GP payouts?!?!?

[Track Phantom]

Have a question for you guys that play GP. I normally don't play the track that often but focused on it today. My buddy and I hit a few supers that we thought were going to be absoutely huge and were vastly disappointed by the payoffs. We actually wondered if there wasn't past posting going on.

Let me know what you think and especially if you played today (2-23-11) and let me know if I'm way off base:

1st race:
Trifecta paid $100.00 with 7-2 over 5-2 over 61-1 (3-2 favorite out of money)

3rd race:
Trifecta paid $155.00 with 4-1 over 4-1 over 11-1 (8-5 favorite out of money)

6th race:
Super paid $2500 with 5-1 over 7-1 over 7-5 over 51-1

7th race:
Super paid $2200 with 6-5 over 14-1 over 33-1 over 58-1

9th race:
Super paid $424 with 3-5 over 25-1 over 14-1 over 27-1 (DH for 4th)
Super paid $227 with 3-5 over 25-1 over 14-1 over 8-1 (DH for 4th)

[CBedo]

It's mostly a function of the ALL button, not past posting.

[Phantombridgejumpe]

1st race looks a touch low with the favorite out

3rd race I might have expected closer to $200

6th race looks okay

7th looks okay considering the 6-5 on top

9th If I consider the DH I think the payouts may even be a touch on the high side


I think you got a touch of a bad shake, but nothing more.

[takeout]

Their raise in takeout to 26% on tris and supers (unconscionable for a so-called major track) isn’t helping those payoffs either.

http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/hanatrackratingsbytrackname2010.html

[Stillriledup]

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=79609&highlight=gulfstream

[Stillriledup]

GP pays 'half' of what other tracks pay.

Check out the tri price in the at GP on the 7th race from Feb 17th. What has to happen in order for the tri price to pay 3k at Gulfstream for a buck?

Seriously.

I've cut back my GP bets substantially, now i only play pick 5 carrovers and the odd race here and there....prices have just come back too short for my blood.

[jelly]

I'd avoid anything with a 26% takeout.

[Track Phantom]

I'm convinced it's past posting or something crooked. No way does an extra 3% in takeout cause a tri to pay 2600 with an 80-1 on top in a full field.

The payouts have been VERY low. Totally counter to what payoffs should be and I have about 250,000 races in which to draw on so I think I know when something isn't right

[The Bit]

Totally counter to what payoffs should be and I have about 250,000 races in which to draw on so I think I know when something isn't right

Why did you pose it as a question than?

[lamboguy]

if you keep playing blind pools these days, you will go broke real fast. i have noticed that these blind pools have been paying less and less the last 20 years. i stopped playing them long ago.

[Track Phantom]

Why did you pose it as a question than?

Because I love getting responses like this.

[Track Phantom]

if you keep playing blind pools these days, you will go broke real fast. i have noticed that these blind pools have been paying less and less the last 20 years. i stopped playing them long ago.

Meaning exotics in which you don't know the payoff in advance, correct? I tend to agree. I've been playing a long time and I don't remember a day at one track in which the payoffs were so low (compared to similar tracks/odds)

[Stillriledup]

Gulfstream trivia.

Tell me what the tri price should be in a 13 horse field (13 betting interests) with a 6-1 over a 2-1 second choice over a 7-1. What do you get for that tri for a buck? What's a fair price?

Also, add a 24-1 for 4th in the super, what's a fair price for that.

Thanks for playing.

[lamboguy]

Meaning exotics in which you don't know the payoff in advance, correct? I tend to agree. I've been playing a long time and I don't remember a day at one track in which the payoffs were so low (compared to similar tracks/odds)it happens all over, not just gulfstream. its not like these races are full of first time starters and some guy knows he got something that no one else knows, its on claiming races.

[Stillriledup]

Have a question for you guys that play GP. I normally don't play the track that often but focused on it today. My buddy and I hit a few supers that we thought were going to be absoutely huge and were vastly disappointed by the payoffs. We actually wondered if there wasn't past posting going on.

