The Exec's at Hollywood Park want to know how they can improve the P5

[andymays]

Should the players prefer the pick 5 to have a two tier payoff as is the case now (70% to major, 30% to minor), or 100% to tickets with 5/5, with a carryover if no one picks all 5. We are getting mixed messages.

This is a multiple Choice Poll!

[Spiderman]

As it is now - two payoffs: 4/5 and 5/5

[Southieboy]

Move it to the final 5 races, bringing the Pick 6 up a race. For example an 8 race card the Pick 6 would be on Races 2-7 and the Pick 5 would be on Races 4-8. Pick 4 goes back to old slot.

Carryover provision with no consolations.

[andymays]

Move it to the final 5 races, bringing the Pick 6 up a race. For example an 8 race card the Pick 6 would be on Races 2-7 and the Pick 5 would be on Races 4-8. Pick 4 goes back to old slot.

Carryover provision with no consolations.

Should they have two P5's?

[toussaud]

nope

[andymays]

Hollywood: Pick 5 pays $27,647 for Sunday

I think the consolation was $300.

[andymays]

Just so eveyone knows they're reading the thread. These are the first group of people to give a sh+t about what they're customers think.

The TOC is the problem in California.

[Stillriledup]

I would consider playing a bet like this if it was part of the Pick 6 and here's why. Because it takes a good 45 mins to an hour (at least) to handicap ONE race. If i'm spending 4 or 5 hours handicapping the 6 races of the pick 6 sequence, i won't have time to handicap the first 5 races of the day to wager on a pick 5...i'll just gloss over it and pretend that the first leg of the pick 6 is the first race of my betting day.

Now, if they put the pick 5 as part of the pick 6 sequence, i would play it because i have those races already deeply handicapped. I can take advantage of the hours i spend capping the pick 6 (and late pick 4) and not have to worry about the first 2 or 3 races on the card.

I like the carryover option on this bet and personally, i'd make it a 1 dollar base, i think i would only even consider betting this thing with a carryover. As it stands now, carding it as the first 5 races of the day gives me no interest at all.

[andymays]

I would consider playing a bet like this if it was part of the Pick 6 and here's why. Because it takes a good 45 mins to an hour (at least) to handicap ONE race. If i'm spending 4 or 5 hours handicapping the 6 races of the pick 6 sequence, i won't have time to handicap the first 5 races of the day to wager on a pick 5...i'll just gloss over it and pretend that the first leg of the pick 6 is the first race of my betting day.

Now, if they put the pick 5 as part of the pick 6 sequence, i would play it because i have those races already deeply handicapped. I can take advantage of the hours i spend capping the pick 6 (and late pick 4) and not have to worry about the first 2 or 3 races on the card.

I like the carryover option on this bet and personally, i'd make it a 1 dollar base, i think i would only even consider betting this thing with a carryover. As it stands now, carding it as the first 5 races of the day gives me no interest at all.


They got hammered for making the P4 a 50 cent bet. They wanted it to be a dollar.

[Stillriledup]

They got hammered for making the P4 a 50 cent bet. They wanted it to be a dollar.

Tracks almost always get this stuff wrong. If you're making a bet hard on purpose, like a super or a penta, why have it a 10 cent or 50 cent base? It makes no sense. The entire premise of these bets is to make it really hard so it pays a TON not to make it 'easier' to hit.

[andymays]

Tracks almost always get this stuff wrong. If you're making a bet hard on purpose, like a super or a penta, why have it a 10 cent or 50 cent base? It makes no sense. The entire premise of these bets is to make it really hard so it pays a TON not to make it 'easier' to hit.

They get hundreds of calls to make the base bet low. I agree with you that the P4'S should be $1.

[Stillriledup]

They get hundreds of calls to make the base bet low. I agree with you that the P4'S should be $1.

Those people who want the base bet low can't afford that particular bet. That means, they should bet on things they CAN afford, like win and show and maybe a Quinella box. Lowering the base of those bets just creates less carryovers and lower payoffs. If i had my way, i'd bring back the 1 dollar super.

How about this idea (since they're reading) how about having one race a day designated as the 1 dollar super? Make it a 10 horse field or larger and make the base 1 dollar. This way, people who really want to try for a massive score can have at least one race per day where the little old lady from Pasadena won't dilute the price betting bingo numbers on a 2 dollar and 40 cent box.

[freehouse2002]

I only played the bet on the first day due to time constraints, but I liked the bet. I don't think there should be a consolation payoff (even though I got one the first day). There isn't one for 3 out of 4 in the pick four, or in the pick three unless there are scratches.

I know it's hard for the racing secretary, but the pick-5 sequence should be set up on the five toughest looking races on the card. That way, we don't get a payoff of what was it on Friday, about $89? This means front-loading the card with the toughest races, or moving it to the last five races of the day, and carding the toughest races then. Unfortunately, that's hard to do with the five and six horse fields we consistently see.

I also agree with the minimum bets being too low on SOME bets, but I think it's great for this particular bet. Yes, it will draw money from bettors who typically can't afford this bet if it'd be a $1 bet, but, they are still not going to go gung-ho on the bet, meaning they add "dumb" money to the pool, meaning a chance for a big score. The payoff was nice on Sunday....just think, you only bet and hit the p4 and it pays $600.....if you liked the #1 in the first, you could've hit for over $27,000.....definite value on the bet.

