Pick 3 pools at Lone Star

[so.cal.fan]

Attention, all you detectives here:

June 29 Grand Praire, Texas

Race 6........winner paid $9.80
Race 7.........winner paid $43.20 (that's fourty three twenty)
Race 8........winner paid $21.60

Pick Three paid $76.20 (that's seventy six dollars and twenty cents, just so no one thinks it's a typo).

Anyone who thinks this is odd......check these pools out and payoffs.

Now, I know it was a small pool (or so they say), but unless these 30 some odd winning tickets were mostly purchased from Lone Star.........something is not kosher here.

Lone Star needs to tell us where those tickets were bought?
If they were from Lewiston, Maine...............<sigh>

:confused: :confused: :confused:

[azibuck]

They do look totally out of whack with the win payoffs.

Furthermore, the Pick 3 completing the 9th (with an $8 winner) was over $4,000. The Pick 3 from races 1-2-3, with two heavy chalks, was 94 bucks.

[so.cal.fan]

Wasn't there a horse bet way down after the wire a week or two ago at Lone Star?
Lone Star owes their fans (including me) an explaination.:mad:


Just read the post about Arlington.....that must have been the bet down I was thinking of......still.......Lone Star.....what's going on?

[Holy Bull]

All the weird payoffs stem from the 7th race..was a maiden race where the horse did pay $40 to win but was hammered in every other pool. The quinella was $13, the pick 3s on that and the next were off, the exacta paid only $63 with a $40 winner on top, and the tri and super paid small too. Looks to me like a case of the connections getting down on their horse hard but being ignorant about pool size and over hitting the p3 pools.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Originally posted by Holy Bull
Looks to me like a case of the connections getting down on their horse hard but being ignorant about pool size and over hitting the p3 pools.

I think it was TVG's own Les Onaka that got the goods on this one.:D

[Valuist]

When I first saw this thread I thought there was a missprint or maybe it was a 2 out of 3 that paid $70 and change. The $70 was legit. Did you see how small that Pic 3 pool was? Under $4000. Tracks should not roll Pic 3s if they can't get at least $10K in each Pic 3.....maybe Arlington will listen on that one.

[ranchwest]

I can see this one being peculiar. Or....

LS also has a lot of heavy hitters. One of them could have loaded up on this combo. I've seen people buy $30 to $50 exotics (each combination), $400 and more to a ticket, almost every race at LS. My guess is LS has a larger percentage of heavy hitters than most tracks considering the total pools are rather average.

[VetScratch]

LS has a notorious history of reporting erroneous payoffs and/or pools. Except for the year Cole Norman ruined, I have loved playing that track since it opened, but I can attest to many instances where official results won't match what gets flashed on TV-screens and gets paid at the windows.

I can't imagine that a P3 pool at LS was really only $4,000. In a lot of cases, when they goof up on large payoffs and/or pools, the error is obvious and can be verified mathematically because no possible number of $1 payouts corresponds to the pool (with t & b considered). I would suspect the pool size was actually greater than 4k.

For some reason, the flash results may often be right while the official results get goofed up. One would think it would be the other way around (i.e., that errors in the flash results would get corrected in the official result charts). If this a DRF/EquiBase issue?

[so.cal.fan]

Vet Scratch writes:
"I can't imagine that a P3 pool at LS was really only $4,000. In a lot of cases, when they goof up on large payoffs and/or pools, the error is obvious and can be verified mathematically because no possible number of $1 payouts corresponds to the pool (with t & b considered). I would suspect the pool size was actually greater than 4k".


This was my first impression as well, VS.
I have no problem with this payoff at all (since I didn't have it), as long as most of the money was BET AT LONE STAR.
Several years ago, in fact right after the start of simulcasting in Calif, Del Mar provided a local San Diego paper some very interesting stats........the mutual department reported that 75% of the winning tickets in EVERY POOL were being purchased AT DEL MAR RACETRACK, during their LIVE MEET.
I would love to see the STATS on his interesting ANGLE for every track in the country! I'm sure it has changed, but by how much and just WHERE are most of the winning tickets being purchased?
I'm not referring to anything crooked like the BC PICK SIX......just would like to see this information on a meet to meet basis.

[Suff]

LONE STAR PARK numbers are low....and going lower. They have across the Board lower handle through the first 6 months of 2003.