Let me know what you think and especially if you played today (2-23-11) and let me know if I'm way off base:

1st race:
Trifecta paid $100.00 with 7-2 over 5-2 over 61-1 (3-2 favorite out of money)

3rd race:
Trifecta paid $155.00 with 4-1 over 4-1 over 11-1 (8-5 favorite out of money)

6th race:
Super paid $2500 with 5-1 over 7-1 over 7-5 over 51-1

7th race:
Super paid $2200 with 6-5 over 14-1 over 33-1 over 58-1

9th race:
Super paid $424 with 3-5 over 25-1 over 14-1 over 27-1 (DH for 4th)
Super paid $227 with 3-5 over 25-1 over 14-1 over 8-1 (DH for 4th)

I looked at the prices for today wow that's the most bizarre thing i've ever seen. Forget the supers for a second because they're dime bets and can be watered down, but those tri prices, wow. Checkout the 8th race tri, 12 horse field, 7-2 winner with 17-1 2nd in 'wide open' race and the tri pays 189?

I won't make a bet anymore at this place to they get this figured out.

[OTM Al]

It is obvious that "they" are out to get you.

[lamboguy]

i have gotten some great prices this year at gulfstream in the straight wager pools. i must have won on about 5 horses there this year where the odds actually went up in price after the start of the race. i had one go up from 3-1 to 9/2 during the race. that might have been someone taking money out of the pool after the break. i bet the horse thinking they would hit it and finish at 8/5.

i am not betting any big money on these but i am happy with my tickets there this year.

[Beachbabe]

i have gotten some great prices this year at gulfstream in the straight wager pools. i must have won on about 5 horses there this year where the odds actually went up in price after the start of the race. i had one go up from 3-1 to 9/2 during the race. that might have been someone taking money out of the pool after the break. i bet the horse thinking they would hit it and finish at 8/5.

i am not betting any big money on these but i am happy with my tickets there this year.


You're obviously part of this nefarious conspiracy. :cool:

[lamboguy]

You're obviously part of this nefarious conspiracy. :cool:i don't do anything, i just bet all day!

[takeout]

GP pays 'half' of what other tracks pay. And the other half goes to Frank. :D
No “Magna” tracks for me please. Thanks but no thanks. I might end up like his stockholders:

Judge calls Magna deal unique and without parallel
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/investment-ideas/streetwise/magna-board-spectacularly-vacated-field-judge/article1916419/

[snip]
To recap the process, once the proposal for Mr. Stronach’s exit was put forward, Magna’s board of directors punted any responsibility to shareholders. At the time, Mr. Stronach’s Class B shares made up less than 1 per cent of total equity, but represented two-thirds of total voting power. The total price tag for giving up these shares was $863-million.
[snip]

[takeout]

I'd avoid anything with a 26% takeout.I think that’s a good idea. 25% is easily twice what it should be already. At the very least 25% should be where customers draw the line. Until we start voting with our wallets, in mass, it’s only going to get worse, and quickly. If I ever find out that I’m betting anywhere that’s taking out more than 25% on anything (thanks for the chart, HANA) I’ll be gone so fast I’ll leave skid marks. Unfortunately that already equates to about 15 tracks, many of which are (were?) considered major ovals.

[takeout]

if you keep playing blind pools these days, you will go broke real fast. i have noticed that these blind pools have been paying less and less the last 20 years. i stopped playing them long ago.Good point. Reminds me of that old article where the pari-mutuel guy realized he could skim precisely because it was in a blind pool. I’ll be surprised if there isn’t some modern day version of that going on somewhere right now.

[Stillriledup]

You're obviously part of this nefarious conspiracy. :cool:

I'd rather be the person concerned at why prices are so short and try to figure out why, rather than just bury my head in the sand and say everything's OK, nothing is going on behind the scenes.

Its not really any kind of conspiracy, its just me looking at the exotic prices and seeing they're way short for what you would expect for those type of odds winners in these HUGE fields.

If anything, Gulfstream is known for large fields and wide open racing, there should be boxcar prices on occasion and you don't get that at all. You get 70-1 shots winning in 12 horse fields and you're getting tri's that pay 2600 instead of 5k.

I would just prefer to 'question authority' than to blindly accept what people tell me.