It's tough to say what will and won't work for the bet....too early to tell, but I at least commend Hollywood Park for trying.....now if they could only lower their General Admission price and/or reward their frequent players more.....and I don't mean the once-a-meet mailings I receive for free admission on a Thursday (I hope they really are reading this)


freehouse2002

[point given]

As Harvey Pack used to say, we have a p6 then if you're .not alive the p5( i realize he didnot say p5_) then the p4 then the p3 then the late double.

The bet will not cannibalize the p6 as they think as they are two different bettors. I will never play this p5 as the first 5 races

[Stillriledup]

As Harvey Pack used to say, we have a p6 then if you're .not alive the p5( i realize he didnot say p5_) then the p4 then the p3 then the late double.

The bet will not cannibalize the p6 as they think as they are two different bettors. I will never play this p5 as the first 5 races

They think its going to cannibalize the pick 6, but it wont take as much as they think, as long as both bets dont start with the exact same race.

I agree, one bet the pick 6 is a 2 dollar base and the other bet is a 50 cent base...pick 6 bettors are an entirely different animal, if you're a pick 6 type of player and that's your 'thing' you're not going to skip the pick 6 and play the pick 5 instead....you'll do both, especially if you lose leg 1 of the pick 6.

They need to do this. They need to make Leg 1 of the pick 6 the toughest race on the card and when that leg knocks out a large amount of pick 6 players, these guys will bet into the pick 5 as they already have those 5 races handicapped in advance.

[Bruddah]

Just so eveyone knows they're reading the thread. These are the first group of people to give a sh+t about what they're customers think.

The TOC is the problem in California.


Now aren't they SPECIAL! After all these years they care now? If you fellas really are looking, aren't you SPECIAL? Getting all your chickens (players) back in the hen house is going to be a lot harder now. But, aren't you SPECIAL for finally caring.

[affirmedny]

Consos are good IMO. It's a similar to lower takeout, the guy who gets something for going 4 for 5 is more likely to keep playing them than the guy who keeps going 4 for 5 and getting nothing. It's good business to return money to as many different players as possible as it keeps them interested.

[Vinman]

The Pick 5 should be on the last 5 races and the Pick 6 should remain on the last 6 races. If you stub your toe on leg one of the Pick 6, you already have your Pick 5 play ready to go.

There is no reason on earth why the Pick 4 needs to be a $1.00 minumum. A 50 cent minimum for both the Pick 4 and Pick 5 will result in fewer "signers" and less wasted time by mutuel clerks filling out IRS forms. An $1,100 Pick 4 on a $1.00 ticket requires IRS paperwork.....a $550 Pick 4 on a $.50 cent ticket doesn't. Anyone who wants to play a Pick 4 for $1.00 can bet the $.50 cent version twice.

Vinman

[Vinman]

Should they have two P5's?

One Pick 5 per day is enough.....last 5 races, as I stated earlier. I do like the idea of an early and late Pick 4, with no overlap. Chances are one will be appealing and one won't.

For years NYRA ran their Pick 6 on races on races 3 through 8 until about 10 years ago when Bill Nader changed it to the last 6 races.....at the suggestion of yours truly. You don't want to end a Pick 6 on what could turn out to be a short field stakes race.....you want to end it on a full field race to make it as challenging as possible. The SoCal fields these days are too short for the racing office not to have the flexiblity of hand picking the final Pick 6 race with a big field to maximize the possibility of a carryover.

You also want to keep the Pick 6 betting windows open as long as possible. There is simply no advantage to moving the start of the Pick 6 forward one race.

Vinman

[JohnGalt1]

Tracks almost always get this stuff wrong. If you're making a bet hard on purpose, like a super or a penta, why have it a 10 cent or 50 cent base? It makes no sense. The entire premise of these bets is to make it really hard so it pays a TON not to make it 'easier' to hit.

:ThmbUp:

[chickenhead]

I think the consolation is a good idea, it's a good way to increase churn by putting a little money back in more peoples pockets and keep them playing. With a $0.50 minimum and a pick 5 I'm not so sure carryover vs. pay out each day matters much, either way.

It's a pretty crowded multi-race exotic menu -- I realize why it was created, but it is shoe-horned in, there wasn't really a need for a pick 5 in socal, not with 2 pick 4's and a (still somewhat) healthy pick 6.

I'm sure Hollywood is worried about cannibalization of other pools a bit, either the early pick 4 or late 4 and 6 depending on where it is placed. The pick 5 is a better bet, most all the bettors with a fixed bankroll for the day *should* move their play to it. Being a fan of rational bettors as they are better equipped to stick around, I hope that does happen to some degree. To look at it the other way -- it's too bad that there are two pick 4's and a pick 6 that are competing with it -- they are siphoning money out of the pick 5 pool.

I like it, I'm glad it is there if the alternative is just not having it -- but it is an awfully crowded menu as it exists.

