Late scratch money on post time favorite. Is that fair?

[Stillriledup]

In today's last race at Santa Anita, the post time favorite was the winner. His pick 6 payoff was approx 25k. But, there was a late scratch of a longshot, so all that money went onto the favorite and when he won, the payoff was about 17k and not the 25k that the bettors of that horse thought they were getting.

I don't think the people who bet a lame/sick horse should get the same exact payout as the people who picked the rightful winner.

What say you?

[therussmeister]

This, and other forums, are filled with posts by people upset that they wound up wasting money betting horses that turned out to be lame/sick, at least by their perception. If you could think of a good way for handicappers to deduce hours in advance, before the post parade, that a given horse is not right today I would say you are right. As far as I know such information can not be discerned by studying the past performances. It could happen to any horse.

[Skanoochies]

Rules are rules. I think it would be better if you had alternative choices if your horse got scratched, but would you sooner have a refund than a chance at 17k? :confused:

[Hanover1]

Just tryin to figure how the folks that bet the scratch got the same as those that backed the winner.......

[Paseana]

And where is it, pray tell, that the Pick 6 rules regarding scratches are any different? Santa Anita get singled out here with a complaint that applies to every racetrack in the country, and the complaining is done by a person or persons that are supposedly boycotting Santa Anita's races anyway.

I guess I missed the announcement of the contest where whoever bashes Santa Anita with the most glee wins

Yes, I'm SoCal, and I live within a stone's throw from Santa Anita. It's been my beloved home track for 40 years. And yes, I know California racing is in serious trouble, but I think :lol: over it is reprehensible. And holding Santa Anita responsible for regulatory decisions over which it has no control is misguided and egregiously unfair.

I'm actually looking forward to the circuit moving to Hollywood Park next month. It's a whole new punching bag. Not only do you get the same take-out issue, but, glory be, you get a synthetic surface to rail on.

Happy days are here again!

[Stillriledup]

And where is it, pray tell, that the Pick 6 rules regarding scratches are any different? Santa Anita get singled out here with a complaint that applies to every racetrack in the country, and the complaining is done by a person or persons that are supposedly boycotting Santa Anita's races anyway.

I guess I missed the announcement of the contest where whoever bashes Santa Anita with the most glee wins

Yes, I'm SoCal, and I live within a stone's throw from Santa Anita. It's been my beloved home track for 40 years. And yes, I know California racing is in serious trouble, but I think :lol: over it is reprehensible. And holding Santa Anita responsible for regulatory decisions over which it has no control is misguided and egregiously unfair.

I'm actually looking forward to the circuit moving to Hollywood Park next month. It's a whole new punching bag. Not only do you get the same take-out issue, but, glory be, you get a synthetic surface to rail on.

Happy days are here again!

Its not an SA bash, i just used that as an example. It can happen at any track.

[Stillriledup]

This, and other forums, are filled with posts by people upset that they wound up wasting money betting horses that turned out to be lame/sick, at least by their perception. If you could think of a good way for handicappers to deduce hours in advance, before the post parade, that a given horse is not right today I would say you are right. As far as I know such information can not be discerned by studying the past performances. It could happen to any horse.

Here's the difference though. If you make a win bet on a sick or lame horse and that horse gets scratched, you get your money back BEFORE the wager starts. With a horizontal bet, the wager has already started, the bets are in. People who get the post time favorite are getting their pick switched after the 'race' has already started. Nobody ever talks about this.

[Southieboy]

If you need/want someone to blame for this scratch, blame Quinonez.

[lamboguy]

there is nothing worse to any type of pick player than to recieve the favorite in a race where the reason you made the play to begin with is because you thought ahead of time that you could beat the favorite. its almost the same thing as getting robbed. that is the flaw of those bets, and the main reason why i hardly ever play them. if ever do play a p3 or p4 i would need to have 2 singles in the sequence. i haven't found one of those in over 6 months now.

good topic of discussion. and if you want my real opinion, i think the world would be a better place without those type of bets.

[Helles]

I like those types of wagers and I look at them as a chance to make a score when I have a good contrarian opinion. In fact, that's the only way I will bet them.

Having said that, in the case of a scratch however, I would still want to have a chance to cash with the favorite than receive a refund. For those that would prefer an alternate pick to automatically getting the favorite, I wouldn't think it would be that difficult to make that possible when writing the ticket. But absent that option, I don't see any other way to do it.