[Track Phantom]

I'd rather be the person concerned at why prices are so short and try to figure out why, rather than just bury my head in the sand and say everything's OK, nothing is going on behind the scenes.

Its not really any kind of conspiracy, its just me looking at the exotic prices and seeing they're way short for what you would expect for those type of odds winners in these HUGE fields.

If anything, Gulfstream is known for large fields and wide open racing, there should be boxcar prices on occasion and you don't get that at all. You get 70-1 shots winning in 12 horse fields and you're getting tri's that pay 2600 instead of 5k.

I would just prefer to 'question authority' than to blindly accept what people tell me.

Spot on!!

I don''t understand why, of all people, players back tracks that gauge us all. You'd think they'd be more appreciative that we are questioning it rather than look past it. But, then again, some people don't want to do anything but be a jerk (which is easy to do behind a keyboard).

I absolutely believe there is something not right about those payoffs. There is no way to "prove" anything. It's just a gut instinct after seeing so many exotic payoffs and combining it with the difficulty of the races. I mean, even So. Cal (a track that is all low prices and bet downs) has more honest payoffs and they hammer the hell out of horses.

Put it this way....I would NOT be surprised to find out there was some eliment of past posting going on.

In the first race, there was 79,459 in the tri pool. The tri paid $100.70 for $1. It was 7-2 (4-1 ML) over 2-1 (3-1 ML) over 61-1 (20-1 ML). The 3-2 favorite (2-1 ML) #7 owned by Frank Calabrese did not hit the board. Yet, the exactas with the Calabrese horse was the lowest paying by far. Oddly enough, every exacta was the lowest when combined with the Calabrese horse EXCEPT the winning exacta of 8 over 6 ($22). The exacta 8 over 7 (the Calabrese horse) was $28. There were 584 winning tickets for this trifecta. All it took was ONE $200 straight trifecta to knock the payoff from a more reasonable $275 to $100. Same story with the exacta.

I do know that there has been past posting and it appears it's happening at GP, the track with some of the largest pools which won't be noticed so easily.

[takeout]

Check out the tri price in the at GP on the 7th race from Feb 17th. What has to happen in order for the tri price to pay 3k at Gulfstream for a buck?

Seriously.Thirty-two $1 winning tickets. Maybe Beyer or some computer team had it about 20 times. ??
The only thing I noticed is that the 2nd & 3rd finishers were among the top 5 betting choices.

I’ve seen some weird ones at CT. Of course it doesn’t take much to wreck the prices at a small-pooled track. Some of them don’t quite pass the smell test though. I remember one a couple of summers ago with a 24-1, 70-1 & 4-1 (the 4-1 was the 3rd betting choice). One trifecta ticket took the whole pool of $15,842, yet in the exacta pool of $19,520, there were 28&1/2 winning tickets at $680 each. I filed that one under “Things that make you go hmm…” Just guessing but I assume that the connections of at least one of those top two finishers had a mighty fine supper that night.

[Stillriledup]

Spot on!!

I don''t understand why, of all people, players back tracks that gauge us all. You'd think they'd be more appreciative that we are questioning it rather than look past it. But, then again, some people don't want to do anything but be a jerk (which is easy to do behind a keyboard).

I absolutely believe there is something not right about those payoffs. There is no way to "prove" anything. It's just a gut instinct after seeing so many exotic payoffs and combining it with the difficulty of the races. I mean, even So. Cal (a track that is all low prices and bet downs) has more honest payoffs and they hammer the hell out of horses.

Put it this way....I would NOT be surprised to find out there was some eliment of past posting going on.

In the first race, there was 79,459 in the tri pool. The tri paid $100.70 for $1. It was 7-2 (4-1 ML) over 2-1 (3-1 ML) over 61-1 (20-1 ML). The 3-2 favorite (2-1 ML) #7 owned by Frank Calabrese did not hit the board. Yet, the exactas with the Calabrese horse was the lowest paying by far. Oddly enough, every exacta was the lowest when combined with the Calabrese horse EXCEPT the winning exacta of 8 over 6 ($22). The exacta 8 over 7 (the Calabrese horse) was $28. There were 584 winning tickets for this trifecta. All it took was ONE $200 straight trifecta to knock the payoff from a more reasonable $275 to $100. Same story with the exacta.