Thats with One additional race card. 50 in 2003, 49 in 2002 till this point. Additionaly they generally have a 10 race card thurs -Sat. which gives them more races than most of the middlers and majors as well.... The numbers are weaker than they appear.

Through 50 cards They average $560,000.00 in live handle. Down over 7%.

Of the Total 211 million handle to date..(down 5.84%) 100 million has been wagered on OUT OF Town similcast tracks.


Here's the numbers from The Texas Racing Commission.

The 2002 STATS are STACKED on top of the Same period 2003 STATS







Live

49
$30,773,903

50
$28,576,910

-7.14%

Simulcast Same-Species
166
$84,760,542

166
$79,411,660

-6.31%

Cross-Species

162
$4,513,013

164
$3,693,982

-18.15%

Export

49
$104,974,426

50
$100,187,333

-4.56%

Total Handle - LONE STAR PARK
$225,021,884


$211,869,885

-5.84

[ranchwest]

There are a lot of factors hurting LS, but one is the dominance of a few trainers and the resulting low prices on those trainers. This is due in large part to Texas racing rules.

Locally, LS has developed a reputation for gouging customers. The perception is that they have their hands in your pockets before you get in the door and don't stop digging.

[BillW]

Originally posted by ranchwest
There are a lot of factors hurting LS, but one is the dominance of a few trainers and the resulting low prices on those trainers. This is due in large part to Texas racing rules.

Locally, LS has developed a reputation for gouging customers. The perception is that they have their hands in your pockets before you get in the door and don't stop digging.

I haven't been up there in 4 or 5 years but then there was no place to sit down inside without paying for the seat. In the middle of July in Dallas, outside is NOT an option (the sun is too bright, hard to read the form :D)

Bill

[Suff]

Originally posted by BillW
I. In the middle of July in Dallas, outside is NOT an option (the sun is too bright, hard to read the form :D)

Bill

Toga's outside area. Covered in Majestic 200+ year old Pine Tree's. A picnic table under one of them is a teenie weenie slice of heavan.

[so.cal.fan]

According to Roger Stein of www.rogerstein.com, he checked into this bet......Equibase made an error.....payoff was for 2.
This makes more sense.

[VetScratch]

Sufferindowns,
I coincidentally visited the Texas Racing Commission statistics the day before I read your post.

As I recall, the handle at ALL Texas tracks is down, with LS about midway between least and worst percentage of decline. After Cole Norman basically ruined one complete season, I am not surprised that LS declined.

However, I interpreted the figures slightly differently (but maybe incorrectly). I figured the 2003 handle on races run at LS as the total of 28,976,510 (ontrack) plus 100,187,333 (export), both for 50 racedates. This would produce 2,560,000 as average daily handle for 50 dates. My OTB wagers would be included in the Export total, but the almost 4:1 offtrack/ontrack ratio seems high unless it is a byproduct of being a night track on many racedates.

My favorite Texas track to visit is Houston. Last time I was there you could eat off the floor (almost suggesting Duchessois may have moonlighted to write maintenance standards for the cleanup crew :) ).

[Suff]

Originally posted by VetScratch
Sufferindowns,
I coincidentally visited the Texas Racing Commission statistics the day before I read your post.
Yea. Ok. Sure you did.



;)


However, I interpreted the figures slightly differently (but maybe incorrectly). I figured the 2003 handle on races run at LS as the total of 28,976,510 (ontrack) plus 100,187,333 (export), both for 50 racedates. This would produce 2,560,000 as average daily handle for 50 dates. [/QUOTE]

$560,000.00 in LIVE HANDLE

My Figure was "LIVE " handle, otherwise known as On-track handle. Its correct. So is the post. Numbers are down across the board.

Stop giving "smart lessons". We're all smart here.:o

[VetScratch]

Sufferindowns,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by VetScratch
Sufferindowns,
I coincidentally visited the Texas Racing Commission statistics the day before I read your post.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yea. Ok. Sure you did.
My URL History indicates I visited http://txrc6.txrc.state.tx.us/new_agency/divisions/wagering/wk061503.htm, and while the numbers for Lone Star are the same as your numbers, it may not be the same source that you used to formulate your post. The difference seems to be that my source shows statistics for all Texas tracks (dogs & horses), and as I mentioned in my earlier post, the statistics reflect a decline in handle for all Texas horse tracks that conduct live racing. Your source appears to focus only on Lone Star and is crudely formatted, so you may want to bookmark my link for future reference.