And, if you had the favorite along with the scratched horse in the same leg anyway, you now have two live tickets if that favorite wins. So in Stillriledup's example from today, there are those that cashed for 17k X 2 when the favorite won instead of 25k X 1 if the longshot had not been scratched and had won. I'll bet they're not complaining.

[Stillriledup]

Here's another problem with this situation.

Lets say you are somehow affiliated with some connections of a horse in one of the legs and you know that after the bet starts, they plan on scratching their no hoper. You want to single a horse but have no idea which horse will take the 'hot' money. The people who bet the lame/sick runner get the benefit of the crowd's last second knowledge on how the race is going to be bet.

The people who bet the lame/sick horse get to use the crowd's knowledge to land on the most likely winner and they get this privilege without even having to handicap the race.

In the Santa Anita example i talked about in the OP, there was a Julio Canani runner who was coming off a 2 or 3 year layoff. This runner opened up 'dead' on the board at like 6-1, but what if he took a 10k win punch and went off at 6-5? Those people who bet the lame Steve Knapp horse get their money on the hot Canani runner while everyone else who actually bet on someone who was going to run don't have that same option to switch their pick.

I think that in a horizontal bet, the money should go on the horse who's favored in that particular bet and not the win favorite. In this particular example, the actual Pick 6 favorite (shortest pick 6 probable) was a horse called B's lucky strike, the bettors of the scratched horse should have been given THAT horse instead.

[Robert Goren]

there is nothing worse to any type of pick player than to recieve the favorite in a race where the reason you made the play to begin with is because you thought ahead of time that you could beat the favorite. its almost the same thing as getting robbed. that is the flaw of those bets, and the main reason why i hardly ever play them. if ever do play a p3 or p4 i would need to have 2 singles in the sequence. i haven't found one of those in over 6 months now.

good topic of discussion. and if you want my real opinion, i think the world would be a better place without those type of bets. I agree, but racing seems to be promoting more of them with "rainbows". You really get screwed if you get the favorite in one of those.

[OTM Al]

What is fair and what isn't depends on who you are talking to, the time of day and the phase of the moon. It is however a rule and a well known one at that. In an efficient market, the post time favorite and the pick six favorite should be the same horse. So I don't see anything valid here worth complaining about.

[FenceBored]

In an efficient market, the post time favorite and the pick six favorite should be the same horse.

Interesting question. I can see reasons why it could be false.* Anybody got a way to answer this (and the willingness to share the results)?

*Say you've got a vunerable favorite. In the win pool it's the favorite, but in the horizontals the second or third choice has the lowest will-pay as the one the most people decide they can't leave off the ticket.

[MaTH716]

In today's last race at Santa Anita, the post time favorite was the winner. His pick 6 payoff was approx 25k. But, there was a late scratch of a longshot, so all that money went onto the favorite and when he won, the payoff was about 17k and not the 25k that the bettors of that horse thought they were getting.

I don't think the people who bet a lame/sick horse should get the same exact payout as the people who picked the rightful winner.

What say you?

Realistically isn't this an issue in every leg of the sequance except the first?

[OTM Al]

Interesting question. I can see reasons why it could be false.* Anybody got a way to answer this (and the willingness to share the results)?

*Say you've got a vunerable favorite. In the win pool it's the favorite, but in the horizontals the second or third choice has the lowest will-pay as the one the most people decide they can't leave off the ticket.


If this was the case, then your market would not be behaving efficiently because there has been no information change in what you propose. A situation like this could not be persistant as bettors would exploit this and thus drive the market back to efficiency. I'm not saying inefficiency doesn't happen. I would venture to guess at smaller venues with likewise smaller pools this should be happening frequently, but in a random manner, but would bet it's much rarer in NY and CA as those markets are big enough to approach efficiency. What I am saying is that if it does happen it is more the effect of randomness rather than something that could be predicted


Now this doesn't assume that the favorite goes bats%^&&&t in the paddock, thus bringing considerably more info into play after the horizontal bets have been placed but before win prices are stabilized, but in ex-ante terms of expectations, we should expect the favorite to be the favorite in every pool. Note, I'm using expectations here. random factors influencing any one outcome can be different.

[Hanover1]

Now that the cobwebs have cleared, I believe that the current system would be called for if it were any other way.

[OTM Al]

Now that the cobwebs have cleared, I believe that the current system would be called for if it were any other way.