I do know that there has been past posting and it appears it's happening at GP, the track with some of the largest pools which won't be noticed so easily.

I know you brought up some Calabrese example, i'm not sure if that's the right angle to take.....if you bring up a horseman in this equasion, you're sort of saying that it might be a situation where certain connections are betting against their 3-2 shot they know stinks. I believe this is deeper than that, this seems to happen almost every race, Calabrese or not.

The exotics results for yesterday are alarming. I don't know what's going on, but i don't like it and i won't play there until i see those prices paying what they should pay.

[takeout]

Put it this way....I would NOT be surprised to find out there was some eliment of past posting going on.I wouldn’t be either. Isn’t that the same place where the casino help was stealing money? At least we heard about that. And wasn’t that the place where they were letting some whale bet directly into their tote system, or something like that?

[Track Phantom]

I know you brought up some Calabrese example, i'm not sure if that's the right angle to take.....if you bring up a horseman in this equasion, you're sort of saying that it might be a situation where certain connections are betting against their 3-2 shot they know stinks. I believe this is deeper than that, this seems to happen almost every race, Calabrese or not.

The exotics results for yesterday are alarming. I don't know what's going on, but i don't like it and i won't play there until i see those prices paying what they should pay.

Not really saying it is Calabrese or owner but thought it was somewhat interesting to point out.

I just find it hard to believe that every single exacta combo with the 7 winning was the lowest except one combination...which happens to be the combination that came in. Either someone knew something beforehand or afterward. Us players get it up the arse on the front end with takeout, tax laws, drugs,etc, making the game difficult and now on the backend by stealing the money directly from honest players who are not in the "know".

Call it conspiratory thinking if you will. I just feel that whereever there is money and opportunity, there will be corruption.

[Track Phantom]

I wouldn’t be either. Isn’t that the same place where the casino help was stealing money? At least we heard about that. And wasn’t that the place where they were letting some whale bet directly into their tote system, or something like that?

Don't know that to be true but sounds plausible.

[Stillriledup]

Not really saying it is Calabrese or owner but thought it was somewhat interesting to point out.

I just find it hard to believe that every single exacta combo with the 7 winning was the lowest except one combination...which happens to be the combination that came in. Either someone knew something beforehand or afterward. Us players get it up the arse on the front end with takeout, tax laws, drugs,etc, making the game difficult and now on the backend by stealing the money directly from honest players who are not in the "know".

Call it conspiratory thinking if you will. I just feel that whereever there is money and opportunity, there will be corruption.

I don't know what's going on with these prices and i don't profess to know. What i DO know is that they're just extremely low to my eye and i've decided to stay away until things start paying normally.

I spent the last hour sifting thru Gulfstream charts for the last few weeks and comparing those exotics prices to other places, like FG for example, and you can see there's no comparison in 'value'.

What this means i have absolutely no idea. Maybe its all on the up and up and the Gulfstream players are just phenominal and are crushing almost every exotic, and the win pool is a seperate entity and you can't compare the Win prices to what exotic prices pay.

One glaring and comparative example i found was the 8th race at GP on Feb 11 and the 7th race at FG on Feb 20.

The FG race had 12 horses and the GP race had 10, here's what it looked like.

FG: 12-1 over 10-1 over 16-1 over 8-1.

Tri paid 6,000 for 2 bucks
Super paid 50,000 for 2 bucks.

GP: 13-1 over 10-1 over 11-1 over 32-1

Tri paid 1200 for 2 bucks
Super paid 17,000 for 2 bucks.

(both places offer dime supers)

[lamboguy]

i want to bring up another form of gambling that i don't think is on the level, the state run daily lottery's. i have followed the massachusetts state lottery for the past 25 years, in that period of time there has NEVER been one day where the 4 digit number was NOT hit. that is impossible! i remember some of the biggest bookmakers in the coutry 40 years ago that took in more action than the state, and they used to go weeks without the 4 digit number being hit at all. i think the state does about $2 million a day in numbers business and the pools are parimutuel. i remember when they caught the pennsylvania lottery running their number's game with weighted balls. i guess i am very cynical, but this is the world we live in, i have seen plenty, but i haven't seen it al!

for the record, to this date i have yet to invest any money in mass. lottery tickets..