I'm sure most horseplayers wouldn't agree with me as they're creatures of habit...but all things considered, sacrilegious as it is -- with this weird problem space the best thing Hollywood could do for the pick 5 (and for bettors, and themselves) is to leave it where it is and as it is and eliminate the early pick 4. Push all that into the P5. The Pick 5 as setup is a much better bet with the takeout, the consos, and the $0.50 min for 5 races.

[andymays]

I'm surprized about the consolation and the carryover numbers.


Although I can understand if you got the carryover yesterday.

[turfnsport]

Just so eveyone knows they're reading the thread. These are the first group of people to give a sh+t about what they're customers think.


Andy,

My suggestion would be they should send each and every online horseplayer a compass. SoCal racing is so far off the radar of horsplayers I talk to, most don't give a crap what they do.

Tossing in a low take Pick 5 does not solve the issue of the takeout hike of the other exotics.

I'm not buying what they are selling. It looks to me like these guys are saying, "let's give these suckers one low takeout bet and they will come back and bet into the other pools. Problem solved."

[andymays]

Andy,

My suggestion would be they should send each and every online horseplayer a compass. SoCal racing is so far off the radar of horsplayers I talk to, most don't give a crap what they do.

Tossing in a low take Pick 5 does not solve the issue of the takeout hike of the other exotics.

I'm not buying what they are selling. It looks to me like these guys are saying, "let's give these suckers one low takeout bet and they will come back and bet into the other pools. Problem solved."

I can understand your position if you haven't been to the meetings. You might want to check out your buddy.


http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/tvg-says-exchange-wagering-will-stimulate-u-s-racing/?commentStart=20#Comments

[toussaud]

I don't like them because they take money out of the winning player's hand. it in a round about way raises the takeout so to speak. You are taking money out of the winners hands and putting it into peoples hand that did not win. the only one I don't mind is when a pick 6 doesn't get h and you paid 5 out of 6.

[turfnsport]

I can understand your position if you haven't been to the meetings. You might want to check out your buddy.


http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/tvg-says-exchange-wagering-will-stimulate-u-s-racing/?commentStart=20#Comments

You think my position would be different if I attended the meetings or read the yakking going on at Paulick?

That's pretty funny Andy....lol

[turfnsport]

I don't like them because they take money out of the winning player's hand. it in a round about way raises the takeout so to speak. You are taking money out of the winners hands and putting it into peoples hand that did not win. the only one I don't mind is when a pick 6 doesn't get h and you paid 5 out of 6.

I'm not really sure where I stand on that, but...
Don't forget if you do hit the P5, chances are you are going to have multiple consos, right?

[Southieboy]

On an aside, why do they still offer a Quinella?

[chickenhead]

On an aside, why do they still offer a Quinella?

good call -- since we have you here Hollywood -- please lead the way on this and eliminate the quinella. There is zero reason for it to exist, it takes up cognitive and physical space, and has a small negative effect on the liquidity of exacta pools everywhere.

Please for the love of god, racing -- eliminate the quinella.

Any time ever a customer of yours looks up at a monitor and sees anything relating to a quinella you've just done them a disservice, and delayed them from getting whatever info they wanted. Because they were not looking for quinella info. Every time a new person is brought to the track and they ask "whats the quinella" you've just done them a disservice, and the person who brought them.

Just having it around has a small but persistent cost.

[andymays]

You think my position would be different if I attended the meetings or read the yakking going on at Paulick?

That's pretty funny Andy....lol

Your'e killing me. :lol:

[Kelso]

These are the first group of people to give a sh+t about what they're customers think.If this were true, they would simply offset the mandated takeout increases on the exotics by adjusting, DOWNWARD, their take on WPS ... and then reducing purses in like amount.

Instead they come up with a bet designed to suck more money ... at existing, UNREDUCED takeout rates ... into the older pools. They're running a con by which greedy horsemen still get more and the track remains whole. There's no room for the customers in THAT equation.

[andymays]

If this were true, they would simply offset the mandated takeout increases on the exotics by adjusting, DOWNWARD, their take on WPS ... and then reducing purses in like amount.

Instead they come up with a bet designed to suck more money ... at existing, UNREDUCED takeout rates ... into the older pools. They're running a con by which greedy horsemen still get more and the track remains whole. There's no room for the customers in THAT equation.

kelso, it's the TOC. End of story.

[Kelso]

kelso, it's the TOC. End of story.Ah ... the Al Gore ploy! :lol:

[andymays]

Ah ... the Al Gore ploy! :lol:

No, it's the truth ploy.

[BombsAway Bob]

They got hammered for making the P4 a 50 cent bet. They wanted it to be a dollar.
Who are "They" and "They"?
on another topic,
i am pretty tired of the whining over Low minimums hurting payouts.
They ($.10 & $.50 minimums)improve many payouts, as people spread deeper than they would for $1, and only cash for 10% or 50% of what they would have with a $1 base.
But Why settle for $1 Minimums on the bets?
Bring back $5 Exactas,& the few left betting won't have their payout diluted!
After all, Casinos have "High-Roller" Slots as well as Penny slots...

