Is NY ever going to introduce a pick five?

[1st time lasix]

With the explosive growth and interest in that pool around the country ...it seems like a no brainer at Saratoga this Summer....wondering why NYRA hasn't got a low-take pick five? Considering what they charge now for three, four and six horse bets....perhaps it is the low take out that really scares them.....or perhaps they are just too disfuntional. Has there been any discussion at all?

[castaway01]

With the explosive growth and interest in that pool around the country ...it seems like a no brainer at Saratoga this Summer....wondering why NYRA hasn't got a low-take pick five? Considering what they charge now for three, four and six horse bets....perhaps it is the low take out that really scares them.....or perhaps they are just too disfuntional. Has there been any discussion at all?

It's because they have one of the few Pick 6s in the country that actually gets money wagered on it. Why would they want to siphon money out of that pool with a Pick 5 when they do so well when there are big Pick 6 carryovers?

[MaTH716]

Maybe they are afraid that it would hurt the pick 4's & 6 pool.

[jelly]

With the explosive growth and interest in that pool around the country ...it seems like a no brainer at Saratoga this Summer....wondering why NYRA hasn't got a low-take pick five? Considering what they charge now for three, four and six horse bets....perhaps it is the low take out that really scares them.....or perhaps they are just too disfuntional. Has there been any discussion at all?





Because the Steve Crist(you know,the one looking out for you) types don't want It.



The pk-6 only handles(non carryovers) about 35-40k a day.A pick 5 with low takeout would average four or five time that and there would be plenty of carryovers.


If they had a pk-5 with 10% takeout it would be more profitable than the pk-6(and attract more bettors) for NYRA.

[OTM Al]

They have 2 P4s, a viable P6, and P3s on all possible races on the card. Why introduce another bet that ties money up for 5 races? I don't even know why people want this thing as it's a pretty lousy bet.

[andtheyreoff]

Here's a better question- who cares?

[MickJ26]

They also have the "grand slam", which never seemed to really catch on.

[Jeff P]

...I don't even know why people want this thing as it's a pretty lousy bet.

Oh boy. <G>


-jp

.

[Robert Fischer]

You don't want to cannibalize the pick6.


There's really two issues here.

A gripe about takeout
A niche group that finds pick5's "just right".
The takeout issue can be applied to the pick6 just the same.


and that p5 niche group ought to play pick4s to build up their bank a wee little more and not expect the pick6 players to subsidize their niche...

[OTM Al]

Oh boy. <G>


-jp

.

Takeout on losing is 100% if your response is driven by that. Hitting such a bet is extremely hard and not one that newer players should ever play as they will lose. Only those with large bankrolls should even bother with such bets.

[1st time lasix]

****Much prefer to play a pick five with a low take out than a pick 6 unless there is a handsome carryover. In fact.... many times I will use both pools. In my humble opinion.... playing into a non-carry over pick six in NY or anywhere else is the real bad bet. Saying a Pick Five with a low take out is a poor wagering option is pure foolishness. :rolleyes: The pool growth of this particular wager everwhere it is now in place is simply staggering. The players have spoken......it is time for NY to respond. in reality....it is the pick three and four in NY with plus 25% takeout that is by far the worse play.

[1st time lasix]

Here's a better question- who cares? Clearly the thousands of players who put thousands of dollars thru the windows...... and with their ADW platforms!

[jelly]

One reason NYRA should add the Pick-5 is because they will make money. :confused:
I guess with slot machines they don't need to make money from the Horseracing side.

[therussmeister]

In my humble opinion.... playing into a non-carry over pick six in NY or anywhere else is the real bad bet.

And in my humble opinion, that is why the pick six is dead nearly everywhere in the country. People eventually figured that out.

[Robert Fischer]

the NYRA non-carry pick6 is 15%

what are we talking in terms of the "low"take pick5s ??
Santa Anita is what? 14%
California?
Churchill?
Gulfstream?
You guys are the experts with this wager, what are major tracks offering??

[BPQJaguar]

the NYRA non-carry pick6 is 15%

what are we talking in terms of the "low"take pick5s ??
Santa Anita is what? 14%
California?
Churchill?
Gulfstream?
You guys are the experts with this wager, what are major tracks offering??
The pick 5 takeout for most tracks is close to the takeout of the non-carryover pick 6 in New York
Hollywood 14%
Gulfstream 15%
Monmouth 15%
I think Churchill was 19% as of last year

[Robert Fischer]

The pick 5 takeout for most tracks is close to the takeout of the non-carryover pick 6 in New York
Hollywood 14%
Gulfstream 15%
Monmouth 15%
I think Churchill was 19% as of last year


So the takeout for this wager isn't really the issue?

[OTM Al]

The pick 5 takeout for most tracks is close to the takeout of the non-carryover pick 6 in New York
Hollywood 14%
Gulfstream 15%
Monmouth 15%
I think Churchill was 19% as of last year

Yeah, that GP P5 is great. It's 15% if you are the only winner, but it's something like an effective 70% if there are more than one. Great bet.

[jelly]

Yeah, that GP P5 is great. It's 15% if you are the only winner, but it's something like an effective 70% if there are more than one. Great bet.




