belmont pick 6 7/8

[aaron]

How can the pick 6 pay $7.60 and have a carryover if the pick 6 was hit with the last 2 races being all/all ?. It doesn't make any sense.

[Pell Mell]

Evidently almost every ticket played was a winner, I guess.:confused:

[aaron]

If that's the case,how could there be a carryover ?

[davew]

every state has their racing comission which states exactly the procedures are for every bet

I do not know the NY rules, but guess there must be something such as if a full feild gets scratched down to 3 or 4 horses, the race becomes a non-starter and automatically pays all in that race and pick-6 pool becomes carry-over with consolation pays

[aaron]

If that's the case,how could there be a carryover ?

[InTheRiver68]

Google is your friend, especially when the best result points right back to PA!

NYRA new Pick6 Rules (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=21375)

The text referred to in the thread on NYRA's site has since been deleted, but if you search on 4011.23 (the rule change), you'll find that if you hit 6-of-6, or 5-of-6 with one race being an "all winners" leg, then you get (a split of) the jackpot. More than one "all winners", and you only share the consolation pool.

"All winners" legs are not dependent on the number of runners, they occur when a leg (or more) has a "change of surface" due to weather or other unforseen circumstances (edit: *after* the start of the pick-6!). Today, races 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9 ... that is, five of the six legs of the pick-6, were carded as turf races. Before the first race, Belmont took all races off the turf except for teh 8th and 9th. It wasn't until 4:05pm that they took the last two off the turf, too. At that point, those two races became "all winners" races with respect to the pick-6, and the 75% jackpot was carried over until tomorrow.

- InTheRiver68

[cj]

It is a terrible rule and I would hope it is fixed right away. Since it has never happened before, I doubt it was put in place to screw people. It is, however, very unfair in this one particular situation. The pool should have been paid out with no carryover.

[aaron]

Thanks for the answer. The rule makes no sense. It would make more sense to cancel the pick 6. This is the first time,I remember seeing this happen. Its stealing your money,if you happen to hit the pick 6.

[aaron]

Another note on this. I was watching the races on the OTB channel and the changes were given before the pick 6 started, I do not know if that means anything.

[Cary Fotias]

Hi Everybody --

This is the best horseracing forum on the web.

I have enjoyed it for many years but have never posted before.

Yesterday's Pick-6 fiasco at Belmont proves once again that industry regulators fail to anticipate the ramifications of their actions. Below is an e-mail I sent to Steve Crist of the Daily Racing Form.

CJ is right. This is a ridiculous rule and needs to be changed pronto. Paying out the whole Pick-6 pool (minus take) to those who had the winners of the "non off the turf" races is one way to go. I have another idea which is outlined below.

Maybe we can all put our heads together and come up with a solution we can recommend to the wagering board. Love to hear your comments and suggestions.

Cary Fotias

President Equiform
HANA Board Member



Hey Steve –

Hope the windows are treating you well.

I am down from four packs to two packs a day thanks to the electronic cigarettes from Green Smoke – still at 10 cups of coffee per day, however. Handicapping takes a lot of drugs.

I was a bit perplexed by today’s Pick-6 payoff at Belmont Park. I know the new rule went into effect quite a few years ago, but as NYRA will not let me copy and paste from its website, I found it somewhere else and pasted below.


(The New York Racing Association last year adopted what ought to be a universal rule governing such situations. When a race is taken off the turf after betting has closed in a pick four or pick six, that race is treated as no contest for the purpose of these wagers. Every horse in the field is considered a winner. Under the NYRA rules, anyone who picked the first three winners in Gulfstream's pick four would have cashed a winning ticket).

"This is a fairness issue," said Bill Nader, chief operation officer of NYRA. "When a race comes off the turf, the whole complexion of the race changes. It's a different event. We did this to protect bettors and for the sake of integrity.

The crucial phrase is AFTER WAGERING HAS CLOSED IN A PICK FOUR OR PICK SIX.

Mr Durkin announced that races eight and nine were OFF THE TURF around 10 MTP before the fourth race (first leg).

I always wait when the threat of rain is in the air, as I prepare different plays for when any race(s) are taken off the turf. When Durkin announced 8 and 9 were off, I was ready. I called in an alternate ticket of $864, singling Poppy Day in the finale off an Equiform pattern. Had I known the last two races were going to be treated as “Alls”, I probably wouldn’t have even played. I went All (6x4x4) in the first three legs hoping to beat Pletcher in the baby race. Of course that Pick-3 came back a whopping $16.80. After that, it was $5.70, $4.30 (second choice), and $13.80. I thought the Pick -6 would pay in the $600 -$800 range. Instead, I had a boatload of P-5s, paying $7.60.

How could this be? The races were taken off the turf well before the P6 pool closed. I was even more bewildered when Durk announced a carryover of $30,000. Does everyone get an “all” if just one race comes off? two races or more? It certainly isn’t clear and I can find nothing on NYRA’s website or by googling NYSRWB etc that explains all the possible scenarios.

Imagine if there was a $1,000,000 carryover and Durk announces 10 MTP before the first leg that the last two races are off the turf. Three million has already been bet into the pool. Based on Friday’s protocol, three quarters of the newly wagered money (after take) would AUTOMATICALLY go to another carryover. How would like that if you nailed four $20 horses in the first four legs? Better yet, how would like it if you bet $20,000 into the pool, only to see 55% (75% of 74%) of it AUTOMATICALLY carryover with no chance to collect a major score.

Something is not kosher here. I understand the intent of the rule is to protect bettors who put their plays in early and have no chance to alter their selections. However, it is patently unfair to bettors (large and small) who have the wherewithal to react to changing circumstances.