[v j stauffer]

Since you're watching HP. Please look into the goings on in the announcers booth. I have it on good authority he's not to be trusted.:rolleyes:

[Fastracehorse]

Should they have two P5's?

p-5's at 14% - roll the p-5 :)

fffastt

[mannyberrios]

Since you're watching HP. Please look into the goings on in the announcers booth. I have it on good authority he's not to be trusted.:rolleyes: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Canarsie]

Since you're watching HP. Please look into the goings on in the announcers booth. I have it on good authority he's not to be trusted.:rolleyes:


Maybe he can't be trusted but he calls one hell of a race every time. :ThmbUp:

[v j stauffer]

Maybe he can't be trusted but he calls one hell of a race every time. :ThmbUp:

I'll forward the nice message to him when I think the time is right. Right now he's not speaking to me:confused:

[andymays]

Who are "They" and "They"?
on another topic,
i am pretty tired of the whining over Low minimums hurting payouts.
They ($.10 & $.50 minimums)improve many payouts, as people spread deeper than they would for $1, and only cash for 10% or 50% of what they would have with a $1 base.
But Why settle for $1 Minimums on the bets?
Bring back $5 Exactas,& the few left betting won't have their payout diluted!
After all, Casinos have "High-Roller" Slots as well as Penny slots...

It's the "short field" thing Bob.

[Zman179]

Those people who want the base bet low can't afford that particular bet. That means, they should bet on things they CAN afford, like win and show and maybe a Quinella box. Lowering the base of those bets just creates less carryovers and lower payoffs. If i had my way, i'd bring back the 1 dollar super.

The idea is to attract attention and increase wagering activity. What you are lobbying for is the status quo. Status quo doesn't work. The idea is to try to get some of the people from casinos, lotteries, etc., back into racing. I was originally against smaller denominational bets, now I'm all for them. I mean, look at Gulfstream! A $5 million Pick 6 pool with a 10¢ bet that Regular Joes had a realistic chance at catching! Casinos are making profits upon profits, so why do you think that their most profitable machines are PENNY slots? A $2 win, show, or quinella is not going to turn a one-time bettor into a frequent fan; but, a 50¢ super which gets them a couple hundred sure has a better chance.

And you're not quite right about 10¢ tickets resulting in lower payoffs. As far as I'm concerned, they're terrific when you think that the race is gonna be all chalk; 10¢ tickets avoid chalks like the plague. Now chalk supers which would have paid $60 are now paying $80 to $100 thanks to all of the dimes.

Since you're watching HP. Please look into the goings on in the announcers booth. I have it on good authority he's not to be trusted.:rolleyes:

Well we KNOW that. Can't trust anyone who looks forward to going to Ferndale. :p

[Stillriledup]

Who are "They" and "They"?
on another topic,
i am pretty tired of the whining over Low minimums hurting payouts.
They ($.10 & $.50 minimums)improve many payouts, as people spread deeper than they would for $1, and only cash for 10% or 50% of what they would have with a $1 base.
But Why settle for $1 Minimums on the bets?
Bring back $5 Exactas,& the few left betting won't have their payout diluted!
After all, Casinos have "High-Roller" Slots as well as Penny slots...

Let me give you an example of why 10 cent or 50 cent minimums hurt the average player at the higher end of the spectrum.

The last race of the Santa Anita meet was that mile and 3/4ths turf race, the San Juan something or other. In that race, the last of the SA meet, there was Pentafecta wagering. In the end of the day, the winning Penta had 2 dollars on it, paying off a handsome 30k for 1. Two people won 30k each on that last race of SA's recently concluded meet.

If there was a 10 cent Penta, there's zero chance that Penta would have paid 30k for a buck. "Stray dimes" would have diluted the price and made it pay less.

Now, what you could say in rebuttal is this. You can say that if the longer priced combinations are diluted, that means the contending horses pay higher than they should be because anyone who hits a 'chalk penta' is winning the stray dimes from the people who are on the longer priced combos. This is a fair point and completely true, the dime (or 50 cent) base makes the shorter priced combos more value and dilutes the longer priced ones. BUT, that's not why a penta or pick 6 or pick 5 was invented in the first place.

The entire premise of the Penta is to make it hard to it pays a lot. If you make a Penta a dime base (for example) the bet becomes 'hittable' and not nearly as hard, it defeats the purpose of why the bet exists in the first place.

Why must every wager in the world be affordable to every single chump who has 5 dollars in their pockets? There are plenty of other opportunities out there for small players, there are 50 cent tri's and pick 4s at many tracks, why do we need to take the 'windfall' bets and make them affordable for everyone? These Pentas and pick 6s are windfall bets for a reason, they're in place so that someone might have a lifechanging score.

Look at the lottery mega millions for example. Its 1 dollar to purchase a ticket. Sometimes the jackpot gets up to 300 million. If Megamillions said their base was 1 penny and you can get 100 quick picks for a buck, how many times do you think the jackpot would reach 300 million? Is it ok that megamillions base is 1 dollar? People dont seem to mind that you need to wager 1 dollar on megamillions. People arent clamoring for it to be reduced to a penny and do you know why? Because many know that if megamillions was a penny, theres very little chance you would ever get a carryover of over 100 million.

Why is it ok that megamillions is a 1 dollar base and yet people in horse racing want these 'lottery type' wagers to be LESS than 1 dollar?

[andymays]

You think my position would be different if I attended the meetings or read the yakking going on at Paulick?