You're thinking about the pick-6

[Producer]

Yeah, that GP P5 is great. It's 15% if you are the only winner, but it's something like an effective 70% if there are more than one. Great bet.


Are you talking about the rainbow p6? That's a different bet. A P5 at a 15% takeout and .50 minumum at a track like Gulfstream with full, competitive fields is an attractive bet to most horse players who play horizontals.

[thaskalos]

I think OTM Al has confused the Pick-5 with the High-5.

The Pick-5, with a 50-cent minimum and a 15% takeout, is an excellent bet.

The NY Pick-3 on the other hand, with a 24% takeout, might be the worst bet in all of racing.

[Some_One]

The P6 in the current format is dead, having the $1 P5 with a $.20-$1 Rainbow/Super/whatever-you-want-to-call it P6 is the future.

[Vinman]

If the .50 cent "Players' Pick 5" with a reduced takeout can thrive on the Southern California circuit together with the traditional $2.00 Pick 6, then why can't the same two wagers thrive on the NYRA circuit?

There IS no rational reason why both wagers cannot be on the NYRA wagering menu and thrive together. There are only "certain people" who don't want to see the Pick 5 introduced at NYRA because they regard Pick 6 carryovers as their own personal piggy bank and don't want them "poached" by a 50 cent wager that is easier to hit and makes so much more sense to play than the "antiquated" $2 minimum Pick 6.

Put in the 50 cent Pick 5 on the LAST 5 races and let the betting dollars flow where they may. If you play the Pick 6 on a carryover day (the only time it should be played, IMHO) and blow the first leg, guess what? You already have the 50 cent Pick 5 doped out on the last 5 races. Wow, what a concept!

Vinman

[OTM Al]

Are you talking about the rainbow p6? That's a different bet. A P5 at a 15% takeout and .50 minumum at a track like Gulfstream with full, competitive fields is an attractive bet to most horse players who play horizontals.

Yep, you are right. I think I mixed it up in my mind with the most recent P5s at (I think) Fairgrounds that worked in the same way. It was only a 57.5% effective takeout I think... Just another shiny object though IMO. You guys want this thing so bad then you are welcome to it, but still feel it is a terrible bet, especially for new players, and don't try to make arguments about churn when you are pushing something like this.

[tanner12oz]

I don't even know why people want this thing as it's a pretty lousy bet.

disagree completely

it's hittable..it's a cheap ticket...and it pays huge...

[OTM Al]

disagree completely

it's hittable..it's a cheap ticket...and it pays huge...

So's Lotto.

[OTM Al]

I think OTM Al has confused the Pick-5 with the High-5.

The Pick-5, with a 50-cent minimum and a 15% takeout, is an excellent bet.

The NY Pick-3 on the other hand, with a 24% takeout, might be the worst bet in all of racing.

Not even close. I take it you don't play Parx?

Win, place, and show: 17%
Daily Double and Exacta wagering: 20%
Pick Three wagering: 26%
Trifecta and Superfecta wagering: 30%

[Saratoga_Mike]

So's Lotto.

Do you feel the same way about the Pick Six?

[OTM Al]

Do you feel the same way about the Pick Six?

For the most part if you don't have a sufficiently large bankroll. I think I've played it once in the last 3 or 4 years and the only reason I did was because it was a triple carry and I could identify 3 singles and make a viable ticket for under $40. I think I got 5 of 6 and got my money back, but that is a pretty rare setup. Day to day I wouldn't touch the thing. Usually won't even touch the P4 either.

Last year I was talking to cj's dad about these bets and he put it out in such a basic and straightforward way that I really don't even think about playing anything more than a P3. He said consider an avarage day when each leg of a pick 3 and 4 had only 8 runners. The Pick 3 gives 512 possible combinations before you even handicap. The Pick 4 multiplies that to 4096. I'd much rather cash small than not at all and my ego does not demand that I chase the white whale known as the Pick Six.

These P5s were instituted at tracks for the most part that tried to have a P6 that failed miserably. To me though they seemed the ultimate in bait and switch. Hastings with it's 0% P3,4 and 5 is the prime example. They probably weren't making much on those bets anyway, so instead they bait you with the low (or no in this case) takeout and minimum knowing that most players aren't disciplined enough to be able to sit there and watch five races without getting some action in other pools. You already handicapped the card you know....so they make up for the low take in their other pools. It would be one thing if the P5 got you your money back on a decent basis, but it won't. You'll likely lose that one too. And that's why I think it's a sucker bet. They make you think you're getting a good deal when you are not. But hey, as I've always said, it's your money and you can spend it as you please.I just think there's smarter ways to do things, but that's just my opinion.

[tanner12oz]

For the most part if you don't have a sufficiently large bankroll. I think I've played it once in the last 3 or 4 years and the only reason I did was because it was a triple carry and I could identify 3 singles and make a viable ticket for under $40. I think I got 5 of 6 and got my money back, but that is a pretty rare setup. Day to day I wouldn't touch the thing. Usually won't even touch the P4 either.