Can't see any one that is more fair. Would you rather be switched to the horse that is the favorite based on most current info, or one based on old info if there is some difference between the two?

[Jeff P]

Can't see any one that is more fair. Would you rather be switched to the horse that is the favorite based on most current info, or one based on old info if there is some difference between the two?

Think outside the box a little. The system that would be more fair is one that would allow the bettor to name an alternate selection (as opposed to auto transfer to the favorite or a refund) in the event the original selection is scratched.

-jp

.

[MaTH716]

Think outside the box a little. The system that would be more fair is one that would allow the bettor to name an alternate selection (as opposed to auto transfer to the favorite or a refund) in the event the original selection is scratched.

-jp

.
Isn't there a chance that the alternate scratches as well? Which would put you right back at square one.

[OTM Al]

Think outside the box a little. The system that would be more fair is one that would allow the bettor to name an alternate selection (as opposed to auto transfer to the favorite or a refund) in the event the original selection is scratched.

-jp

.

Clearly some players would prefer that. I'm just thinking what can be done with current technology. What you, and many others, suggest can get complex. Could you only have one alternate for a leg, or one for each selection? And what happens if Mr Horse flips in the stall and cuts up the one next to him and two that you had scratch? What do you do then? I'm not sure but a simple system with very clear rules may still be better in the long run for all parties involved.

And frankly that wouldn't be more fair, it would be more advantageous to certain players. The current system is completely fair. The rules are simple and clearly stated and are applied to all equally. That is as fair as it is going to get. What you suggest is actually less fair because it gives even more of an edge to sophisticated players.

[Jeff P]

Isn't there a chance that the alternate scratches as well? Which would put you right back at square one.Sure there's a chance alternate selections scratch out as well.

Imagine a tote system programmed in such a way that:

* Customer has the opportunity to name an alternate scratch list for each leg of a serial race wager. Alternate scratch list has built in order of preference the same way as is being done right now in the Paceadvantage.com PAIHL contest. IMHO, very fair rule implemented by Jay covering a lot of ground.

* In the event the original selection and ALL of the scratch list alternates have been scratched out of the race, the post time favorite is substituted.

Combine that with:

* A gate crew that instead of loading the rest of the field as quickly as possible whenever a horse is scratched at the gate - they give the bettors enough time to rehandicap the race (90 seconds to 2 minutes would do it) and make exchanges.

FWIW, I'm of the opinion that quite a few tracks out there are missing out on additional handle through the actions of their gate crews.

Like I said, think outside the box a little. :)

-jp

.

[OTM Al]

Like I said, think outside the box a little. :)

-jp

.

That is such an annoying and overused phrase. I can imagine that easily and more. I can also imagine the cost of redoing the entire tote system. This will of course have to happen eventually, so maybe you should put that in the suggestion box then. I can also imagine being stuck in line behind somebody keying one of these monsters in. I can't imagine yet what players will find to complain about it (except for longer waits in line) but I'm sure they will.

Sorry, but I'm a fan of simple over additional moving parts that really aren't needed. Maybe I'll switch to your view when I hear about somebody complaining because he got the winner twice due to a scratch.

[Stillriledup]

What is fair and what isn't depends on who you are talking to, the time of day and the phase of the moon. It is however a rule and a well known one at that. In an efficient market, the post time favorite and the pick six favorite should be the same horse. So I don't see anything valid here worth complaining about.

A lot of the times, its going to be the same.

I understand this can happen in 5 of the 6 legs, but i'll use the 6th leg as my example. The win pool favorite in leg 6 is much more efficient than the pick 6 favorite in that same leg because the people who are betting win in the final race have gotten to see an entire day of changing track biases, hot jocks, hot trainers, last race warmups which is big. What if the favorite comes out with first time front bandages and looks stiff? He might end up being the 2nd or 3rd choice. Also, there was a horse who was 5-2 ML trained by Canani off a 2 year layoff. Most of the bettors in the pick 6 do not know if that Canani horse is going to be dead on the board, or open up 6-5 as the 'right' horse.

Also, another possibility is if there's 2 distinct speed horses in the race. One is a contender and one is a longshot. Lets say the longshot is the one who scratched....this gives the final race win bettors the info that now, the other contender is 'loose' on the lead, while before, he figured to duel.