That's pretty funny Andy....lol

Honestly I know you are one of the guys that gives a sh+t. Keep going and somewhere in this fight we'll win.

Believe me when I tell you the meetings would put you in therapy.

[BombsAway Bob]

Let me give you an example of why 10 cent or 50 cent minimums hurt the average player at the higher end of the spectrum.

The last race of the Santa Anita meet was that mile and 3/4ths turf race, the San Juan something or other. In that race, the last of the SA meet, there was Pentafecta wagering. In the end of the day, the winning Penta had 2 dollars on it, paying off a handsome 30k for 1. Two people won 30k each on that last race of SA's recently concluded meet.

If there was a 10 cent Penta, there's zero chance that Penta would have paid 30k for a buck. "Stray dimes" would have diluted the price and made it pay less.

Now, what you could say in rebuttal is this. You can say that if the longer priced combinations are diluted, that means the contending horses pay higher than they should be because anyone who hits a 'chalk penta' is winning the stray dimes from the people who are on the longer priced combos. This is a fair point and completely true, the dime (or 50 cent) base makes the shorter priced combos more value and dilutes the longer priced ones. BUT, that's not why a penta or pick 6 or pick 5 was invented in the first place.

The entire premise of the Penta is to make it hard to it pays a lot. If you make a Penta a dime base (for example) the bet becomes 'hittable' and not nearly as hard, it defeats the purpose of why the bet exists in the first place.

Why must every wager in the world be affordable to every single chump who has 5 dollars in their pockets? There are plenty of other opportunities out there for small players, there are 50 cent tri's and pick 4s at many tracks, why do we need to take the 'windfall' bets and make them affordable for everyone? These Pentas and pick 6s are windfall bets for a reason, they're in place so that someone might have a lifechanging score.

Look at the lottery mega millions for example. Its 1 dollar to purchase a ticket. Sometimes the jackpot gets up to 300 million. If Megamillions said their base was 1 penny and you can get 100 quick picks for a buck, how many times do you think the jackpot would reach 300 million? Is it ok that megamillions base is 1 dollar? People dont seem to mind that you need to wager 1 dollar on megamillions. People arent clamoring for it to be reduced to a penny and do you know why? Because many know that if megamillions was a penny, theres very little chance you would ever get a carryover of over 100 million.

Why is it ok that megamillions is a 1 dollar base and yet people in horse racing want these 'lottery type' wagers to be LESS than 1 dollar?
nowhere did i mention the Super-Hi-Five, which has been the worst performing New Wager among Dime Supers, $.50 Pick-4's,even the Lotto Dime Pick-6(which really only benefits the track offering it).
Hollywood offers the SH5 for $.50 base to try & create some interest.
Bottom Line..you want a Big Score, play ANY BET for the $1 Base..
(heck, play it for $2, like the traditional P6... your choice)

[Stillriledup]

nowhere did i mention the Super-Hi-Five, which has been the worst performing New Wager among Dime Supers, $.50 Pick-4's,even the Lotto Dime Pick-6(which really only benefits the track offering it).
Hollywood offers the SH5 for $.50 base to try & create some interest.
Bottom Line..you want a Big Score, play ANY BET for the $1 Base..
(heck, play it for $2, like the traditional P6... your choice)

I understand, i just used the super high 5 in my examples, i know you never mentioned it.

Keeneland has a HI5 C/O for tomorrow of 21k, pool should be about 100k, good to take a shot on this 1 dollar base bet.

[toussaud]

Let me give you an example of why 10 cent or 50 cent minimums hurt the average player at the higher end of the spectrum.

The last race of the Santa Anita meet was that mile and 3/4ths turf race, the San Juan something or other. In that race, the last of the SA meet, there was Pentafecta wagering. In the end of the day, the winning Penta had 2 dollars on it, paying off a handsome 30k for 1. Two people won 30k each on that last race of SA's recently concluded meet.

If there was a 10 cent Penta, there's zero chance that Penta would have paid 30k for a buck. "Stray dimes" would have diluted the price and made it pay less.

Now, what you could say in rebuttal is this. You can say that if the longer priced combinations are diluted, that means the contending horses pay higher than they should be because anyone who hits a 'chalk penta' is winning the stray dimes from the people who are on the longer priced combos. This is a fair point and completely true, the dime (or 50 cent) base makes the shorter priced combos more value and dilutes the longer priced ones. BUT, that's not why a penta or pick 6 or pick 5 was invented in the first place.

The entire premise of the Penta is to make it hard to it pays a lot. If you make a Penta a dime base (for example) the bet becomes 'hittable' and not nearly as hard, it defeats the purpose of why the bet exists in the first place.

Why must every wager in the world be affordable to every single chump who has 5 dollars in their pockets? There are plenty of other opportunities out there for small players, there are 50 cent tri's and pick 4s at many tracks, why do we need to take the 'windfall' bets and make them affordable for everyone? These Pentas and pick 6s are windfall bets for a reason, they're in place so that someone might have a lifechanging score.