Last year I was talking to cj's dad about these bets and he put it out in such a basic and straightforward way that I really don't even think about playing anything more than a P3. He said consider an avarage day when each leg of a pick 3 and 4 had only 8 runners. The Pick 3 gives 512 possible combinations before you even handicap. The Pick 4 multiplies that to 4096. I'd much rather cash small than not at all and my ego does not demand that I chase the white whale known as the Pick Six.

These P5s were instituted at tracks for the most part that tried to have a P6 that failed miserably. To me though they seemed the ultimate in bait and switch. Hastings with it's 0% P3,4 and 5 is the prime example. They probably weren't making much on those bets anyway, so instead they bait you with the low (or no in this case) takeout and minimum knowing that most players aren't disciplined enough to be able to sit there and watch five races without getting some action in other pools. You already handicapped the card you know....so they make up for the low take in their other pools. It would be one thing if the P5 got you your money back on a decent basis, but it won't. You'll likely lose that one too. And that's why I think it's a sucker bet. They make you think you're getting a good deal when you are not. But hey, as I've always said, it's your money and you can spend it as you please.I just think there's smarter ways to do things, but that's just my opinion.

just wondering how much do you think you need to spend to create a solid pick 4, pick 5 and pick 6 ticket (2.00 not lame jackpot)?

personally pick 4's are very hittable at $40-$50 (.50) and at the decent tracks return significantly more then your investment. pick 5 is very hittable around $100-$120 (.50) again paying significantly more back and the pick 6 requires some addition bucks but at maybe $300-$450 it's hittable and again provides a great return...

i almost strictly play the longer sequence pick bets and without a doubt am up significantly as a result...the key is playing a good sequence and finding a single...although i agree 100% that discipline is key with these bets and many times i have sat around between races and pissed away any profit i had coming to me....this doesn't have anything to do with the bets though but gamblers discipline

[tanner12oz]

So's Lotto.

can you eliminate lotto numbers based upon past performances and solid handicapping?

[OTM Al]

just wondering how much do you think you need to spend to create a solid pick 4, pick 5 and pick 6 ticket (2.00 not lame jackpot)?

personally pick 4's are very hittable at $40-$50 (.50) and at the decent tracks return significantly more then your investment. pick 5 is very hittable around $100-$120 (.50) again paying significantly more back and the pick 6 requires some addition bucks but at maybe $300-$450 it's hittable and again provides a great return...

i almost strictly play the longer sequence pick bets and without a doubt am up significantly as a result...the key is playing a good sequence and finding a single...although i agree 100% that discipline is key with these bets and many times i have sat around between races and pissed away any profit i had coming to me....this doesn't have anything to do with the bets though but gamblers discipline

It sounds like this is your specialty so what you are saying makes complete sense for you. For me, I can only justify spending the $100 level (and I rarely can do that much on one race) is some sort of win and exacta setup. I'd rather focus the bet on one strong opinion and it is rare, though I have done it, when I have that strong an opinion on a P4 sequence. If I play a P4 I may spend as much as $60-$80 on a set of structured tickets which has the chance of giving me multiple hits if more than one top choice comes in. Have never played a P5, so not sure if I would go caveman or structured if I did. Likely will never play this bet anyway though. Always kind of figured with the P6 to play it right there are 2 options, very small, say $64 or less on a $2 base with strong singles (only way I've ever played it) or you have to go strong in the $1000+ territory.

I assume you do structured tickets rather that the "caveman" method, right?

[OTM Al]

can you eliminate lotto numbers based upon past performances and solid handicapping?

No, but it satisfies all 3 of your criteria and when you have 6 chances at a chaos outcome that blows everything up, solid handicapping can be driven right out the window.

[thaskalos]

For the most part if you don't have a sufficiently large bankroll. I think I've played it once in the last 3 or 4 years and the only reason I did was because it was a triple carry and I could identify 3 singles and make a viable ticket for under $40. I think I got 5 of 6 and got my money back, but that is a pretty rare setup. Day to day I wouldn't touch the thing. Usually won't even touch the P4 either.

Last year I was talking to cj's dad about these bets and he put it out in such a basic and straightforward way that I really don't even think about playing anything more than a P3. He said consider an avarage day when each leg of a pick 3 and 4 had only 8 runners. The Pick 3 gives 512 possible combinations before you even handicap. The Pick 4 multiplies that to 4096. I'd much rather cash small than not at all and my ego does not demand that I chase the white whale known as the Pick Six.

These P5s were instituted at tracks for the most part that tried to have a P6 that failed miserably. To me though they seemed the ultimate in bait and switch. Hastings with it's 0% P3,4 and 5 is the prime example. They probably weren't making much on those bets anyway, so instead they bait you with the low (or no in this case) takeout and minimum knowing that most players aren't disciplined enough to be able to sit there and watch five races without getting some action in other pools. You already handicapped the card you know....so they make up for the low take in their other pools. It would be one thing if the P5 got you your money back on a decent basis, but it won't. You'll likely lose that one too. And that's why I think it's a sucker bet. They make you think you're getting a good deal when you are not. But hey, as I've always said, it's your money and you can spend it as you please.I just think there's smarter ways to do things, but that's just my opinion.

You are entitled to your opinion, of course...but I think that you are wrong here.

