everyone keeps debating point, but in general,I know there has been a drop in payouts. When you sum up both sides of the argument as in this thread, each side has a point. But ultimately payouts have dropped!!! This is all the empirical evidence I need.

[Pell Mell]

The size of the bet has less to do with the size of the payoff where as the size of the field has a lot to do with the size of the payoff.:confused:

[eastie]

I really don't believe this to be the case. the idiots playing the dime supers without handicapping may occaisonally it something big, but most times they are losers because if you play like this and just play a very wide ticket without handicapping, the same thing will happen to you if you played any othr wager irresponsibly. you'll hit a few nice ones but you won't be around very long because you will more often be a loser and many of the wins will result in a breakeven scenario or an actual loss. I welcome dumb money into the pool.

lowering the minimum play to a dime doesn't make anyone a better capper, or ensure that you are going to make money.

i love the dime supers, the best gimmick improvememt in many years.

another pick 4 player heard from....any true super player would disagree

[advancedcapper]

A dollar or a dime, the odds are the odds. There has to be 10 dime winners for every dollar. You mean to tell me that the $240 guy you speak of CAN't play the whole ticket, so he buys the $24 version instead? There would still have to be 10 of those guys to equal the dollar that someone else is shoving through the windows. If anything, the odds go UP, as the dime bettors WASTE money on frivolous combinations because, hey, it's only $3 for those thirty tix.

In essence, you are saying that the dime bettors are SMARTER and hitting MORE supers than the dollar bettors. This would have to be right, because you said those dimes are DROPPING the payoffs, right. I should reduce my $5 super wheels to make more profit??? Naaaaa, I'll stick to the $10,000 scores over the $500 scores any day.

I won't debate that there are more winning tickets, but the odds are generally the same. Sure, every once n a while a string of longshots come in, but very very few and far between when a dime bettor collects the entire pool.

ac

[ArlJim78]

another pick 4 player heard from....any true super player would disagree
i don't know what you consider the threshold for becoming a "true super player". I can say for my own part I play the super much more so than pick 4's. and FYI, I play a LOT of supers. i love the flexability to take it in increments of 10 or 20 or 30 or 40 cent, etc, depending on the field size, my confidence, etc.
you've got your facts all wrong. read advancecappers's posts, he can make the case better than I can. you should welcome anyone that is playing, single/all/all/all type tickets. they might catch a big one here and there but most of the time when they hit they are losers.

[Bruddah]

1. If payoffs are smaller, they are for many reasons, or a primary reason which is presently still speculative.

2. Payoff sizes and variations are of a main concern, mostly to a small segment of informed players. Most players are oblivious to payoff or pool variances.

3.The "HOUSE" gives a rats a__ because they have found a way to include all levels of players in the Pools, which drives "CHURN", which drives PROFITS.

4. The "HOUSE" controls the game. Things ain't gonna change, unless you effect de CHOINS.

5. Effect de Choins and you get the "HOUSES" attention.

Conclusion: The "HOUSE" don't give a rats a__! We are all a bunch of Don Quixote's chasing windmills. :bang: :D

[advancedcapper]

Everything you said is true, except I stopped chasing windmills long ago.

As for the payouts............They are the same. It doesn't matter if it is a dime or a $1 or $50. The payouts are constant. I remember reading a long time ago where it doesn't and didn't make a difference, but if I stated that, I would just be told that they lied. And.................the jockeys cheat, and the trainers drug horses and it is all fixed. Blah, blah, blah. What I don't understand is how people can make these comments AND STILL BET!! LOL.

ac

[eastie]

QUOTE=ArlJim78]i don't know what you consider the threshold for becoming a "true super player". I can say for my own part I play the super much more so than pick 4's. and FYI, I play a LOT of supers. i love the flexability to take it in increments of 10 or 20 or 30 or 40 cent, etc, depending on the field size, my confidence, etc.
you've got your facts all wrong. read advancecappers's posts, he can make the case better than I can. you should welcome anyone that is playing, single/all/all/all type tickets. they might catch a big one here and there but most of the time when they hit they are losers.[/QUOTE]