However, since the raw Lone Star numbers are the same from both sources, we won't have to argue about arithmetic, so I should be able help you learn to understand what the numbers represent.

$560,000.00 in LIVE HANDLE

My Figure was "LIVE " handle, otherwise known as On-track handle. Its correct. So is the post. Numbers are down across the board.
I can't tell whether you are confused or were simply misled by your source. That's why I recommend my official Texas Racing Commission source. If you go there, you will see that the TRC defines On-Track handle as the sum of Live handle and Export handle. In other words, Live handle is NOT otherwise known as On-Track handle because Live handle excludes the Export segment of On-Track handle. I know the idiosyncrasies of racing nomenclature can be confusing, so let's examine how you and the Texas Racing Commission are at odds. When a live race is run at Lone Star, the TRC uses "Live" to describe monies bet through the wagering facilities at Lone Star, and the TRC uses "Export" to describe monies bet at remote facilities where horseplayers watch live racing at Lone Star on TV via a broadcast feed exported from Lone Star. Adding Live and Export totals produces On-Track Handle (which is not the same as TRC's definition of Total Handle).

The TRC defines Total Handle as the sum of:
(1) On-Track Handle (Live + Export, as defined above)
(2) Simulcast-Same Species (monies bet at Lone Star on live races at other tracks which export a broadcast feed that players watch on TV at Lone Star).
(3) Cross-Species (monies bet at Lone Star or elsewhere on occasional live races at Lone Star that are restricted to Arabians or Quarter Horses. Some but not all of the remote facilities that receive Lone Star's exported broadcast feed take wagers on Arabians and Quarter Horses. In some legislative jurisdictions only Thoroughbred races are legal gambling opportunities.)

Given all this, I wouldn't fault anyone for being confused, and my empathy would soar if you told me English was not your primary language.

I recommend that you print this post and then go to the official Texas Racing Commission site (see the link posted above). If you have difficulty reconciling what I have posted with what the TRC says, just yell for help. I usually check this board every day.

[VetScratch]

Sufferindowns,
Stop giving "smart lessons". We're all smart here.
I should hope to shout that this is a smart board! I feel privileged to be a member.

However, as Orwell wrote in Animal Farm, "all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others".

In terms of "smarts," I would hope that I may someday be your equal.

I seem to remember that you and I were at loggerheads over the number of program scratches on Belmont day in New York. I said there were 48 program scratches, but you repeatedly disagreed.

If you would like to revisit that issue, I think I can help you make some progress towards equality!

Vettie
(No Fear!)
(Even icons have feet of clay if they are made of clay!)

[ranchwest]

Originally posted by BillW
I haven't been up there in 4 or 5 years but then there was no place to sit down inside without paying for the seat. In the middle of July in Dallas, outside is NOT an option (the sun is too bright, hard to read the form :D)

Bill

By the time I got there today, there were NO inside seats.

I wish Trinity Meadows hadn't closed. The place was certainly no palace, but you could bring your lawn chair and sit anywhere you wanted, in the A/C.

[Suff]

Originally posted by VetScratch
Sufferindowns,

The TRC defines Total Handle as the sum of:
(1) On-Track Handle (Live + Export, as defined above)
(2) Simulcast-Same Species (monies bet at Lone Star on live races at other tracks which export a broadcast feed that players watch on TV at Lone Star).
(3) Cross-Species (monies bet at Lone Star or elsewhere on occasional live races at Lone Star that are restricted to Arabians or Quarter Horses. Some but not all of the remote facilities that receive Lone Star's exported broadcast feed take wagers on Arabians and Quarter Horses. In some legislative jurisdictions only Thoroughbred races are legal gambling opportunities.)

.

Huh waa? I know you wanna run with the Big dogs. I just don't think your ready. But you have the Base I can work with. So you have potential. Lone stars Live hande 6 months to Date is 28 million. They average $560,000 every race day. Thats what I typed. Thats what you contradicted. And you were wrong. But Thats no big deal. I'm wrong frequently.

You and I had a conversation about program changes on the Belmont card a month ago. Did you make a mental note that you were right? How are you doing on your scorecard? How many "rights" to "wrongs".

No worries. Slow down on the "Smart Lessons". You got your game knowledge criticized when you first showed up here...and it appears to me you have been going out of your way to "show" how smart you are....on virtually every post you make.