The key to the Pick-5 lies in the 50-cent minimum. This makes it a much more sensible bet for the majority of the players...who are put off by the Pick-6's $2 minimum and increased difficulty.

IMO...the Pick-5 is far from a "sucker bet".

Profitwise...it's the best horizontal wager available, IMO.

It's getting tougher and tougher to make a profit in this game by "grinding"...and the Pick-5 provides "homerun" potential suitable for the masses.

[Robert Fischer]

If you can afford to play the $2 pick6 properly, you don't want a pick5 with 50cent incremental wagering.


although I agree with what you say here Thaskalos.
You are entitled to your opinion, of course...but I think that you are wrong here.

The key to the Pick-5 lies in the 50-cent minimum. This makes it a much more sensible bet for the majority of the players...who are put off by the Pick-6's $2 minimum and increased difficulty.

IMO...the Pick-5 is far from a "sucker bet".

Profitwise...it's the best horizontal wager available, IMO.

It's getting tougher and tougher to make a profit in this game by "grinding"...and the Pick-5 provides "homerun" potential suitable for the masses.

[The Hawk]

It sounds like this is your specialty so what you are saying makes complete sense for you. For me, I can only justify spending the $100 level (and I rarely can do that much on one race) is some sort of win and exacta setup. I'd rather focus the bet on one strong opinion and it is rare, though I have done it, when I have that strong an opinion on a P4 sequence. If I play a P4 I may spend as much as $60-$80 on a set of structured tickets which has the chance of giving me multiple hits if more than one top choice comes in. Have never played a P5, so not sure if I would go caveman or structured if I did. Likely will never play this bet anyway though. Always kind of figured with the P6 to play it right there are 2 options, very small, say $64 or less on a $2 base with strong singles (only way I've ever played it) or you have to go strong in the $1000+ territory.

I assume you do structured tickets rather that the "caveman" method, right?

You're playing $64 in $2 Pick 6's, but the Pick 5 is a bad bet?

The Pick 5 Pools are double what Belmont does in the Pick 6 on non-carryover days. The takeouts are the same (15%). You can cover 4 times as many horses, and have to hit one less race. Yes, the payoff can be much less, but you'll hit a great many more with any kind of skill.

[OTM Al]

You're playing $64 in $2 Pick 6's, but the Pick 5 is a bad bet?

The Pick 5 Pools are double what Belmont does in the Pick 6 on non-carryover days. The takeouts are the same (15%). You can cover 4 times as many horses, and have to hit one less race. Yes, the payoff can be much less, but you'll hit a great many more with any kind of skill.

I do not play low dollar P6s on any regular basis. In fact I've played one in the last 3 years and only then because I could easily single 3 races in the sequence and narrowed down the other races to no more than 4 horses and then only when there was a triple carryover. How often is that going to happen? Otherwise it is generally going to be a bad bet. I also suck at cheap claiming races. How many times can I get a sequence without one of those? Pretty much never. Not even going to be on my radar.

I love the concept of with any kind of skill you can hit these. If that was true they'd be paying about $20. These bets are HARD. They are not for people with small bankrolls or for beginners despite the way they are marketed with the low denomination and take. It's your money as I said before, but if you want to play this type of bet, I hope you have a very high level of discipline because otherwise you will blow yourself up chasing.

[The Hawk]

I do not play low dollar P6s on any regular basis. In fact I've played one in the last 3 years and only then because I could easily single 3 races in the sequence and narrowed down the other races to no more than 4 horses and then only when there was a triple carryover. How often is that going to happen? Otherwise it is generally going to be a bad bet. I also suck at cheap claiming races. How many times can I get a sequence without one of those? Pretty much never. Not even going to be on my radar.

I love the concept of with any kind of skill you can hit these. If that was true they'd be paying about $20. These bets are HARD. They are not for people with small bankrolls or for beginners despite the way they are marketed with the low denomination and take. It's your money as I said before, but if you want to play this type of bet, I hope you have a very high level of discipline because otherwise you will blow yourself up chasing.

I pretty much agree with you, especially regarding the fact that you're forced to play races you don't like, and you do need discipline. And you're right, they're certainly not for beginners or for those with tight bankrolls (what bet is?) But I disagree regarding the strike rate. Your theories about the Pick 6 do apply, in that these bets are certainly playable, and hittable, when you have solid singles, as you can spread much deeper with the 50 cent base than you can with a $2 base. I don't play them this way, but if you construct it like you would a low-level Pick 6, if you have two solid singles you can use 4x4x4 in the other three races for $32. As you said, discipline is key.

[Producer]

The thing I love about the P5 is that you can have 4 very logical horses, even favorites, along with one price horse and make a relatively big score. I have even seen times when all the horses were in the 3-1 through 6-1 range, without any favs, and it payed a bundle.

To me, the key to any horizontal bet is finding a false favorite that most people are going to single. If you can beat that horse, the bet often times pays much more than you would expect. The first thing, and biggest mistake, I believe most people make is trying to find a single.

I guess it all comes down to what kind of player you are. Me myself, I could never be the grind it out all day type of player. I play with the intention of trying to turn a relatively small amount into a large amount. Sitting at the track all day (yes, I still go to the actual track) to make .10 on the dollar doesn't excite me in the least bit.