I know that I don't hit all of the alls that I used to hit before the dime super came along. Since I concentrate on small tracks, where the competition is easier, i used to hit supers where the alls paid great and usually had them 3 or 4 times. It was a big part of my huge success. people couldn't afford to take 20-1 shots on top for dollars. Now thay can box 6 for a dime and hit them outright. a ton of supers at suffolk have paid thousands for a 10 cent ticket that was the only live ticket. The dime super is forcing me out of the pools.

[Softshoesureshot]

The dime super is a bigger threat to racing than the offshore books. For the love of God, end this nightmare now, and stop before it's too late.

I can hardly wait for Nickel Daily Doubles, or Penny Exactas.

That will be awesome.

I have to go now, I have a windmill at Aqueduct to chase.

[advancedcapper]

If you can't afford to play "all" the combos you think you need to win, you should downgrade to tri's. This is the difference between a handicapper and a very good handicapper. It isn't the dimes that kill the players, it is there ego to QUOTE> "chase a windmill", as I heard it put. Play to your level of handicapping ability.

ac

[ArlJim78]

QUOTE=ArlJim78]i don't know what you consider the threshold for becoming a "true super player". I can say for my own part I play the super much more so than pick 4's. and FYI, I play a LOT of supers. i love the flexability to take it in increments of 10 or 20 or 30 or 40 cent, etc, depending on the field size, my confidence, etc.
you've got your facts all wrong. read advancecappers's posts, he can make the case better than I can. you should welcome anyone that is playing, single/all/all/all type tickets. they might catch a big one here and there but most of the time when they hit they are losers.

I know that I don't hit all of the alls that I used to hit before the dime super came along. Since I concentrate on small tracks, where the competition is easier, i used to hit supers where the alls paid great and usually had them 3 or 4 times. It was a big part of my huge success. people couldn't afford to take 20-1 shots on top for dollars. Now thay can box 6 for a dime and hit them outright. a ton of supers at suffolk have paid thousands for a 10 cent ticket that was the only live ticket. The dime super is forcing me out of the pools.[/QUOTE]
i guess I can't relate to this because i only play into big pools. example Keeneland and SoCal tracks and also Arlington because even with dime supers people seem to play in predictable ways ways. bigger rewards can be had when you find the 20-1 that most have over looked. Also I focus my plays on large fields. i avoid places like suffolk. its hard for me anyway to come up with big payoff when the pool is $15,000 and it 7-8 horse field. unless the field comes in almost completely inverted, and even if it does the reward is not going to be enough. the field size is small enough that its within range of many more people to at least have a dimes worth of it. i still think you can beat the average players even at a place like Suffolk but you may have to tighten up your plays accordingly and play only on stronger opinions.

i prefer going into a chaotic 12-14 horse field at SoCal, with an opinion on a 15/1-20/1 horse that I feel strongly will be on the ticket (preferably combined with vulnerable favorite), and go after a pool that is ten times larger. in this case you don't have to worry very much about guys playing six horse box plays.

[advancedcapper]

So you agree that the dime supers are ok to play, but are costing you money? Trust me. There is the same amount of wagering on the dime horses as the dollar horses as the five diollar horses. And the pools are what they are.

ac

[eastie]

people may be willing to spend a dime with a 30-1 shot on top, but if they have to spend a buck per combo they will bet flat to make sure thay get paid. If you love a horse at 30-1 are you gonna take him on top in supers with 5 horses for $60 bucks or are you gonna bet 60 win and take the $1800. Get it now ?

[advancedcapper]

So people now think differently when they play dimes? Or do they think differently because the horse is 30-1? Either way, I love to be in the pool when people think "differently" because of the odds. People bet the same every race, every time.