[OTM Al]

You know what else is a fix? Those displaced princes from Nigeria. They seem so trustworthy but in the end they just take your money and give you nothing in return....

[garyscpa]

You know what else is a fix? Those displaced princes from Nigeria. They seem so trustworthy but in the end they just take your money and give you nothing in return....

Yeah, but if only 1 in a 100 of them is telling the truth, I'll be rich! :D

[johnhannibalsmith]

Don't know that to be true but sounds plausible.

Neither do I, but I believe this is the reference:

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/2007-11-08/news/cripple-the-presses/

[dartman51]

There's a SIMPLE solution, don't patronize any track that you feel is being unfair. If you felt you were getting ripped off at a local retail store, would you keep shopping there? The fact is, racing is an entertainment business, meaning, it's not something you have to participate in. It's a choice. The following is just a hand full of payouts that went the other way. These happen every day at tracks across America. What happens when this takes place? Somebody has to make up the difference. Negative pools happen everyday, yet I don't hear the track owners complaining about it.
Is the take out out of line at some tracks? Absolutely!! With out a doubt. But you don't have to gamble there. JMHO :ThmbUp:

PEN 2/18 Race 5
SUPER $26630.60
POOL $ 9681.00

CT 2/18 Race 1
SUPER $19682.80
POOL $13124.00

CT 2/19 Race 5
SUPER $26742.20
POOL $ 8922.00

Race 9
SUPER $29965.00
POOL $10006.00

CT 2/23 Race 7
SUPER $22276.20
POOL $14861.00

BEU 2/21 Race 6
SUPER $16957.80
POOL $ 7659.00

SUN 2/19 Race 3
$1 SUPER $29961.30
POOL $ 7990.00

[Stillriledup]

There's a SIMPLE solution, don't patronize any track that you feel is being unfair. If you felt you were getting ripped off at a local retail store, would you keep shopping there? The fact is, racing is an entertainment business, meaning, it's not something you have to participate in. It's a choice. The following is just a hand full of payouts that went the other way. These happen every day at tracks across America. What happens when this takes place? Somebody has to make up the difference. Negative pools happen everyday, yet I don't hear the track owners complaining about it.
Is the take out out of line at some tracks? Absolutely!! With out a doubt. But you don't have to gamble there. JMHO :ThmbUp:

PEN 2/18 Race 5
SUPER $26630.60
POOL $ 9681.00

CT 2/18 Race 1
SUPER $19682.80
POOL $13124.00

CT 2/19 Race 5
SUPER $26742.20
POOL $ 8922.00

Race 9
SUPER $29965.00
POOL $10006.00

CT 2/23 Race 7
SUPER $22276.20
POOL $14861.00

BEU 2/21 Race 6
SUPER $16957.80
POOL $ 7659.00

SUN 2/19 Race 3
$1 SUPER $29961.30
POOL $ 7990.00

This is absolutely true, if you don't like it, don't play it. Couldnt' agree more.

Personally, my best case scenario would be for GP to investigate this and stop the madness.

I'll monitor their payouts, but i won't be broken up if i don't bet Gulfstream, there are other fish in the sea.

[Beachbabe]

This is absolutely true, if you don't like it, don't play it. Couldnt' agree more.

Personally, my best case scenario would be for GP to investigate this and stop the madness.

I'll monitor their payouts, but i won't be broken up if i don't bet Gulfstream, there are other fish in the sea.


And one would be...............

[Stillriledup]

And one would be...............

I'm fine betting Fair Grounds and making spot plays at tracks around the country. Mountaineer opens soon also. Plenty to do.