In any event, I think all of the possible scenarios need to be addressed and clearly explained on the NYRA site. What’s on its site now states that you get an “All” if a race is taken off the turf after betting closes, but makes no mention of the AUTOMATIC CARRYOVER. But betting was not closed for the Pick-6 when the announcement was made on Friday.

I know somewhere out there is rule 2468 (a) 3.4 subsection (4)b that clarifies all this, but I’d sure like to see it.

How about this for an idea? All Pick-6 bets are refunded if any races are taken off the turf before or after P6 betting closes. There is a time stamp, before which all P6 bets are refunded. If you bet two hours ahead of time, you get your money refunded and can choose to rebet with race(s) now off the turf. This way, the egregious “automatic carryover” becomes moot. We aren’t playing the P6 to hit at best an “automatic conso”. If a change of surface is announced before P-6 betting closes, the track should give sufficient time (15 minutes or so) for players to rebet. Fifteen minutes every now and then would save a lot of aggravation for all (pun intended).

This seems a reasonable solution to me, which means it will probably never see the light of day. Hell, we can’t event get the tote to recycle every 15 seconds (not that it matters much anymore with the dearth of liquidity in the pools). At any rate, I would appreciate your comments regarding the current “rules” and what might be done to improve them.. For now, I’d just like to see the statute or whatever that applies.

This all reminds of a day about twenty years ago when I back-wheeled a horse named Jazz City in the double. There was a big chalk in the opener (he won, of course, paying $4.00). But still, the double to Jazz City was paying $74. About fifteen minutes until the second race, Durkin announced that they were experiencing tote difficulties (the board was blank) which they hoped to resolve in a few minutes.

Mind you, the first race had been paid out and the double probables posted. At about 8 MTP, Durk said to continue to bet as the problem should be resolved soon. Well, ay about 3 MTP, The Durk said that because of the tote malfunction, the second race would be run for purse money only, and that all (there’s that word again) win, place, show, exacta, quinella and trifecta wagers on the second race would be refunded (no mention of the double).

Well, Jazz City won for fun at 15/1. I had a $20 double and lined up to collect. But wait, the double was paying $3.80 according to the screen. Was there a late scratch and that was the conso? Oh No! Somehow, it was decided that due to the tote malfunction, the double would be paid off to all horses in the second race.

This made no f****** sense to me and I stormed into the racing office demanding an explanation. Didn’t these morons comprehend that if they paid off on the first race, they had to pay off on the listed double prices as those odds were already set before the tote malfunction. I was really steamed, and some guy pulled out a little blue book that had all the rules and regulations of the Wagering Board. I asked him to show me the rule that covered this particular situation.

After 15 minutes of fumbling through his little blue book, he told me he could find no specific paragraph that dealt with my situation. There were rules concerning acts of God, rules for when the tractor couldn’t move the gate after the start of a two-turn race, rules for computing show payoffs when there were dead heats for third, and so on and so on. But, nothing about my immediate predicament.

Finally, at a loss, the racing official turned to a subsection of a subsection that stated, “anything not covered in these rules is subject to the discretion of the management” or some such disclaimer. I stared at the guy and asked him again how could they pay out on the first race and not pay out on the double, as both pools were set in stone after the first race was made official.

Exasperated, he handed me the little blue rule book with a hint of compassion. He said I could have it and told me that maybe I could find something in it to help my case.

I never did.

Well, time to beat Gomez at even money in the 7th at Hollywood.

Best Wishes

CARY..

PS Check out the ride by Kayla in the seventh race – got lead, was passed by GG, and fought back to win it.

[aaron]

Hi Cary-
Stop making so much sense. If you keep this up you will be banned from NY racetracks forever.
As a longtime player,I appreciate your efforts and the classy way you state them.

[Storm Cadet]

Cary Glad to hear you've cut down on the smokes :cool: ...hope your drinking decaf too!

Keep up the good work and I hope you'll catch a game again at The Garden!

[PhantomOnTour]

Whoa...they carried it over by mistake.
Somebody's in trouble.

[overthehill]

If that Daily Double incident happened to me I think i would have become a raving lunatic. that has got to be up there with the most ridiculous decisions i have ever heard. I remember when my friend was taken down at the spa. the dq-ed winner wasnt even in the frame of the incident causing the dq. the powers that be decided to close the hearing involving the incident to the public.

[Storm Cadet]

NY Post take on it:

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/horse_racing/through_the_binocs_AakIz6ISARMAAtqB5Uq68N

:eek:

[postpicker]

NY Post take on it:

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/horse_racing/through_the_binocs_AakIz6ISARMAAtqB5Uq68N

:eek:


NYRA Statement to the Pick Six on Friday


http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/63933/error-causes-pick-6-carryover-at-belmont?source=rss

Nobody wins except for the people that hit the Pick Six on Saturday with the extra money in the pool.

[OTM Al]

I'm usually first to go against arguments like this. A rule is a rule and if you don't know it and still bet and get burned by it, it's your own damn fault. I have to admit though, this one could be spelled out a little better. However, 4011.23b does state that the 75% share only gets paid out (any day other than designated last day of meet) if there is a six of six winner, or a five of five winner with one "ALL" race declared and the other 25% goes to consos. In any other case only 25% is paid out and the 75% is carried over. This was a case of only 4 of 4 with 2 "ALL"s getting paid. Thus I think the correct thing was done according to the law, or at least a good faith interpretation of it, though this case is never stated explicitly, only implied, and the rule is very poorly written.

The only real question here is why the mutual department did not receive the proper information on the surface changes, which did go into effect before an "ALL" race was required. That is under investigation.

[aaron]

Some how, I think if the bettors were notified if this rule before the pick 6 started,the pool would have had much less in it. I'm amazed that bettors are not outraged by this. In essence,they stole the bettors money. I did not play this pick 6,but the lack of outrage just shows that players are not willing to fight for what should be their rights.