Do younot remember, or are you too young to remember when simucasting had separate pools. The odds were ALMOST IDENTICAL at each track. But in this case, the odds change and people bet differently? If they take the win odds, it doesn't affect the super payouts. I'm not trying to be a hard nose, but I can't buy the theories on this subject.

Besides, 6 minutes to profit at CD. I took the win odds and not the wheel. And I did play a super. 2-a-6-5 2-a-6-3. (no dime bets...lol)

ac

[eastie]

I'm 45 but started going to track when I was 11 and can remember when you had to go the fast tellers if you were boxing 4 in tri's cause it was 24 tickets they had to punch. If you have a $60 winner and get nothing cause you missed the super, you'll hate yourself for a week.

[advancedcapper]

And the best part of those days...................Coming home with DRF ink all over your hands! LOL

[Valuist]

Nobody should bet supers with bigger than dime tickets. If you want bigger, just bet dime tickets and hit "repeat". How can anybody criticize a legal way to avoid the taxman?

I think the dumbest thing in racing was when Southern California tracks had $5 minimums on exactas, which they didn't even offer every race. How are you going to get new players to bet with minimums like that? As for the P6, I will not bother with it at $2/ticket and I know many others who feel the same way.

[advancedcapper]

My online site doesn't allow 0.10 tix. I can only do them at the track, but very rarely do. VERY RARELY. I am the king of the "REPEAT" button though! LOL.

Especially in tri's and supers.

ac

[Zman179]

I think the dumbest thing in racing was when Southern California tracks had $5 minimums on exactas, which they didn't even offer every race. How are you going to get new players to bet with minimums like that? As for the P6, I will not bother with it at $2/ticket and I know many others who feel the same way.

That was because back then, they still believed in the puritanistic WPS ideal. I seem to remember the track executive saying one time that, "since the exactas are harder to hit, we want to make it more expensive to play. By playing WPS, it is cheaper and easier to hit." In other words, they hoped to create more churn by keeping WPS levels down and exacta levels high. Seemed hypocritical when they offered a $2 pick 6 and win pick 9 at the same time.

Having been an everyday SA fan back in the late 80's I still remember the exotic structure:
1) DD, Pick 9
2) None
3) $5 Exacta
4) $2 Pick 6
5) $5 Exacta
6) $3 Daily Triple (aka Pick 3)
7) $5 Exacta
8) None
9) $5 Exacta with $3 Exacta Box (minimum three horses).

How archaic.

[Zman179]

So people now think differently when they play dimes? Or do they think differently because the horse is 30-1? Either way, I love to be in the pool when people think "differently" because of the odds. People bet the same every race, every time.



That's no longer the case. If you're going to bet a 30/1 shot on top in a super, then it is more cost effective over the long run to reduce the base wager amount. Reason being that when before $1 could take down half a pool, now maybe 40¢ or 50¢ can do it. By still making $1 super wagers on longshots into a pool that offers 10¢ increments, you'll wind up betting against yourself. Don't forget that the "all" factor (i.e. no tickets selecting all four positions) is quasi-eliminated in a dime pool, so it takes a retinkering of strategy to play in dime pools.

[Zman179]

Why do you think Casinos have so many small denominational bets? Penny, nickle, dime or quarter, all of those small bets add up to Dollars $$$. Casinos learned the small bets payed the over head, which left more Profit $$$. Remeber, the HOUSE is getting the same percentage cut. An additional benefit is getting every level of player into ACTION = CHURN = PROFIT. :ThmbUp:

Actually, the casinos lowered the denominations, but made it up by raising the amount of coins needed to play the maximum bet, which any slot player will tell you is mandatory if you want to hit a jackpot. A quarter slot might have a maximum 75¢ bet whereas a penny slot will have a 90¢ max. You think it's cheaper, but it really isn't, and this is where the casinos prey on the gullibility of their customers.