This final race yesterday at SA was a cheap claiming race, people didnt know for sure who the favorite was going to be, so, when they put in their pick 6 tickets, they were just guessing. But, the people who got the scratch didnt have to guess, they were put onto the favorite at the last second.

I do understand that everyone who bets a horiz bet knows the rules before hand, therefore, there's really no disadvantage, you're playing by the same rules as everyone else. Except, the people who KNOW they intend on scratching and that information is given to some bettors who are singling the horse who intends to scratch. Those people end up with the more efficient favorite, while the people who put their tickets in before leg 1 are just guessing.

[Robert Goren]

Combine that with:

* A gate crew that instead of loading the rest of the field as quickly as possible whenever a horse is scratched at the gate - they give the bettors enough time to rehandicap the race (90 seconds to 2 minutes would do it) and make exchanges.

FWIW, I'm of the opinion that quite a few tracks out there are missing out on additional handle through the actions of their gate crews.

Like I said, think outside the box a little. :)

-jp

.There are plenty of lower level tracks that do delay the start of the race when a gate scratch occurs. I hate it. I almost cancel my bet when they pull that. I think it throws timing of the race off. Horse are exercised in the warm ups to start at certain time. Everything is now off. At least that opinion.

[OTM Al]

I do understand that everyone who bets a horiz bet knows the rules before hand, therefore, there's really no disadvantage, you're playing by the same rules as everyone else. Except, the people who KNOW they intend on scratching and that information is given to some bettors who are singling the horse who intends to scratch. Those people end up with the more efficient favorite, while the people who put their tickets in before leg 1 are just guessing.

I guess this is ok if you like letting others make a pick for you. Seems a little suicidal to me, but if this is the way you handicap, that's your thing. You might realize that I'm not a big believer in the value of so called inside information. I've seen it pay, but much more often I've seen it implode.

[Stillriledup]

I guess this is ok if you like letting others make a pick for you. Seems a little suicidal to me, but if this is the way you handicap, that's your thing. You might realize that I'm not a big believer in the value of so called inside information. I've seen it pay, but much more often I've seen it implode.

Its like this. Lets say that in the final leg, i'm down to 4 horses who can possibly be the favorite and possibly win (according to my handicapping) and i really have no clue who is better than the other, i feel that all 4 horses are equal in my eyes. Well, if i was given the opportunity to land on the post time favorite, no matter who it is, in my pick 6 ticket, i would choose that option. The logic is that whoever is the post time favorite will be a better long run pick than my own personal selection just because there will be times where i'm NOT on the favorite.

IN this example i'm talking about, the 9 horse B's Lucky Strike appeared like he was going to be favored. If you asked me before hand "who do you think is going to be the favorite" i would have said him. I would have been wrong, as the Sherman horse from the outside post took all the 'live' money.

I think that if this was a stakes race and all these horses were young and sound, its different than the last race yesterday where it was a cheap claimer and you have no idea who's going to show up looking like crap and who's going to show up looking sound, great coat, bouncing off his heels and taking all the inside money.

In this particular instance, I'd rather go with the public's pick in a cheap race where the public has up until off time to decide who should be favored rather than my own pick 2 and a half hours beforehand.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Think outside the box a little. The system that would be more fair is one that would allow the bettor to name an alternate selection (as opposed to auto transfer to the favorite or a refund) in the event the original selection is scratched.

-jp

.

Don't I remember NYRA offering this exact scenario way back when if you were betting on the little parlay style cards while on-track?

It's been a while since I lived in New York and I rarely used them, but that seems to stick out to me from the few times that I did play a parlay ticket.

[Stillriledup]

Think outside the box a little. The system that would be more fair is one that would allow the bettor to name an alternate selection (as opposed to auto transfer to the favorite or a refund) in the event the original selection is scratched.

-jp

.

Alternate's sound good. I just get a little concerned that people who are betting on a horse who wasnt destined to win are all of a sudden getting to reap the benefits of not only a much more live horse, but getting to utilize handicapping info that everyone else wasnt privy to when they made their bets 2 and a half hours before. Its an advantage to use a horse who scratches and that shouldnt be the case.

[Jeff P]

That is such an annoying and overused phrase. I can imagine that easily and more. I can also imagine the cost of redoing the entire tote system. This will of course have to happen eventually, so maybe you should put that in the suggestion box then. I can also imagine being stuck in line behind somebody keying one of these monsters in. I can't imagine yet what players will find to complain about it (except for longer waits in line) but I'm sure they will.