Edited to say: When I mean people make the mistake of finding a single, I mean a "logical" favorite to single. If you have a strong angle on a non favorite to single, by all means its a solid play.

[tanner12oz]

No, but it satisfies all 3 of your criteria and when you have 6 chances at a chaos outcome that blows everything up, solid handicapping can be driven right out the window.


every race isn't a "chaos" outcome....you can turn a pick 4 or pick 5 into a pick 3 or pick 4 by finding that standout single....which obviously you cannot do with the lotto with every number having the exact same probability....horses simply do not have the same probability of winning races...if they did then we might as well forget handicapping...i can understand not liking sequence bets for whatever reason (different strokes different folks) but the comparison to the lottery isn't even close to being accurate

[tanner12oz]

The thing I love about the P5 is that you can have 4 very logical horses, even favorites, along with one price horse and make a relatively big score. I have even seen times when all the horses were in the 3-1 through 6-1 range, without any favs, and it payed a bundle.

To me, the key to any horizontal bet is finding a false favorite that most people are going to single. If you can beat that horse, the bet often times pays much more than you would expect. The first thing, and biggest mistake, I believe most people make is trying to find a single.

I guess it all comes down to what kind of player you are. Me myself, I could never be the grind it out all day type of player. I play with the intention of trying to turn a relatively small amount into a large amount. Sitting at the track all day (yes, I still go to the actual track) to make .10 on the dollar doesn't excite me in the least bit.


Edited to say: When I mean people make the mistake of finding a single, I mean a "logical" favorite to single. If you have a strong angle on a non favorite to single, by all means its a solid play.

don't even get me started on pick 5 carryovers!!! =)

this is all good advice...the sequence plays a HUGE part in these wagers....it's about taking a stand (and i mean single not 2 deep) when you feel good and then spreading when your unsure...and if it looks like an obvious single to you and everyone else your going to kill your payout....when you stand...you wanna stand alone or as close to alone as possible

[aaron]

Takeout on losing is 100% if your response is driven by that. Hitting such a bet is extremely hard and not one that newer players should ever play as they will lose. Only those with large bankrolls should even bother with such bets.
I would much rather see them lower the take on was to 10%. That would be better for the average player and it would being the rebate players back into these pools.

[OTM Al]

every race isn't a "chaos" outcome....you can turn a pick 4 or pick 5 into a pick 3 or pick 4 by finding that standout single....which obviously you cannot do with the lotto with every number having the exact same probability....horses simply do not have the same probability of winning races...if they did then we might as well forget handicapping...i can understand not liking sequence bets for whatever reason (different strokes different folks) but the comparison to the lottery isn't even close to being accurate

No, but there are multiple chances at it which makes the likelihood of such an occurance higher. If there is a 5% chance of chaos in any given race, then there is a 26.5% of at least one chaos result in a P6 sequence for example. Certainly these probabilities will vary by race type.

[Robert Fischer]

I would much rather see them lower the take on was to 10%. That would be better for the average player and it would being the rebate players back into these pools.

This is something everyone can agree on.

For every wager type.

[Al Gobbi]

Pick 6 pool today at Belmont was $72,480 - a total disgrace for a weekend card in NY. Many Double/P3 pools had more money in the pools today.

[the little guy]

Pick 6 pool today at Belmont was $72,480 - a total disgrace for a weekend card in NY. Many Double/P3 pools had more money in the pools today.

This has to be an act.

[andtheyreoff]

Pick 6 pool today at Belmont was $72,480 - a total disgrace for a weekend card in NY. Many Double/P3 pools had more money in the pools today.

Despite the tragedy of not having a lot of money in a total gimmick pool on a day with a lot of tough races, handle for the card was $14,146,825, up from $10,173,214 on the last Saturday in June last year.*

*- even though there was one more race this year, the handle per race increased to $1,286,075, up from $1,017,321 last year.

[jelly]

Pick 6 pool today at Belmont was $72,480 - a total disgrace for a weekend card in NY. Many Double/P3 pools had more money in the pools today.





72k Is a big number for NY.

A pick-5 would have had $300k - $400k in handle.

[classhandicapper]

I don't play either the Pick 5 or Pick 6. Heck, I rarely even play a Pick 4. But I don't see the logic of preferring pick 6 customers over other customers.

Even if adding a Pick 5 wound up hurting the Pick 6 handle a little and a few Pick 6 specialists with big bankrolls started whining because they don't have as big an edge over the suckers, that should not be NYRA's primary focus.

The idea for the track is to maximize the total handle!

If there are a bunch of people not playing the pick 6 now whose handle would rise if there was a Pick 5, then I think it should probably be implemented. Somehow, I think the Pick 6 carry over specialists are going to continue playing that bet even if there is a Pick 5 and the Pick 6 pool is a touch smaller.

I don't see the upside of enriching people like Steve Crist etc.. at the expense of players with smaller bankrolls that would rather be playing the Pick 5. In fact, I think it's a HORRIBLE idea.

This is mostly just a math problem.

Which way would the total handle be bigger?

Which way would NYRA net more cash to the bottom line?