You know something about the game. Great. We all do. Join the club.


MY source was the Texas Racing commisssion. Over the years I have tracked down 100's of sites I use for information. The TRC site is a remote outpost. It a wild coincidence that you were there reading the same page I was on the same day. I woulda used my street smarts to somehow explain how that was possible. If I did'nt, I'd expect someone to say "Yea Right", (privately for sure,,,publicly only I did).

and trust me...I garauntee MANY said to themselves , "Yea" "right"!

I don't want to go back and forth with you. You have a larger appetite for that than I do. Heres my take on you.

Your a sharp guy...No doubt. You have some good information. I've read some of your work. Your thorough and insightful. But consider this.

Information can be "shared" or "Taught". Two different tones. I try and "share" what comes across my plate. When You try and "TELL" or "teach",,it alienates people who have a fair command of the game.

I have'nt missed to many of your posts. Many of them are the "Bickering" type. Arguing over who's right. Or who "undertsands" better.
\
Threads that are "heated" or "Combative" are useless. The Rancor kills the worth of the information. I don't want to read half the stuff and most certainly, most members are reluctant to REPLY (and add) with good information. Because most people do want to be involved in that bulshit.


I'm wrong Frequently. And corrected on PACE. I don't want to see the site in such a hostile environment where people are afraid to post or ask a question for fear they will be jumped on...or look stupid. Insatiable appetites to be "right" can do that.


Like I said... I've read all your stuff. You were overdue for a "bitch slap".

[VetScratch]

Sufferindowns,

The only hostility in this thread is yours.

We all started out questioning a P3 at LS, for which the reported pool was stated as $4k, for races 6-8.

I said that number seems low. In countless result charts for LS, the P3 pools are larger than $4k, and daily handle always tops $2-million. This is where you entered the thread to announce:
LONE STAR PARK numbers are low....and going lower. They have across the Board lower handle through the first 6 months of 2003.

Thats with One additional race card. 50 in 2003, 49 in 2002 till this point. Additionaly they generally have a 10 race card thurs -Sat. which gives them more races than most of the middlers and majors as well.... The numbers are weaker than they appear.

Through 50 cards They average $560,000.00 in live handle. Down over 7%.
Most tracks are open all year because they offer year round simulcast wagering. Most players and publications understand Live Handle to mean monies bet on live races during the local meet (including out of town money).

Our P3 pool quandary was certainly in this same context. How much was bet on LS races 6-8?

At best, your post was misleading because, beginning from the top, it seemed to support the notion that the P3 pool was only $4k, and could have been expected to be even smaller. Further, your crude table of numbers indicated you might be right because of the peculiar way the TRC expresses LS handle as the combination of "Live" and "Export" totals. In fact, the TRC report never bothers to combine these figures by track although it does report a statewide total for all tracks.

In my reply, I tried to get the thread back on course by saying:
"I figured the 2003 handle on races run at LS as the total of 28,976,510 (ontrack) plus 100,187,333 (export), both for 50 racedates. This would produce 2,560,000 as average daily handle for 50 dates."

I think my numbers were the ones relevant to the P3 question because nowhere in your post do you state or estimate what gets bet on LS races on an average day.

If this is what precipitated your "bitch slapping" reply, then you need professional counseling. In addition, you further misled readers by insisting that "My Figure was 'LIVE' handle, otherwise known as On-track handle. Its correct." Of course, anyone who goes to the TRC site can verify that this is not consistent with TRC nomenclature. Who knew what you meant? You even converted the TRC horizontal format into a long and clumsy vertical format. I wondered if you had ever been to TRC.

As for Belmont Stakes day, when official program information was released for national distribution, 161 program numbers were assigned. Only 113 horses ran while 48 did not compete. Why would you repeatedly contest such simple arithmetic?

Soon after joining PA, I naively included my email address in the text of a post, and I received a friendly heads-up email from a PA veteran. You were included under the heading "Old Goats In Trailer Parks." Now I see why.

[VetScratch]

Sufferindowns,
I know you wanna run with the Big dogs. I just don't think your ready.
Presumpteous fools rush in where angels fear to tread. Would you entertain a wager that will teach you a valuable lesson?

Using official racing records and IRS tax returns, we can determine dog size with a dollar-for-dollar wager, and I will pay the independent CPA who will judge the outcome.