[advancedcapper]

Back in the 80's, the computer systems couldn't handle anything too tough. I like the bets now, but I would love the old PERFECTA, where you hit and exacta and turned it in for some money and another exacta ticket on the next race and collected lots more after hitting two in a row. Old Libery Bell park had them and I used to make some nice cash on them.

ac

[Robert Fischer]

a 30-1 shot on top is going to pay nice in a super. No matter what.

It's the times when the top 4 or 5 Public choices make up the trifecta, and the 8th choice runs 4th that the dime players take the old dollar pools and split them up 3 ways.

Or when the big fan-favorite wins and 2 of the top 3 come in second and 4th , and in the Third-Slot is that 6th choice that you handicapped your butt off as belonging with the top 3, and you are not rewarded above and beyond the common player for that skill...



Then again you the dime allows you to play some wide open cheap synthetic race with 12 horses and maybe you just key one of them to pick up a payout on a race you would never have invested 1K into.


What should be mind blowing to those who understand the dynamics of the current market, is that even with the decreased value in conventional superfecta plays there is still some value. There is still some value in keying one or two and spreading around! Just a short while ago, there was a lot of money on the table for any quality player willing/able to put anywhere from $400-2000 into a superfecta. Yes there will be further depreciation as the market becomes even more efficient. Hopefully we will get one or two more Breeders Cups before the rest of the betting public all has the "Gems" in their third slot.

[advancedcapper]

The dime isn't killing the prices, it is in reality, just adding more money into the pool. I doubt very much that poeple play only the longshot configurations to put longshots into play.

I am a big super fecta player and had a nice one the other day. The odds were, 7/2....4/5....116-1....18-1 (give or take). HAd someone hit it for a dime, It wouldn't have taken that much away from me.

ac

[BombsAway Bob]

-an excerpt of Steve Crist's "CristBlog"(11/4/07)- Re:Breeders Cup pools
*The one obvious growth area on the betting menu is superfectas. Total eight-race super handle was virtually identical to last year's in the face of the 18 percent decline, and supers rose from 7.4 percent to 9.1 percent of total handle, a 22 percent gain. Trifecta betting, meanwhile, was down 27 percent year over year, suggesting a migration from tris to supers that can be largely attributed to 10-cent minimums on supers in most markets (Florida remains a sore-thumb exception.)
--After Aqueduct cancelled Saturday, I turned my attention elsewhere and did a pretty good job of lousing up the day's exotics, going 3-for-4 in the Churchill and Oak Tree late pick-fours and 5-for-6 on the Greyhound Night of Stars pick-six. But I did get most of the way out thanks to a "superfecta saver" I tried out on the Chilukki Stakes at Churchill, a very cheap hedge you might want to consider.

After Istan walloped Sun King in the Ack Ack, I was alive only to my two contrary picks in the Chilukki, High Heels (#3) and Change Up (#4), both at 7-1. I thought both of them would run well, I had no idea why Windy was being pounded down to 8-5, and I didn't want to walk away empty-handed if both of my horses hit the board without winning. For a mere $18 per 10-cent super unit, I was able to buy some "insanity insurance" against such an outcome with the following play:

10-cent super: all/34/34/all = 60 combos = $6
10-cent super: all/34/all/34 = 60 combos = $6
10-cent super: all/all/34/34 = 60 combos = $6

Even though the race was won by ML favorite Rolling Sea ($10.00), 22-1 My Chickadee snuck in for third, splitting High Heels (2nd) and Change Up (4th). The $2 super paid $4,073, a return of $203.65 for every $18 invested.:lol:

[Robert Fischer]

-an excerpt of Steve Crist's "CristBlog"(11/4/07)- Re:Breeders Cup pools

Chilukki


High Heels (#3) and Change Up (#4), both at 7-1. I thought both of them would run well, I had no idea why Windy was being pounded down to 8-5, and I didn't want to walk away empty-handed if both of my horses hit the board without winning. For a mere $18 per 10-cent super unit, I was able to buy some "insanity insurance" against such an outcome with the following play:

10-cent super: all/34/34/all = 60 combos = $6
10-cent super: all/34/all/34 = 60 combos = $6
10-cent super: all/all/34/34 = 60 combos = $6

Even though the race was won by ML favorite Rolling Sea ($10.00), 22-1 My Chickadee snuck in for third, splitting High Heels (2nd) and Change Up (4th). The $2 super paid $4,073, a return of $203.65 for every $18 invested.:lol:


it was a good example of a dime saver (vulnerable fav, short enough to cover, strong opinion that 2 horses will both finish top4...)