Sorry, but I'm a fan of simple over additional moving parts that really aren't needed. Maybe I'll switch to your view when I hear about somebody complaining because he got the winner twice due to a scratch.Actually I was imagining a web based betting interface with checkboxes as the UI to create an alternate scratch list. Nothing too complicated. Want to create an alternate scratch list? Easy. Check a couple of boxes and hit the submit button.

With a little imagination it wouldn't take all that much to present the same UI to the on track customer using a touch screen.

Racing and innovation? Kicking and screaming... maybe by the year 2112. :D


-jp

.

[Jeff P]

Alternate's sound good. I just get a little concerned that people who are betting on a horse who wasnt destined to win are all of a sudden getting to reap the benefits of not only a much more live horse, but getting to utilize handicapping info that everyone else wasnt privy to when they made their bets 2 and a half hours before. Its an advantage to use a horse who scratches and that shouldnt be the case.The system I proposed addresses this. The bettor has to name a list of scratch alternates (in order of preference) at the time the bet is made - for a pick 6 this would be hrs earlier.

-jp

.

[Dahoss9698]

Except, the people who KNOW they intend on scratching and that information is given to some bettors who are singling the horse who intends to scratch.

This is really stupid, even for you.

[Stillriledup]

The system I proposed addresses this. The bettor has to name a list of scratch alternates (in order of preference) at the time the bet is made - for a pick 6 this would be hrs earlier.

-jp

.

This is the best idea i believe.

[Spalding No!]

This is the best idea i believe.

I'm pretty sure the Santa Anita pick 6 bet slip already has an area to put in an alternate selection (if you want to choose one).

[Stillriledup]

I'm pretty sure the Santa Anita pick 6 bet slip already has an area to put in an alternate selection (if you want to choose one).

What about for people who bet over the phone or on the internet?

[OTM Al]

What about the people that had a 3rd horse (ie not the fav and not the scratch) who wins? Announced payouts are not altered under the current system. However, allowing players to have chosen that horse as an alternate lessens their payoffs. All this is is a redistribution system which will screw some over and benefit others compared to the current system. A change in this rule has a net 0 effect. That's why I fail to see the need to change anything here. It's not like having a race rained off the turf during the sequence. Hey if the goal is for more winners, why not just ask for an ALL on the leg with a scratch.

[Dahoss9698]

In this particular instance, I'd rather go with the public's pick in a cheap race where the public has up until off time to decide who should be favored rather than my own pick 2 and a half hours beforehand.

Spoken like someone who doesn't bet. Call me crazy, but I'd rather go with horses I have chosen, not the public.

[Stillriledup]

What about the people that had a 3rd horse (ie not the fav and not the scratch) who wins? Announced payouts are not altered under the current system. However, allowing players to have chosen that horse as an alternate lessens their payoffs. All this is is a redistribution system which will screw some over and benefit others compared to the current system. A change in this rule has a net 0 effect. That's why I fail to see the need to change anything here. It's not like having a race rained off the turf during the sequence. Hey if the goal is for more winners, why not just ask for an ALL on the leg with a scratch.

There's gotta be a better way than to award the people with the scratched horse with the same exact payoff as someone who actually picked the winner in the first place.

[Jeff P]

What about the people that had a 3rd horse (ie not the fav and not the scratch) who wins? Announced payouts are not altered under the current system. However, allowing players to have chosen that horse as an alternate lessens their payoffs. All this is is a redistribution system which will screw some over and benefit others compared to the current system. A change in this rule has a net 0 effect. That's why I fail to see the need to change anything here. It's not like having a race rained off the turf during the sequence. Hey if the goal is for more winners, why not just ask for an ALL on the leg with a scratch. The goal isn't to create more winners.

The goal is to allow bettors to make better decisions during ticket construction.

In a perfect world, all scratches and changes would be known prior to the start of any serial race sequence. Of course that's not always possible.

An alternate scratch list is a way to allow players to create tickets that better reflect their opinions (given the horses that are actually running) vs. the current system we have now.

Taking things a step further, in addition to checkboxes on the UI designed for creation of an alternate scratch list - I'd like to see both a "refund" checkbox and a "post time favorite" checkbox made part of the UI.

Many times a serial race ticket is constructed around a single horse in one of the legs. When that horse scratches, I'd argue most players would rather have a refund than the post time favorite. Other players might see things differently. Why not let those who so choose check the post time favorite box?