Look at the lottery mega millions for example. Its 1 dollar to purchase a ticket. Sometimes the jackpot gets up to 300 million. If Megamillions said their base was 1 penny and you can get 100 quick picks for a buck, how many times do you think the jackpot would reach 300 million? Is it ok that megamillions base is 1 dollar? People dont seem to mind that you need to wager 1 dollar on megamillions. People arent clamoring for it to be reduced to a penny and do you know why? Because many know that if megamillions was a penny, theres very little chance you would ever get a carryover of over 100 million.

Why is it ok that megamillions is a 1 dollar base and yet people in horse racing want these 'lottery type' wagers to be LESS than 1 dollar?
good post :ThmbUp:

[Kelso]

"END OF STORY?" That's definitive "TRUTH?" C'mon, Andy. Get over yourself.

[Southieboy]

Pick 5 carryover for 5/12 of 107K.

[andymays]

"END OF STORY?" That's definitive "TRUTH?" C'mon, Andy. Get over yourself.

Kelso, It was the truth when I posted it and it's still the truth today.

[andymays]

You think my position would be different if I attended the meetings or read the yakking going on at Paulick?

That's pretty funny Andy....lol

I don't think you would change your position regarding rescinding the takeout but you would change your position if you understood how the process works out here. Too many people have veto power. The only way to get changes is to get the TOC on board or decertify them. Decertification is in the process.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

I can see 50 cent minimums for supers, high fives, pick 4's, 5's, and 6's, but like Stillriledup says, the 10 cent minimums actually hurt the game by creating less and smaller carryovers than I think we would see otherwise.

[andymays]

I can see 50 cent minimums for supers, high fives, pick 4's, 5's, and 6's, but like Stillriledup says, the 10 cent minimums actually hurt the game by creating less and smaller carryovers than I think we would see otherwise.

I agree for the most part. A lot depends on the average field size at the particular venu. Churchill had an interesting strategy with the 50 cent tri's but $1 supers. They probably got a lot more people playing tri's and cashing instead of playing supers for a dollar. I don't like 10 cent minimums.

[Stillriledup]

I can see 50 cent minimums for supers, high fives, pick 4's, 5's, and 6's, but like Stillriledup says, the 10 cent minimums actually hurt the game by creating less and smaller carryovers than I think we would see otherwise.

I just think with all the information out there, its getting harder and harder to squeeze out a profit. By making the Supers (and other high risk high reward bets) a 1 dollar bet instead of a 10 cent bet, you see the higher end payoffs actually 'pay something'.

[Stillriledup]

This is a simple question and probably has a logical answer, but what is the difference between a pick 5 and a players pick 5? Im just not understanding why Hollywood is calling this a players pick 5.

[andymays]

This is a simple question and probably has a logical answer, but what is the difference between a pick 5 and a players pick 5? Im just not understanding why Hollywood is calling this a players pick 5.

I asked them to call it the Horseplayers Early Pick 5 but they decided on Players Pick 5. Not sure why, but a name gives the bet some distinction. I just wish they would have called it the Horseplayers Pick 5 because of the low takeout.

[turfnsport]

I don't think you would change your position regarding rescinding the takeout but you would change your position if you understood how the process works out here. Too many people have veto power. The only way to get changes is to get the TOC on board or decertify them. Decertification is in the process.

If I understood the process?

I can understand a takeout hike and a takeout decrease.

That's really all this horseplayer cares about. I don't give a crap about the "process."

They have not rescinded the exotic takeout and tossed you a P5 bone.

BFD.

I've moved on. California racing means nothing to me. Don't care. Too many other better options out there for a horseplayer, both in regards to takeout and product.

I can't even stand to read Jerry Jam's emails anymore. I delete them all.

However, keep fighting the fight for those who do care, you are doing a good job trying to clean up that mess.

[andymays]

If I understood the process?

I can understand a takeout hike and a takeout decrease.

That's really all this horseplayer cares about. I don't give a crap about the "process."

They have not rescinded the exotic takeout and tossed you a P5 bone.

BFD.

I've moved on. California racing means nothing to me. Don't care. Too many other better options out there for a horseplayer, both in regards to takeout and product.

I can't even stand to read Jerry Jam's emails anymore. I delete them all.

However, keep fighting the fight for those who do care, you are doing a good job trying to clean up that mess.


Well, I'll tell you what. You're down there in Florida go ahead and get them to lower the takeout and stop doing the same gimmicks that Hollywood is doing. It is my understanding that Calder was going to significantly lower their takeouts but the Horsemen stopped the move. Maybe you can do something about that.

The people who hate California can keep on keepin on but until I see someone else out there fight one tenth as hard as we've fought then I just have to laugh.

If anyone out there thinks they can do better than what we've done then invest your time and have at it.

[turfnsport]

If anyone out there thinks they can do better than what we've done then invest your time and have at it.

Ain't nobody taking you up on that one. :D

Maybe you did not understand my post. YOU are doing a great job fighting the fight.

The brain trust is California has shown enough disrespect to the horseplayer that I just don't give a crap what they do. I've had enough.

But I strongly believe they tossed horseplayers that low takeout Pick 5 to try and bring horseplayers back to increase handle in all pools, including those they raised last year.

If handle increases with the help of the Pick 5 pools, you really think they are going to decrease the takeout on other exotics?

Seems unlikely to me, at least anytime soon, but keep dreaming!