[Saratoga_Mike]

There's a SIMPLE solution, don't patronize any track that you feel is being unfair. If you felt you were getting ripped off at a local retail store, would you keep shopping there? The fact is, racing is an entertainment business, meaning, it's not something you have to participate in. It's a choice. The following is just a hand full of payouts that went the other way. These happen every day at tracks across America. What happens when this takes place? Somebody has to make up the difference. Negative pools happen everyday, yet I don't hear the track owners complaining about it.
Is the take out out of line at some tracks? Absolutely!! With out a doubt. But you don't have to gamble there. JMHO :ThmbUp:

PEN 2/18 Race 6
SUPER $26630.60
POOL $ 9681.00

CT 2/18 Race 1
SUPER $19682.80
POOL $13124.00

CT 2/19 Race 5
SUPER $26742.20
POOL $ 8922.00

Race 9
SUPER $29965.00
POOL $10006.00

CT 2/23 Race 7
SUPER $22276.20
POOL $14861.00

BEU 2/21 Race 6
SUPER $16957.80
POOL $ 7659.00

SUN 2/19 Race 3
$1 SUPER $29961.30
POOL $ 7990.00

I'm either misreading your post or you're looking at this info the wrong way. If you think Penn paid out $17k more than the pool in race 6 on Feb 18, you're making a mistake (sorry if this wasn't your point). The payout is larger than the pool because of dime, 50 cent and dollar plays, while the posted payouts are stated in $1 or $2 increments (even if the sole ticket is for a dime).

Take the Penn example. If you adjust for takeout (30%), you end up with $6,777 ($9,681 pool * [1 - .3]) to be distributed to winners. The stated $2 winning ticket was $26,631. If you divided that by four, you get roughly $6,800. So this just means the super was hit for 50 cents.

[Kevroc]

I'm either misreading your post or you're looking at this info the wrong way. If you think Penn paid out $17k more than the pool in race 6 on Feb 18, you're making a mistake (sorry if this wasn't your point). The payout is larger than the pool because of dime, 50 cent and dollar plays, while the posted payouts are stated in $1 or $2 increments (even if the sole ticket is for a dime).

Take the Penn example. If you adjust for takeout (30%), you end up with $6,777 ($9,681 pool * [1 - .3]) to be distributed to winners. The stated $2 winning ticket was $26,631. If you divided that by four, you get roughly $6,800. So this just means the super was hit for 50 cents.

I, myself wasn't sure what his point was either. Your explanation is spot on. The thing that sours me about it is that is is misleading. I think payoff trees should universally list prices by the minimum accepted wager amount.

This would eliminate much confusion. The current format also gives the illusion that the pools are bigger than they really are, which in my mind is not on the up-and-up and really sours my opinion of the track.

List the superfecta payouts as .10 pays $xxx etc.

It is also frustrating when trying to read exacta probables and you don't know if they are based on $1 or $2.

If the track accepts $1 exactas and $1 doubles... then SHOW the prices that way universally... it's a simple concept really. We do not need to confuse the fan base.. we need the fan base to grow... and making the screens and boards more user-friendly will accomplish this.

[Track Phantom]

I, myself wasn't sure what his point was either. Your explanation is spot on. The thing that sours me about it is that is is misleading. I think payoff trees should universally list prices by the minimum accepted wager amount.

This would eliminate much confusion. The current format also gives the illusion that the pools are bigger than they really are, which in my mind is not on the up-and-up and really sours my opinion of the track.

List the superfecta payouts as .10 pays $xxx etc.

It is also frustrating when trying to read exacta probables and you don't know if they are based on $1 or $2.

If the track accepts $1 exactas and $1 doubles... then SHOW the prices that way universally... it's a simple concept really. We do not need to confuse the fan base.. we need the fan base to grow... and making the screens and boards more user-friendly will accomplish this.

I couldn't agree more with everything you said. Such a well thought out and verbalized idea. I have NEVER understood why the tracks don't converse with the people that wager on their product to find simple areas for improvement.

While I think moving all racing video to HD is a good idea, I understand why this is difficult due to the cost associated. However, when you talk about adjusting the tote board and payouts to always show the minimum payout, it would be extremely helpful, easy and costfree. I cannot tell you how many times I have agonized over a will pay (say I'm alive to a few horses in a pick 4 and want to possibly hedge) and they are either not shown or I'm not sure what denomonation is shown.