...this particular race is not a prime example of the type that the 10Cent Super generally devalues.
Reason being that the "cheap" dime super player would have done something like 2favorites/1234/bothLongshots/1234 =$2.40
and 2favorites/1234/1234/bothLongshots =$2.40
however such a strategy would miss High Heels and/or Change Up who were narrowly choices 5,6.

2favorites/123456/ keying the 2 longshots 3rd and 4th next to 123456 would cost $16. A middle range wager, but probably not an extremely popular one among the middle-range betting public.

In other words, most of the cheaper and moderate approaches would not have devalued the pool in this specific example. The added money in the pool would offset the guys like Crist who lucked into savers, or the guys who keyed My Chickadee 3rd and 4th in dimes, or even those who hated the favorite and keyed ALL in the 3rd and 4th slot.

However had the race come in
Windy/RollingSea/Chickadee/LadyBelsara (1/2/Longshot/3)
We would have seen a devalued superfecta.

[advancedcapper]

Because Steve Crist did a dumb thing and lucked into a superfecta, it is devaluing the whole system? I assume that is what you are inplying, by the little laughing guy at the end.

Here's a reality check for you though............Why not just PLAY ALL STEVE CRIST"S HORSES THEN?

The bottom line is this.........The 0.10 cent supers are only adding money to the pools proportionate to the combinations bet. AND these combos are the same (more or less) as the $1 guy, the $2 guy, or the guy like me who plays anywhere from $3-$50 on a superfecta. Case closed.

If you even think that these people are making the patouts LOWER, simply because they are betting a dine on the superfectas, you are MISSING THE POINT that they have already spent $20 or $50 or $100 on other combinations at BIG MONEY to collect on a dine! I love these people. bEt dollars to hit dimes. No different than the guy who makes a three horse exacta box and collects on a $10 exacta.

I would like to thank you in advance for all those dimes you throw into the pool, which eventually find their way into my pocket to pay the toll to get over the bridge to make those dimes that you throw into the pools, which eventually find their way in to my pocket to pay the toll to get over the bridge to to make those dimes that you throw into the pools, which eventually find their way into my pocket to pay the toll to get over the bridge to make those dimes that you throw into the pools, which eventually find their way in to my pocket to pay the toll to get over the bridge to to make those dimes that you throw into the pools...............


ac

[Zman179]

Trifecta betting, meanwhile, was down 27 percent year over year, suggesting a migration from tris to supers that can be largely attributed to 10-cent minimums on supers in most markets

It is no secret that 10¢ supers cannibalize the trifecta pool.

If you even think that these people are making the patouts LOWER, simply because they are betting a dine on the superfectas, you are MISSING THE POINT that they have already spent $20 or $50 or $100 on other combinations at BIG MONEY to collect on a dine! I love these people. bEt dollars to hit dimes. No different than the guy who makes a three horse exacta box and collects on a $10 exacta.

Chances are that if someone is going to hit a race for 10¢, and only 10¢, then that person probably won't even reach the $20 mark in total bets. At least, that's what I would believe the average would turn out to be.
The only payoffs that would be significantly lowered are those with 3+ longshots in the ticket. In fact, payoff might not be the correct term to use, aggregate split of the pool would be more accurate.