Using strictly verifiable numbers for each of us as individuals, let's compare breeders award (1099s), purse awards (1099s), and wagering income (1040s) since 1990. Big Dog wins and gets the dollar difference. I like table stakes, but if you want to cap the wager, make a proposal, but don't trifle with me unless you are willing to make it worth my while.

If you are a Big Dog, the time has come to put up or shut up!

[PaceAdvantage]

Is there really any point to this pissing contest? You both make very valuable contributions to this board. I'd hate to see that go downhill.

As for Sufferin, he has shown to me in private, and to this board in public, that he is a MAJOR handicapper and bettor.....no debate there....


==PA

[Show Me the Wire]

PA:

A little tension before social intercourse(VetScratch's words) is acceptable.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[ranchwest]

Originally posted by Show Me the Wire
PA:

A little tension before social intercourse(VetScratch's words) is acceptable.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

Yeah, but what about the verbosity? Is that stimulating?

[Show Me the Wire]

Ranch West:

To answer your question, maybe , maybe not, could be, could not be, depends, I am not sure, it might or it might not. I am undecided and becuase of my indecison, I am going to ask you. What do you think?

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[VetScratch]

PA,
As for Sufferin, he has shown to me in private, and to this board in public, that he is a MAJOR handicapper and bettor.....no debate there....
Are you suggesting a little side action?
We could have a pot on the side, but I really want to take down this obnoxious "bitch slapper" dollar-for-dollar. He was out of line, and is now apparently out of nerve! MAJOR handicappers and bettors have tax records just like I do, so where is your bite "Big Dog" Sufferindowns?

BTW, Ranchwest, "good-natured intercourse" were my words, but "social intercourse" is obviously what I meant.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by VetScratch
PA,

Are you suggesting a little side action?
We could have a pot on the side, but I really want to take down this obnoxious "bitch slapper" dollar-for-dollar. He was out of line, and is now apparently out of nerve! MAJOR handicappers and bettors have tax records just like I do, so where is your bite "Big Dog" Sufferindowns?

BTW, Ranchwest, "good-natured intercourse" were my words, but "social intercourse" is obviously what I meant.

OOPs, I am sorry VetScratch I mis(s) quoted you. I stand corrected and I will amend my statement to read "A little tension before good-natured intercourse is acceptable". After all it is good that it is good-natured, however my preference is social.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[VetScratch]

Oops, I forgot to pop the stack on the nested quotes! Sorry for mixing up your names, Show and Ranch. At the risk of verbosity, I should have explained that I meant "social..." was probably a better expression, with less chance of misinterpretation. From now on I will try observe "safe conversation" guidelines.:)

[Show Me the Wire]

VetScratch:

I am not the “safe conversation” police and my post was not intended as an admonishment. I personally, have not been offended by any content or any words contained in any of your posts, I stated my observation to PA that a little tension before social intercourse is acceptable. When I said, your words, I wanted everyone to understand I was referring to your stated intentions from another post. Feel free to practice any conversation PA allows.

I too have had some pissing matches with others and have come to understand them and myself better. From my experiences I have concluded a little tension before good-natured or social intercourse is acceptable.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[PaceAdvantage]

VetScratch....

Actually, around here, I'm the BIG DOG....for obvious reasons.

With that said, please take any further "side bets" or "bitch-slapping" into PRIVATE MESSAGING OR E-MAIL.


==PA


PS. Tax forms mean nothing to me or anyone else. If you're a great handicapper, SO WHAT?? Is that going to make ME any more money at the track??? Don't think so....unless you let me look over your shoulder every day...or unless you are willing to share your methods with the group.

[VetScratch]

PA,

The thread speaks for itself. Sufferindowns INTRODUCED the objectional phrase, but quoting him was admittedly poor judgement on my part.

PS: since we're sharing ideas and knowledge, I don't understand your comment about tax records. Under penalty of law, ALL winnings have to be reported to the IRS. No other official summary of success or failure exists. If someone can't show me proof of success, why would I want to look over their shoulder?

[gino]

"Life is the high wire; everything else is just waiting..."
-Karl Wallenda, the late,great patriarch of The Flying Wallendas

[Show Me the Wire]

Speaking of big dogs.

The common accepted scientific conclusion is dogs lack size perception meanng a dog observing another dog lacks the ability to judge whether he is smaller or larger than the dog he is observing.



Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[VetScratch]

Show Me The Wire,

You get my vote for the best statement of wisdom in this thread!