Would there be any real harm if racing did the unthinkable and offered the customer a few choices and a little innovation?


-jp

.

[Stillriledup]

The goal isn't to create more winners.

The goal is to allow bettors to make better decisions during ticket construction.

In a perfect world, all scratches and changes would be known prior to the start of any serial race sequence. Of course that's not always possible.

An alternate scratch list is a way to allow players to create tickets that better reflect their opinions (given the horses that are actually running) vs. the current system we have now.

Taking things a step further, in addition to checkboxes on the UI designed for creation of an alternate scratch list - I'd like to see both a "refund" checkbox and a "post time favorite" checkbox made part of the UI.

Many times a serial race ticket is constructed around a single horse in one of the legs. When that horse scratches, I'd argue most players would rather have a refund than the post time favorite. Other players might see things differently. Why not let those who so choose check the post time favorite box?

Would there be any real harm if racing did the unthinkable and offered the customer a few choices and a little innovation?


-jp

.


The key to a horizontal bet lies with the closing of the wagering pools. If you bet win, and the pool closes and the gate opens and your horse is lame and can't run, you lose. You don't get the opportunity halfway thru the bet to 'switch picks to the post time favorite'.

We assume just because there are 6 races, there are 6 individual siuations, but in reality, its one wager and that one wager shouldnt be altered in any way.

If something happens to the horse you select and he can't run, you should probably just lose your bet.

I guess it comes down to this. If you select a horse who ends up being physically unable to run, you shouldnt get a do-over. Getting a do-over puts the person who picked the lame/sick horse at an actual advantage over those who are already locked into their bets, that's not fair to the handicappers who were smart enough to not select a horse who was broken down.

If it was up to me, i would either assign all the scratched monies to the LONGEST shot in the race at post time or refund their ticket altogether.

[therussmeister]

I guess it comes down to this. If you select a horse who ends up being physically unable to run, you shouldnt get a do-over. Getting a do-over puts the person who picked the lame/sick horse at an actual advantage over those who are already locked into their bets, that's not fair to the handicappers who were smart enough to not select a horse who was broken down.

If it was up to me, i would either assign all the scratched monies to the LONGEST shot in the race at post time or refund their ticket altogether.

My point, in post #2 is, it has nothing to do with being smart, and everything to do with luck. You can't tell before the post parade, which horse, if any, is not feeling right today.

And by the way, as far as changing bets to the longest price on the board, think of the howling if that horse wins and the pick 6 payout drops from $350,000 to $35,000 due to the late scratch a 3 - 1 horse.

Unfortunately, many actions are unavoidably beneficial to some and harmful to others. No ideal solution.

[Stillriledup]

My point, in post #2 is, it has nothing to do with being smart, and everything to do with luck. You can't tell before the post parade, which horse, if any, is not feeling right today.

And by the way, as far as changing bets to the longest price on the board, think of the howling if that horse wins and the pick 6 payout drops from $350,000 to $35,000 due to the late scratch a 3 - 1 horse.

Unfortunately, many actions are unavoidably beneficial to some and harmful to others. No ideal solution.

I hear you, there's really no easy solution because no matter which direction you go, one segment of players is going to get the shaft.

[OTM Al]

I hear you, there's really no easy solution because no matter which direction you go, one segment of players is going to get the shaft.

Which is exactly why you leave it alone. You get what you picked and if you lose one, everybody that had that one gets the same replacement. Simple, fair.

[MaTH716]

There's gotta be a better way than to award the people with the scratched horse with the same exact payoff as someone who actually picked the winner in the first place.

That's ridiculous. The bettors get screwed enough, now you want to punish people that included a horse that scratched? If you think about it, they are already being punished, by not having a horse that they liked (hopefully at a price) in the sequance. Come on man, get a grip.

[MaTH716]

The goal isn't to create more winners.

The goal is to allow bettors to make better decisions during ticket construction.

In a perfect world, all scratches and changes would be known prior to the start of any serial race sequence. Of course that's not always possible.

An alternate scratch list is a way to allow players to create tickets that better reflect their opinions (given the horses that are actually running) vs. the current system we have now.

Taking things a step further, in addition to checkboxes on the UI designed for creation of an alternate scratch list - I'd like to see both a "refund" checkbox and a "post time favorite" checkbox made part of the UI.