Which way would attract more new players?

If you don't know the answer from researching what happened at other tracks, then implement it as an experiment and see what happens.

If it's a net positive keep it and if it's not can it.

Preferring the Pick 6 or Pick 6 players to others for some other reason seems like a bad business idea.

[the little guy]

A pick-5 would have had $300k - $400k in handle.

That would be incorrect. But, why should this post be any different than any of your other ones.

[David-LV]

Originally Posted by jelly
A pick-5 would have had $300k - $400k in handle


That would be incorrect. But, why should this post be any different than any of your other ones.

Maybe not $300k - $400k but a lot more handle then the pick 6 pool in NY when there is not a carryover like Saturday's pick 6 handle of $72,481.

Hollywood .50 pick 5 handle for:

Thursday --------- $191,439
Friday------------- $277,775
Saturday---------- $267,207


________
David-LV

[David-LV]

Pick 6 handle at Belmont:

Wed----------- $176,012 with a carryover
Thur---------- $43,565 no carryover
Fri------------ $174,154 with a carryover
Sat----------- $72,481 no carryover

It appears that Belmont needs a double carryover to surpass Hollywood's one day .50 pick 5 handle.

There is no logical reasoning why New York Racing will not give the .50 pick 5 bet a chance.

_______
David-LV

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by jelly
A pick-5 would have had $300k - $400k in handle




Maybe not $300k - $400k but a lot more handle then the pick 6 pool in NY when there is not a carryover like Saturday's pick 6 handle of $72,481.

Hollywood .50 pick 5 handle for:

Thursday --------- $191,439
Friday------------- $277,775
Saturday---------- $267,207


________
David-LV


California gets much bigger Pick-6 handles and, more importantly, their Pick-5 starts much later in the afternoon in other time zones than one would in NY.

[David-LV]

California gets much bigger Pick-6 handles and, more importantly, their Pick-5 starts much later in the afternoon in other time zones than one would in NY.

It does not hurt to give it a try, because when Hollywood put the pick 5 in they also had their doubts, but they went ahead and gave it a try and it was successful.

About being to early in the day I don't know about that being a problem as Belmont handled a total of $959,875 on all bets starting with and including the first race on Saturday.

________
David-LV

[the little guy]

It does not hurt to give it a try, because when Hollywood put the pick 5 in they also had their doubts, but they went ahead and gave it a try and it was successful.

About being to early in the day I don't know about that being a problem as Belmont handled a total of $959,875 on all bets starting with and including the first race on Saturday.

________
David-LV

The problem with most internet threads and posts of this kind is that they never know the actual story...and unfortunately there is frequently a lot of unfair conjecture and blame that accompanies that.

I have no argument with replacing the early Pick-4 with a Pick-5, with a 50 cent minimum, that starts in race 1.

[tzipi]

Pick 6 handle at Belmont:

Wed----------- $176,012 with a carryover
Thur---------- $43,565 no carryover
Fri------------ $174,154 with a carryover
Sat----------- $72,481 no carryover

It appears that Belmont needs a double carryover to surpass Hollywood's one day .50 pick 5 handle.

There is no logical reasoning why New York Racing will not give the .50 pick 5 bet a chance.

_______
David-LV


Time zones people. Time zones.

[jelly]

I don't play either the Pick 5 or Pick 6. Heck, I rarely even play a Pick 4. But I don't see the logic of preferring pick 6 customers over other customers.

Even if adding a Pick 5 wound up hurting the Pick 6 handle a little and a few Pick 6 specialists with big bankrolls started whining because they don't have as big an edge over the suckers, that should not be NYRA's primary focus.

The idea for the track is to maximize the total handle!

If there are a bunch of people not playing the pick 6 now whose handle would rise if there was a Pick 5, then I think it should probably be implemented. Somehow, I think the Pick 6 carry over specialists are going to continue playing that bet even if there is a Pick 5 and the Pick 6 pool is a touch smaller.

I don't see the upside of enriching people like Steve Crist etc.. at the expense of players with smaller bankrolls that would rather be playing the Pick 5. In fact, I think it's a HORRIBLE idea.

This is mostly just a math problem.

Which way would the total handle be bigger?

Which way would NYRA net more cash to the bottom line?

Which way would attract more new players?

If you don't know the answer from researching what happened at other tracks, then implement it as an experiment and see what happens.

If it's a net positive keep it and if it's not can it.

Preferring the Pick 6 or Pick 6 players to others for some other reason seems like a bad business idea.










You,re absolutely right,everyday they go without a late pick 5 the more money NYRA loses.

It also exposes how poorly run the NYRA continues to be. :(

[PaceAdvantage]

I can't wait until NYRA starts the pick-5. All of racing's problems will finally be solved.

[Vinman]

The problem with most internet threads and posts of this kind is that they never know the actual story...and unfortunately there is frequently a lot of unfair conjecture and blame that accompanies that.

I have no argument with replacing the early Pick-4 with a Pick-5, with a 50 cent minimum, that starts in race 1.

Andy...