[Dodgersv]

What should be mind blowing to those who understand the dynamics of the current market, is that even with the decreased value in conventional superfecta plays there is still some value. There is still some value in keying one or two and spreading around! Just a short while ago, there was a lot of money on the table for any quality player willing/able to put anywhere from $400-2000 into a superfecta. Yes there will be further depreciation as the market becomes even more efficient. Hopefully we will get one or two more Breeders Cups before the rest of the betting public all has the "Gems" in their third slot.

Robert you my friend are so right. The market was such a valuable opportunity, but due to the efficiency created by affordability these pools will pay less.

[ryesteve]

due to the efficiency created by affordabilityI still fail to see how someone spreading dimes all up and down the board is "efficient" betting. It increases the chances that there will be more winning tickets (hence a lower payoff) when the result is less-than-logical, but this doesn't mean the pools are more "efficient"

[advancedcapper]

What you are saying all evens out. Sure the "three longshot tix" will eat into the payoffs, but the hundreds of thousands dumped into the pools on the other combinations, evens it out to the payoffs being right at par.

Do you honestly suggest that the 0.10 cent players are smarter and hitting more than the $1 players?

ac

[advancedcapper]

More money = smaller payouts.

Think about that.

ac

[Softshoesureshot]

I was at Santa Anita this past Sunday, and having a pretty good day at the windows. So I stroll over to the Gift Shop, where my eyes are immediately drawn to a publication that defies description: .10 superfecta betting guide.

The price was a bit steep, $12, but I mentioned a local radio host's name and got $5 off.....I bought it for a few of my friends who like the wager, as sort of a joke, since they know my disdain for it.

And to think, I could have made 70 bets with each one I bought......:D

[Steve 'StatMan']

Remember, a for a single $2 super winner's price to be cut in half, it takes another $2 super winner. That's the equivilent of 20 dime super winners, to reduce the payoff in half. If there are just one $2.00 winner and a one $0.10 winner, the $2.00 winner's price gets goes from full (20/20ths) down to 20/21sts, a decline of not quite 1/40th. :cool:

Yeah, I know money is money, & no offense, but seriously begruding a dime super winner seems a bit like the guy who pulls a fly out of his beer, shakes it, ording the fly to 'spit it out'. (Hey, the writers are on strike, so I'm trying to help out. Which side am I helping, well, guess all of you get to be the judge.) :D

[First Run]

WOW...DODGERV!! NOW YOU HAVE ALL OF THESE "DIMER PLAYERS" UPSET. IT IS CALLED GAMBLING..NOT THE DIME TOSS AT THE CARNIVALS!

GUYS..I THOUGHT WE WERE IN THIS TO WIN A BIG PAYOFF...LIKE DODGERV STATES -- WE ARE PROBABLY LOOKING AT A MAX. OF 8K. I AM GOING TO BOYCOTT THE 10 CENT SUPERS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS GROUPS LOGIC...BUT I GUESS THIS IS WHAT THE TRACK WANTS...THESE DIMER PLAYERS STILL CHASING A DREAM, BUT NOW WITH LOWER PAYOFFS.

MAYBE WE SHOULD ALL CHANGE TO POKER AND LET THE SPORT DIE...WITH ALL OF THE OLD TIMERS!! ALTHOUGH, WITH THE GROUP ON THIS THREAD...THEY WILL WANT A PENNY ANTE IN THE POKER GAME!!

WAKE UP GUYS...YOU KNOW SOME PEOPLE ARE SPENDING MORE MONEY ON THE 10 CENT SUOERFECTAS THEN THEY WOULD IF THEY JUST PLAYED THE $1 TRIFECTAS OR CONCENTRATED THEIR MONEY ON THE EXACTA. GRANTED I PLAYED 10 CENT SUPERS...BUT ON RACES THAT I PROBABLY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PLAYING..THE RACES WHERE IT IS DIFFICULT TO HANDICAP OR I THINK THERE WILL BE AN UPSET WINNER.

CAN'T REALLY GET OUT OF THIS SPORT SINCE I OWN HORSES...BUT I THINK I AM GOING TO TAKE UP A NEW PASTIME....LET THE SPORT DIE!!!