Many times a serial race ticket is constructed around a single horse in one of the legs. When that horse scratches, I'd argue most players would rather have a refund than the post time favorite. Other players might see things differently. Why not let those who so choose check the post time favorite box?

Would there be any real harm if racing did the unthinkable and offered the customer a few choices and a little innovation?


-jp

.

I honestly don't think that a refund option could really work fairly.

Say you had a pick four sequance that in the final leg had a heavy odds on favorite (a probably single on many tickets) flips in the paddock and gets scratched. Do you really think that the track is going to refund all that money live to that horse at that point? Take the track out of it, say you really think the 1/9 shot was beatable. You're live to three other horses in the race and now all of a sudden the favorite scratched and 75% of the pool goes back to the bettors. How is that fair to you? That's much more of an injustice then your horse scratching and getting the post time favorite as your pick.

You do have some valid points/ideas about alternate selections.

[elhelmete]

And, if you had the favorite along with the scratched horse in the same leg anyway, you now have two live tickets if that favorite wins. So in Stillriledup's example from today, there are those that cashed for 17k X 2 when the favorite won instead of 25k X 1 if the longshot had not been scratched and had won. I'll bet they're not complaining.

Is this accurate? If I was live to the final leg and had horse 'A', the favorite and horse 'B' that scratches, do I now have 2 live tickets? Or am I now a single and a portion of my initial bet gets refunded?

[OTM Al]

Is this accurate? If I was live to the final leg and had horse 'A', the favorite and horse 'B' that scratches, do I now have 2 live tickets? Or am I now a single and a portion of my initial bet gets refunded?

You would have 2 As in that case.

[elhelmete]

You would have 2 As in that case.

On a single ticket?

Not a P-6 player so forgive me if this is an obvious question. :)

[Stillriledup]

That's ridiculous. The bettors get screwed enough, now you want to punish people that included a horse that scratched? If you think about it, they are already being punished, by not having a horse that they liked (hopefully at a price) in the sequance. Come on man, get a grip.

Yes, i want to punish them. I want to tar and feather them.

Listen, as far as getting a grip, i have a firm grip and i'm not letting go. The rules of the bet is to pick SIX (or, 5 or 4,etc) winners, not one less. If you have a scratched horse, that means you didnt meet the criteria of the bet. In my example, the bet was to pick 6 winners, if one of your horses scratches, that means you didnt select 6 winners and other people did. Should the people who picked 6 winners get the same payoff as people who picked 5 winners with a little bad luck?

[Beachbabe]

The key to a horizontal bet lies with the closing of the wagering pools. If you bet win, and the pool closes and the gate opens and your horse is lame and can't run, you lose. You don't get the opportunity halfway thru the bet to 'switch picks to the post time favorite'.

We assume just because there are 6 races, there are 6 individual siuations, but in reality, its one wager and that one wager shouldnt be altered in any way.

If something happens to the horse you select and he can't run, you should probably just lose your bet.

I guess it comes down to this. If you select a horse who ends up being physically unable to run, you shouldnt get a do-over. Getting a do-over puts the person who picked the lame/sick horse at an actual advantage over those who are already locked into their bets, that's not fair to the handicappers who were smart enough to not select a horse who was broken down.

If it was up to me, i would either assign all the scratched monies to the LONGEST shot in the race at post time or refund their ticket altogether.


According to that reasoning, if you bet $200 on a horse and he's scratched at the gate, then your bet is a losing bet. I'm sure that would go over big. How long before the National Guard was called in to quell the riots ?

[Stillriledup]

According to that reasoning, if you bet $200 on a horse and he's scratched at the gate, then your bet is a losing bet. I'm sure that would go over big. How long before the National Guard was called in to quell the riots ?

No, that's different.

If you bet 200 on a horse and he scratched, you get your money back.

I'm talking about a bet that requires the participant to select a certain amount of winners. If you have a scratch during one of the legs, you havent picked that exact amount of winners. I'm not sure we can go rewarding people who have picked 5 winners with bad luck and give them the same amount of money as people who actually picked 6 winners.

[OTM Al]

No, that's different.

If you bet 200 on a horse and he scratched, you get your money back.

I'm talking about a bet that requires the participant to select a certain amount of winners. If you have a scratch during one of the legs, you havent picked that exact amount of winners. I'm not sure we can go rewarding people who have picked 5 winners with bad luck and give them the same amount of money as people who actually picked 6 winners.