I proposed earlier in this thread a 50 cent Pick 5 on the last 5 races. Yes, this would put such a Pick 5 in direct competition with the Pick 6 and therefore be "counterproductive"? Not so fast. The advantages of having the Pick 5 on the last 5 races:

o Better quality of Pick 5 races to play, including the stake(s) if any, as opposed to the early races, which almost always have a much higher percentage of maiden races with first time starters and first time turfers. For this reason I virtually never play the early Pick 4. Yes, those type of races do have a purpose and must be run, but not as part of my "Pick N" parimutuel experience. I'd much prefer to focus on the later races, where I can eliminate a lot more horses.

o By having the Pick 5 on the last 5 races, there is much more time to handicap it, especially after late scratches and adjust for any possible surface switches that may occur after the card begins, caused by a downpour just before the 4th race, for example. This would also be true for people playing from the west coast, who would have to react to late changes and get their bets in my 10am their time if the Pick 5 began with race 1. Not happening.

o Bigger handle. Those west coast folks would have until around 12:30 their time, for NYRA race 6 with an approximate 3:30pm post. That's ample time for them to get to the track and scope things out and get their bets in, vs a Pick 5 post of 10am for them. Huge difference. As Doug Donn of Gulfstream used to say, "We're in the business of selling mutuel tickets". NYRA will sell a hell of a lot more of them on a Pick 5 that begins with race 6 (race 7 for an 11 race weekend card) at 3:30pm than on race 1 at 1pm.

o Perhaps the best reason to hold the Pick 5 on the last 5 races is that if you are playing the Pick 6 on a carryover day and get blown out by a bomb in leg 1, your already have your Pick 5 play at the ready for the very next race!

Having the Pick 5 start with the first race "sounds logical" because that's what they do in California....avoid competition with the "sacred cow" Pick 6. But NYRA has a major market in California to draw extra handle from by starting the Pick 5 two and a half hours later, while California has no such large market to draw from that gets out of bed 3 hours later than they do.

Its not necessarily about "balancing the card" with Pick N wagers....If you play the 1pm Pick 5, your money will be tied up until after the Pick 6 begins anyway - if we're talking as many as 10 races on the card.

What it should really be about is maximizing the overall handle and of course, doing what is best for the players. If there's a big traffic jam at exit 12 on the Northway en route to Saratoga, I'm sure most fans would much prefer a late 50 cent Pick 5 than an early one. In fact, they'd prefer it even there was no traffic at all.

Vinman

[GARY Z]

[QUOTE=jelly]Because the Steve Crist(you know,the one looking out for you) types don't want It.


Jelly:

I'd agree Steve looks out for "you".

Witness the most expensive paper in the world being used by
the average player with great articles and mediocre pps whose cost can be
greatly curtailed by players concentrating on only one track.

(ie Bris, HDW ,Trackmaster, Post Time Daily)

[classhandicapper]

I can't wait until NYRA starts the pick-5. All of racing's problems will finally be solved.

It's obviously not going to solve all of racing's problems, but there is clearly a market for it. So why not start working towards implementing it to find out if it adds handle or just siphons money away from other multi race wagers and becomes a net negative by making them less attractive?

[lamboguy]

It's obviously not going to solve all of racing's problems, but there is clearly a market for it. So why not start working towards implementing it to find out if it adds handle or just siphons money away from other multi race wagers and becomes a net negative by making them less attractive?
in my opinion, having all these exotic wagers have helped to take this game down. if you asked me, i would turn back the clocks to the days where there was 1 daily double and 3 exacta's for the card and that would be it.

but i know that ain't happening.

[the little guy]

Here's what's amazing, it's not the usual " I want something, NYRA doesn't have it, therefore they suck " silliness that frequents this board. It's the stubborn refusal to even entertain the possibility that there may be more than meets the eye as to why changes aren't implemented instantaneously, despite having frequently seen why this doesn't happen.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Here's what's amazing, it's not the usual " I want something, NYRA doesn't have it, therefore they suck " silliness that frequents this board. It's the stubborn refusal to even entertain the possibility that there may be more than meets the eye as to why changes aren't implemented instantaneously, despite having frequently seen why this doesn't happen.

The 50-cent Pick Five seems like a decent idea assuming the Cali metrics translate to NY. You've made this reference about "more than meets the eye" a couple of times. Can you elaborate? I have no idea how NYRA would go about introducing such a bet. Maybe you can explain the process to everyone. Thanks.

[lamboguy]

The 50-cent Pick Five seems like a decent idea assuming the Cali metrics translate to NY. You've made this reference about "more than meets the eye" a couple of times. Can you elaborate? I have no idea how NYRA would go about introducing such a bet. Maybe you can explain the process to everyone. Thanks.
i think in order to implement or change any bet in new york, someone has to approve it with a vote.

[jelly]

Someone from the NYRA has to ask for the bet.This Is difficult stuff :D

[Dahoss9698]

Someone from the NYRA has to ask for the bet.This Is difficult stuff :D

Don't you think (scary, I know) someone has?

[PaceAdvantage]

Someone from the NYRA has to ask for the bet.This Is difficult stuff :DNYRA asks for lots of stuff that either never materializes or takes a very long time to materialize.

Keep blaming NYRA though, and keep having your ignorance shine through.