[andymays]

Ain't nobody taking you up on that one. :D

Maybe you did not understand my post. YOU are doing a great job fighting the fight.

The brain trust is California has shown enough disrespect to the horseplayer that I just don't give a crap what they do. I've had enough.

But I strongly believe they tossed horseplayers that low takeout Pick 5 to try and bring horseplayers back to increase handle in all pools, including those they raised last year.

If handle increases with the help of the Pick 5 pools, you really think they are going to decrease the takeout on other exotics?

Seems unlikely to me, at least anytime soon, but keep dreaming!


What I tried to convey earlier (and I think I started the thead and subsequent comments under the influence of Tequila shots and beer) is that it's hard for anyone to believe what goes on unless you're there. I'm sure most other jurisdictions have their dirty laundry but out here most things are made public and if they aren't then we make them public.

There 's another meeting with all the who's who at Hollywood Park on the 25th where I expect them to announce more changes. Jeff and Roger will there but I will most likely pass. Do I think they're going to rescind the takeout raise? Not a chance. Should they rescind it? Absolutely.

That's where it stands.

[andymays]

1st race P5 Pool today 263k plus. Paid out over 3k.

Consolation definitely has to go. Paid $23. I think we'll see then gone in the next couple of weeks.

[Southieboy]

Lester's favorite pal :D Stein said there would be changes soon.

[toussaud]

What I tried to convey earlier (and I think I started the thead and subsequent comments under the influence of Tequila shots and beer) is that it's hard for anyone to believe what goes on unless you're there. I'm sure most other jurisdictions have their dirty laundry but out here most things are made public and if they aren't then we make them public.

There 's another meeting with all the who's who at Hollywood Park on the 25th where I expect them to announce more changes. Jeff and Roger will there but I will most likely pass. Do I think they're going to rescind the takeout raise? Not a chance. Should they rescind it? Absolutely.

That's where it stands.
i think the writing is on the wall right about now

[jelly]

Andy,the boy's running the TOC felt pretty good about the handle due to Thursday 's carryover.

Now,Back to reality.


Last years handle.$17,082,772 att.7,589. 11 races.

Today $9,661,451 att.4,397 9 races.



Down over 43%.



Last year Hollywood had 10 horses in the (The Great)Jim Murray.This year 5.



Rescind the Takeout!

[andymays]

Andy,the boy's running the TOC felt pretty good about the handle due to Thursday 's carryover.

Now,Back to reality.


Last years handle.$17,082,772 att.7,589. 11 races.

Today $9,661,451 att.4,397 9 races.



Down over 43%.



Last year Hollywood had 10 horses in the (The Great)Jim Murray.This year 5.



Rescind the Takeout!

The TOC isn't happy about the pick 5 they were forced into it. If and when they get decertified then there's a shot at rescinding the takeout. Until then there's no shot.

[v j stauffer]

Andy,the boy's running the TOC felt pretty good about the handle due to Thursday 's carryover.

Now,Back to reality.


Last years handle.$17,082,772 att.7,589. 11 races.

Today $9,661,451 att.4,397 9 races.



Down over 43%.



Last year Hollywood had 10 horses in the (The Great)Jim Murray.This year 5.



Rescind the Takeout!

If you're gonna take unwarrented cheap shots at least spend 10 seconds doing basic research.

The day you're comparing today too was Preakness Day last year. Sheesh:bang:

What a joke!

[andymays]

Comparing handle is a tricky thing. It will be apples to apples after next weekend. So far they aren't down nearly as much as most people thought they would be.

They will make a few more adjustments between now and the end of the year. Del Mar will have some new stuff and Santa Anita will as well. They need to at least move the exacta takeout back down to where it was.

[jelly]

If you're gonna take unwarrented cheap shots at least spend 10 seconds doing basic research.

The day you're comparing today too was Preakness Day last year. Sheesh:bang:

What a joke!




Didn't mean to mislead,thanks for the info,I deserved a slap in the head for that one.

[andymays]

Didn't mean to mislead,thanks for the info,I deserved a slap in the head for that one.

Don't worry about it Jelly. This past year has been a learning experience for all of us involved in the meetings out here. There are a lot of things that I assumed that weren't necessarily true.

The bottom line with the handle thing is that sometimes CHRIMS figures and Equibase figures tell different stories but usually by the end of a meet like Santa Anita they match up. The three week handle report prepared by HANA using Equibase matched up pretty well with CHRIMS so you never know what's what.

The bottom line is far too many people in charge don't know what the hell they're doing and groups like the TOC are preventing the tracks out here from competing for customers. I always thought the tracks could do just about anything they wanted but nothing could be further from the truth. The Execs at Hollywood Park had to jump through quite a few hoops to get the low takeout P5 in and they deserve some credit for listening to us and fighting for the bet.

Just to give you an example a while back the TOC called a meeting at Santa Anita so we went up there. Driving to LA from San Diego can be a pain in the ass because of traffic and it takes me anywhere from an hour and a half to 2 and a half hours each way depending on traffic. We went up there so the TOC could ask us some questions that we've answered already and to tell us they were going to approve the P5 wager. As if they were doing us a favor. The reality is that we were doing them a favor. I've personally been touting this wager for almost two years. It started with Del Mar becaue they don't even have an early pick 4. All the power players had excuses for not doing it because they thought that they knew better. Well I've learned that they don't know better and if they'd listen to their customers more often like Hollywood Park just did they would be far better off than they are today.