Seriously? Do you look for things to complain about? I should have known this thread was just another complaint fest before spending time on it.

[MaTH716]

Yes, i want to punish them. I want to tar and feather them.

Listen, as far as getting a grip, i have a firm grip and i'm not letting go. The rules of the bet is to pick SIX (or, 5 or 4,etc) winners, not one less. If you have a scratched horse, that means you didnt meet the criteria of the bet. In my example, the bet was to pick 6 winners, if one of your horses scratches, that means you didnt select 6 winners and other people did. Should the people who picked 6 winners get the same payoff as people who picked 5 winners with a little bad luck?

So in this game that is so hard to win at with all the different factors, now you want to include horses scratching to the list of ways that bettors can lose. Why would anyone ever want to bet a multi race wager again?

I'm really starting to believe that Hoss is right and that you don't bet a red cent.

[andtheyreoff]

No, that's different.

If you bet 200 on a horse and he scratched, you get your money back.

I'm talking about a bet that requires the participant to select a certain amount of winners. If you have a scratch during one of the legs, you havent picked that exact amount of winners. I'm not sure we can go rewarding people who have picked 5 winners with bad luck and give them the same amount of money as people who actually picked 6 winners.

Ok, let's say that there's a big Pick 6 carryover at, say, Santa Anita. You've spent hours handicapping the sequence and have decided on a sizable play.

In the first 5 races, you pick every winner and are alive to a major score if your single comes in. In the gate, however, he flips and has to be scratched.
The post time favorite goes on to win, creating a 5 figure payout.

Would you be happy to get a 5 out of 6 return on your investment instead of all that money under the current rule?

[affirmedny]

Santa Anita already has alternate selection capability for both pick 4, PPA, and pick sixes:

Scratches
An alternate selection can be made only on bet cards for the Pick 4,6 and all. Your alternate selection will be substituted for a scratch. If you do not select an alternate, the actual betting favorite, as evidenced by the total amount wagered in the win pool at the time of the start of the race, will be substituted for the scratch. In the event of a scratch in the Pick 3 before the first race on your ticket, a refund will be given

http://santaanita.com/content/how-wager

[Stillriledup]

Ok, let's say that there's a big Pick 6 carryover at, say, Santa Anita. You've spent hours handicapping the sequence and have decided on a sizable play.

In the first 5 races, you pick every winner and are alive to a major score if your single comes in. In the gate, however, he flips and has to be scratched.
The post time favorite goes on to win, creating a 5 figure payout.

Would you be happy to get a 5 out of 6 return on your investment instead of all that money under the current rule?

Ya know, i totally get what you're saying. Its a very slippery slope however, i just think that even though its incredibly bad luck that after picking 5 straight winners and then having a horse flip, you still only picked 5 winners with a lot of horrible luck mixed in, while some people picked 6 winners.

The people who found a way to not have their horse flip have to equally share their money with you.

I know that there's really no other way to get around this and make the bettors happy, i wish i had a solution where the bettors of the scratched horse didnt take money out of the pockets of the people who actually picked 6 winners.

While its not fair to the guy who's horse flipped, its less fair to someone who picked 6 winners to share the pot with someone who picked 5 and had horrible luck.

[Learned Hand35]

While its not fair to the guy who's horse flipped, its less fair to someone who picked 6 winners to share the pot with someone who picked 5 and had horrible luck.

So the bettor who that had the good luck of not having to beat another contender with their horse is more deserving of a payout than the bettor that had the bad luck of picking the late scratch?

[Stillriledup]

So the bettor who that had the good luck of not having to beat another contender with their horse is more deserving of a payout than the bettor that had the bad luck of picking the late scratch?

This is an excellent point, the bettors of the winner have one less horse to defeat.

Like i said before, there's really no way to make everyone happy and still reward the people who actually picked 6 winners.

At the end of the day, i guess the moral of the story remains that its really a bad idea to use (or single) a favorite because if someone gets late scratched, you have those people's money on your horse knocking down your price.

Maybe the best way to do this is to change the rule from post time WIN favorite to the horse who is the actual pick 6 favorite. I believe this is better than getting the post time win favorite for at least 2 reasons. One reason is that the track can announce before the race starts who's the favorite and the other reason is the people who bet the scratched horse dont get the benefit of the public's up to date information, they get the 'stale' favorite that was made before anyone saw a post parade/warmup.