PDA

View Full Version : BC Pick 6 fails to reach $3,000,000 guarantee


Vinman
10-29-2008, 08:57 AM
Article in DRF said the BC Pick 6 handle was just under 2.9 MIL, first time BC had to dig into its pocket to make the guaranteed minimum.

Having a race in the P6 without a long history such as the BC Juvenile Turf certainly didn't help, nor did the challege of the new Pro-Ride surface, but I think also that many folks are finally growing tired of forking over a chunk of their bankroll for a wager that in recent years has proven next to impossible to hit. This year's 55K payoff was the first "haveable" one in quite some time.

I was fortunate to hit the 45K BC P6 in 2000 on a group wager of $17,988, but haven't played it since losing in 2003 on a group wager of over 25K. Action This Day's win that year the last straw, as was Graham Stone's taking the pool on an $8 bet....after he changed on of his selections at the last moment. The only way I would ever play the BC Pick 6 again is if they finally remove the mandatory withholding on payoffs exceeding $5,000 for a deuce.

In the meantime I'm going to see what I can do to persuade Ken Kirchner, who advises BC on their wagering menu, to put in a $1.00 Pick 5 on the last 5 races, a wager that Oak Tree has been offering on their meet for at least the last two years. I succesfully lobbied Ken to retain the 50 cent Pick 5 that Monmouth offers during their meet for last year's BC. This year it was gone.

Aside from a $1.00 Pick 5, I'd like to see Rolling Doubles and the Place Pick All added to the BC Menu on both days.

If the BC Pick 6 minimum were reduced to $1.00, would you play it? If not, why not?

What about a $1.00 Pick 5?.....or would you rather have a 50 cent Pick 5?

If you could add any wager to the BC Menu, which one(s) would it be?

Vinman

rrbauer
10-29-2008, 09:27 AM
The SMALLEST P3-pool on BC Friday was over $178K and on BC Saturday was over $290K Those pools provided a steady parade of overlaid payoffs for a buck that were possible to enter and hit without risking megabucks. And, you get to pick and choose from those 3-race sets those that best fit your personal expertise as well as leveraging some single races into three different plays.

I do regularly play the 50-cent P5's (and some $1 P4's) at Monmouth on weekends but primarily because the P3 Pools there are small and the occasional carryover in the P4/P5 pools adds some value while not attracting "syndicate-type" money. Chasing the P6 and P4 (and P5 for that matter) pools on BC days is like looking for gold when you're in a silver (P3) mine.

DanG
10-29-2008, 09:36 AM
This won’t be popular…

People ask why the $2 minimum on the P6…why not $1 or a .10 cent version? You would virtually kill the golden carryover goose that So Cal (and lately NY) is enjoying.

When the payout is forced out (like Sat-BC) and the carryover is no longer an issue an argument can be made to allow smaller denominations. I don’t happen to agree because such a small % of the players have contributed a disproportionate % of the pool. It’s not quite a level playing field when a group is stuck for 10k over two days and then the potential coverage and exposure is completely altered.

If one option could be offered in a dream scenario I would vote for exchange betting. :jump: Take your same obscene rake if you must but let players fund accounts and post odds like a civilized society of adults should be allowed to do!

Oh yeah…there is really only one thing we can all agree on…No more ‘Valponi fix-6 fiasco’s!!! :mad:

facorsig
10-29-2008, 09:54 AM
I noticed the pool on Saturday was short of the mark and was surprised I didn't see reference on PA any sooner. Frankly, these races are too competitive to be throwing a lot of money into multi-win exotics. I would rather try my luck on cheap, broken down claimers at FL.

I pretty much stopped playing the superfecta when the dimes arrived and reducing the minimum for P6 would be the end of the wager's legacy of large payoffs. For that matter, I think we should bring back $5 exactas.

rrbauer
10-29-2008, 10:38 AM
I noticed the pool on Saturday was short of the mark and was surprised I didn't see reference on PA any sooner. Frankly, these races are too competitive to be throwing a lot of money into multi-win exotics. I would rather try my luck on cheap, broken down claimers at FL.

I pretty much stopped playing the superfecta when the dimes arrived and reducing the minimum for P6 would be the end of the wager's legacy of large payoffs. For that matter, I think we should bring back $5 exactas.

The "large payoff" P6's are large because nobody is hitting them. If nobody is hitting them then IMO they are like playing the lottery and I refuse to play the lottery!

DeanT
10-29-2008, 12:32 PM
I think people are tired of getting their head kicked in with these things. They are too hard for the average guy. The BC one, imo, was brutal and I never for a moment thought of even spending $12.

Maybe people are starting to follow some advice about hit rates too.

HANA had a post from a professional gambler up on their blog about multi legs. One sec......

http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2008/09/handicapping-multi-leg-wagers.html

We have had a few comments from players saying they don't like them because they are made so tough with tracks scheduling hard to handicap races in them to grow the carry over. I think people are getting smart.

Having said that I was still surprised that it did not hit 3m.

Light
10-29-2008, 01:09 PM
Most people would be happy to catch one winner from those 15 horse fields. The idea of catching 6 out of 6 in very competitive large fields,with some serious,but unknown horses from overseas is a joke. Look at those Bris dudes who put $90k into it and were out in the 1st leg with most of the field covered in the first leg. That bet needs to go down to a dime.It's harder to catch than the super,and they have dime supers. Dime supers havent hurt payouts or handle. Ten cent bets should be the norm for all exotic bets,especially this one.