The circumstances have changed out here because of the success of the P5 so we have to adust our tactics to get more done. The facts are the facts and we've shown them the way to go.

[rwwupl]

All,

We are not trying to "kill" California Horse Racing...Everything we have done is for the long term benefit of California racing,and racing everywhere.

We had to boycott California early in the year to show that customers do care about things such as raising the take out and I think we made our point by dropping handle in California 120 million dollars plus for the winter meets.. If you think it was the weather, thats O.K. too...but facts are facts.

Hollywood was facing poor conditions for their upcoming meet ,so we worked with Hollywood managers and others concerned to introduce the players p-5 at a low take out. The take out was not as low as we wanted, but we wanted to show that take out matters to betting customers, and the early results of success can not be denied. The over-all handle is still down at Hollywood.

We have now demonstrated that customers will react to high and low take outs with their wallets.

Many California managers would like to adjust the takeout to meet current market conditions but are blocked as Andy said, by special interests who have the veto power. We are working to clear the way.

The Players Boycott continues to advocate to avoid high take out bets.

http://www.playersboycott.org/

We continue to consult with the racing managers to make California a more customer friendly place to wager on horses.

We are doing well and will accomplish our goals in the main,thanks to the dedication of the California HANA team and the cooperation of many thoughtful and enlightened managers of California racing.

When there are people who like things the way they are,and have veto power,it takes a little longer. We continue to chip away at old policy.

Andy has played a special roll in all this and deserves thanks from all of us.

Roger Way

[turfnsport]

Andy has played a special roll in all this and deserves thanks from all of us.


More like cartwheels!

[Canarsie]

Andy and Rodger have done yeoman's work and deserve lots of kudos. :ThmbUp:

[toussaud]

All,

We are not trying to "kill" California Horse Racing...Everything we have done is for the long term benefit of California racing,and racing everywhere.

We had to boycott California early in the year to show that customers do care about things such as raising the take out and I think we made our point by dropping handle in California 120 million dollars plus for the winter meets.. If you think it was the weather, thats O.K. too...but facts are facts.

Hollywood was facing poor conditions for their upcoming meet ,so we worked with Hollywood managers and others concerned to introduce the players p-5 at a low take out. The take out was not as low as we wanted, but we wanted to show that take out matters to betting customers, and the early results of success can not be denied. The over-all handle is still down at Hollywood.

We have now demonstrated that customers will react to high and low take outs with their wallets.

Many California managers would like to adjust the takeout to meet current market conditions but are blocked as Andy said, by special interests who have the veto power. We are working to clear the way.

The Players Boycott continues to advocate to avoid high take out bets.

http://www.playersboycott.org/

We continue to consult with the racing managers to make California a more customer friendly place to wager on horses.

We are doing well and will accomplish our goals in the main,thanks to the dedication of the California HANA team and the cooperation of many thoughtful and enlightened managers of California racing.

When there are people who like things the way they are,and have veto power,it takes a little longer. We continue to chip away at old policy.

Andy has played a special roll in all this and deserves thanks from all of us.

Roger Way


I am curious, at this point, what exactly is the argument for keeping takeout where it is?

[andymays]

I am curious, at this point, what exactly is the argument for keeping takeout where it is?

Ignorance and greed! There are some of them that still think higher takeout means more money for them. :bang:

[rwwupl]

A quick explanation.. it is complicated, but...

The Interstate Horseracing Act (IHA) granted the horsemens representative organization (TOC in California) the right of approval of contracts and this gives them a go or no go on pricing.

The TOC has a main interest in serving their membership first and their main goal is higher purses for horsemen. The TOC is suspicious of any take out reduction that may reduce purses, because purses are funded by the take out from customers bets.

The TOC does not trust the idea of finding the optimum % of take out, even though the evidence is clear to most.

The TOC believes that higher take out means higher purses, and they are not responsible for profit and loss of the Association, or advertising, or have a need to explain to the shareholders why customers are not buying the product. In the view of the TOC,that is the responsibility of the association.

Some would argue that the TOC has a higher obligation to the industry, than just to its membership.

Any change in take out rates must be presented to the regulators (CHRB) by the association and the TOC. At Santa Anita this season, the TOC was satisfied by getting bigger purses from increased take out rates while the association (Santa Anita) was hurt by a lack of support from customers due to the increase in take out rates.

Not all horsemen are on board with the TOC positions on many things, and a new group that call themselves the CTHA are in process of trying to become the horsemens representative...See the HANA section on pace and the thread on "Who is the CTHA" for more.

rw

[rwwupl]

More like cartwheels!


Sorry for the hasty work, but I missed the cut off time for spelling corrections.


S/B

Andy has played a special role in all this and deserves thanks from all of us.

rw

[turfnsport]

Sorry for the hasty work, but I missed the cut off time for spelling corrections.


S/B

Andy has played a special role in all this and deserves thanks from all of us.

rw

Yes he does, nobody has worked harder on behalf of horseplayers. He really should get some type of award.

I guess you could say he has been a good roll model.