[advancedcapper]

If anyone was to play the dime supers different from the $1 supers, they are idiots. I always though you played to win.

And PLEASE, don't someone come here and tell me to play "back-up" bets with those dimes. That is the worst thing one can do. That is like boxing an exacta and then backing it up with more horses. You are DILUTING your money, NOT backing it up!!

Tell me how the book reads. I would be very interested in hearing their #1 money making idea on the subject. LOL

ac

[advancedcapper]

A sane, rational thought on the subject.

They almost had me convinced to start sorting those dimes from my change jug!!!

ac

[Zman179]

Remember, a for a single $2 super winner's price to be cut in half, it takes another $2 super winner. That's the equivilent of 20 dime super winners, to reduce the payoff in half. If there are just one $2.00 winner and a one $0.10 winner, the $2.00 winner's price gets goes from full (20/20ths) down to 20/21sts, a decline of not quite 1/40th.

It is extremely rare when a single player takes down an entire super pool with a $2 ticket; a bettor often takes a pool down with a single dollar.
Nonetheless, those tiny little dimes can make a dent in the winnings for a dollar player. Lets take for an example a superfecta pool which, after takeout is extracted, leaves exactly $50,000 to be paid out to winning ticket holders. Obviously if you have the whole thing for a buck, and you hold the only winning ticket, you'll get the whole $50 grand. :)
However, if one other person hits the super for a single dime, the amount of the winnings for that dollar ticket is reduced to $45,454. Two dimes and it becomes $41,666. A 17% cut in the winnings as a result of two extra dimes in the pool. The smaller the amount of the super pool is, the more noticeable the cut becomes.

$40 grand ain't nothing to sneeze at, but it shows how these little lottery dimes can kick a dollar player in the butt.

[Ron]

It is extremely rare when a single player takes down an entire super pool with a $2 ticket; a bettor often takes a pool down with a single dollar.
Nonetheless, those tiny little dimes can make a dent in the winnings for a dollar player. Lets take for an example a superfecta pool which, after takeout is extracted, leaves exactly $50,000 to be paid out to winning ticket holders. Obviously if you have the whole thing for a buck, and you hold the only winning ticket, you'll get the whole $50 grand. :)
However, if one other person hits the super for a single dime, the amount of the winnings for that dollar ticket is reduced to $45,454. Two dimes and it becomes $41,666. A 17% cut in the winnings as a result of two extra dimes in the pool. The smaller the amount of the super pool is, the more noticeable the cut becomes.

$40 grand ain't nothing to sneeze at, but it shows how these little lottery dimes can kick a dollar player in the butt.

Right, but you're missing the point, $30k of the pool may be dime money.

[Zman179]

Right, but you're missing the point, $30k of the pool may be dime money.

It might be dime money, or it might be players playing dimes then hitting the repeat button to avoid the tax man.
There's no question that super pools go up thanks to these dimes. What I'd like to know are the average percentages of these hikes.

[advancedcapper]

You are not comparing apples to apples. Of course in that situation, there is a "situation" that occurs. What about all the other dimes that people use a back-up bets, on bad combinations and the people who invest $15 in dimes and get rewarded $13.00? Believe me, in the long run, the dime bet is adding to the pool slight more than the break even point.

When the studies come out, I'm sure this will be the case. And if someone hits a super that has one winner for a dollar compared to their dime, that doesn't mean that they are "stealing" from the dollar bettor. Come on! I play exacta for $100 sometimes and i don't complain at all the $2 bettors that get cash. Same thing. No matter what one invests, the numbers all average out. the pools are exact and the odds are the same. How can the outcome be any different? If anything, there is MORE money in the pool for when someone hitsthe whole shebang.

ac

[silverbulletday]

I obviously look at the sport much differently than most of the other posters. I know this is an absolute crazy outlandish concept to most of you, but what about the guy that simply wants to go to the track and bet and have (gasp) fun?

Look call me a rookie, a square, insult my thinking and my handicapping, but if myself or someone else enjoys taking a stab at a Super by throwing together a Super ticket with some long shots in it, spends $20 and hopes for the best, so be it.

I see these posts which have ran the gamut on complaints. Someone complaining that dime bettors that are not nearly the handicapper you are will take some of the money out of the pools. Someone complaining about how they may be shut out at the window because someone that is not worthy enough to be at the track and is placing a bet that may take 10 seconds has the audacity to place this bet (note it is not the guys fault that waited too long to get to the window, its the guys fault that is making a bet) Sure I get pissed when someone is handicapping at the window or maybe someone that does not know what they are doing, but because he is playing a dime Super? :confused: You've got to be kidding me. Should I also be mad if a "Serious Handicapper" was playing the same wager but for a dollar or playing a pick 6?

I will freely admit I am sure I am not the astute handicapper as probably anyone on this board. But you know what, I love handicapping. I think it is fun. I love getting a racing form and making selections and trying to pick winners. That’s why I go to the track, because I enjoy the process. Sure I like to win money, but it seems as if 90% of this Board is so consumed with the thought that someone could be cutting in to "your" pool by making wagers the track offers, but you feel are only for less experienced handicappers who simply rely on luck. So what, get over it. I can picture a lot of the people making these comments and I picture the rude, arrogant degenerate who is always at the OTB, always has a hard luck story to tell and is risking their mortgage payment on a $25,000 claiming event for non-winners of 3 lifetime at River Downs.

You are why horseracing is in the position it is today. Quite being so bitter and longing for the good ol days when Truman was in office, a coke was still cola and a joint was a bad place to be. I probably won't win as much money as the pros here on this forum, but I won’t go through my life bellyaching and complaining about a new wager being offered that may or may not cut the size of pools. I will go through life, enjoying this game, trying to learn more about it and having fun in the process. I am sure I will have people lining up to bash me and that’s fine, I simply don't care and did not post this to start a back and forth barb session so have at it if you like. Instead of being defensive, though, I would encourage you to take some of this rant to heart.

Enjoy the races.

[advancedcapper]

Everything you said is true, but who can afford to go to the track, as you say and just throw numbers together and hope for the best? And like it?

That is like the guy who shoots herion or smokes pot or likes to slice their wrist with a razor blade. I imagine it is fun when you do it, but not productive, as I've never been one to take a risk without looking into it first.

If you are going to risk anything in life, most importantly money.......Remember this.

The key to any successful venture is wise planning.

Hence, these discussions. As for the good old days. I love 'em and wish racing never changed over the years.

ac

[BombsAway Bob]

PULLLEAZE! I do not know a SINGLE PERSON who went the track the first few times who said; "HOW AM I GOING TO MAKE A WISE INVESTMENT TODAY?"
You go, have a couple beers & a bite to eat, look at the cute gals & hope to make your money back!
It's usually only AFTER you've played a little while that you realize;
"WOW, if I want to keep playing this game, I've got to sharpen my handicapping skills!"- Bob

[advancedcapper]

I said the everyday player.

ac

ps.....Just hit the 6th race super at Crc. Giddie-up!

[BombsAway Bob]

I said the everyday player.

ac

ps.....Just hit the 6th race super at Crc. Giddie-up!
NICE SCORE:jump: ! Sorry, I didn't see 'everyday player' in your post that I responded to!...Peace,Bob www.myspace.com/bobgrant3 (http://www.myspace.com/bobgrant3)

[advancedcapper]

No problem.

7th at Calder. Keyed a 5/2 and 3/5 1st and 2nd and the super came back $450. Two huge frontrunners went 1-2 all the way around and three closers i played ran 3-4-5. I wish it were a superfecta+1 bet. LOL.

How does 5/2...3/5...18-1...7-1 pay $450 in a eight horse race with two horses that were COMPLETE throw-outs? I think the tri was $75. Go figure.

ac