[jelly]

No,I don't think the NYRA has asked.


You know that they have asked for a pick 5?

[NTamm1215]

No,I don't think the NYRA has asked.


You know that they have asked for a pick 5?

Once again, thinking has proven to be a major problem for you.

[PaceAdvantage]

No,I don't think the NYRA has asked.


You know that they have asked for a pick 5?Why wouldn't they want that bet on their menu?

And if you come back at me with the ridiculous "Steve Crist wants to protect the pick-6" conspiracy theory, I might have to slap you.

[classhandicapper]

Here's what's amazing, it's not the usual " I want something, NYRA doesn't have it, therefore they suck " silliness that frequents this board. It's the stubborn refusal to even entertain the possibility that there may be more than meets the eye as to why changes aren't implemented instantaneously, despite having frequently seen why this doesn't happen.

I think by now most people here understand the politics and logistics involved with making changes.

This thread probably would have gone away quickly if someone with knowledge of the situation was able to say that NYRA was evaluating the Pick 5, doing some internal studies, etc.. but even if it's determined that they would like to add it to the betting menu, it would take some time because of the politics and logistics.

Without that, it sort of evolved into a debate over the merits of the pick 5 as if NYRA doesn't want it when that may not be the case.

[Dahoss9698]

I think by now most people here understand the politics and logistics involved with making changes.



Have you read the threads here?

[classhandicapper]

Have you read the threads here?

LOL.

That's why I said "most" instead of everyone. Maybe I was tad too aggressive. Many? Some? A few?

[jelly]

And if you come back at me with the ridiculous "Steve Crist wants to protect the pick-6" conspiracy theory, I might have to slap you.[/QUOTE] :lol: :lol:





[QUOTE=PaceAdvantage]Why wouldn't they want that bet on their menu?

Incompetents,having we established that?

[PaceAdvantage]

Incompetents,having we established that?Regarding who? NYRA or your thoughts on NYRA?

You can criticize NYRA for various things, but not asking for a pick-5 because of incompetence is not one of them.

Do you think they don't realize the bet exists? That people haven't been asking for it?

Give your head a shake and think logically for once. Don't let your emotions get the better of you.

[OTM Al]

This thread probably would have gone away quickly if someone with knowledge of the situation was able to say that NYRA was evaluating the Pick 5, doing some internal studies, etc.. but even if it's determined that they would like to add it to the betting menu, it would take some time because of the politics and logistics.

Without that, it sort of evolved into a debate over the merits of the pick 5 as if NYRA doesn't want it when that may not be the case.

This is true in part but a rather silly way to approach it. Making public anything that is in negotiation can get you in a lot of trouble. From fans if it falls through and from regulators for making discussions public in a state where no govt action is public. To announce something before it is finalized can only result in bad outcomes. Thus let's take off the tin hats and deal with the reality of the situation.

[Charli125]

This is true in part but a rather silly way to approach it. Making public anything that is in negotiation can get you in a lot of trouble. From fans if it falls through and from regulators for making discussions public in a state where no govt action is public. To announce something before it is finalized can only result in bad outcomes. Thus let's take off the tin hats and deal with the reality of the situation.

It's sad that NYRA has to negotiate to add a bet that has been a life saver for CA and has been a hit everywhere it's been added. It's ridiculous that the tracks can't just decide whatever bets they want to offer, whenever they want.

I bet if it was up to NYRA to make the rules(or say Saratoga/Belmont/Aqueduct making the rules on their own), they'd all have a .50 cent P5 starting in the first race. Too much red tape in this industry.

[OTM Al]

It's sad that NYRA has to negotiate to add a bet that has been a life saver for CA and has been a hit everywhere it's been added. It's ridiculous that the tracks can't just decide whatever bets they want to offer, whenever they want.

I bet if it was up to NYRA to make the rules(or say Saratoga/Belmont/Aqueduct making the rules on their own), they'd all have a .50 cent P5 starting in the first race. Too much red tape in this industry.

To be clear, I don't know if they have or haven't. Personally I couldn't care less on this one for already stated reasons. But this is the process they face and given current circumstance, any moving forward must be difficult, moreso than even a few months ago. Such negotiation has had to happen in the past and the one I know that has been openly discussed in the press is NYRA run OTBs which they have been trying to do for some time and have not yet gotten there. It's why I snap back at the standard and unthinking "why don't they just...." posters

[Cholly]

Maybe not $300k - $400k but a lot more handle then the pick 6 pool in NY when there is not a carryover like Saturday's pick 6 handle of $72,481.

Hollywood .50 pick 5 handle for:

Thursday --------- $191,439
Friday------------- $277,775
Saturday---------- $267,207


________
David-LV[/QUOTE]

Those amounts are not chump change. But they’re impressive only if they are part of an overall rising handle. Are they?

Imagine plotting a graph with the number of menu offerings (i.e., types of wagers allowed) on the x-axis and total sales on the y. With almost all products/services, you will find a modified bell curve. Total sales will rise with each increased option only to a certain point, then there will be a decline in total sales as each new menu item is added. It results from the customer becoming confused by the increasingly complex decision of which product to choose, resulting in their spending less (or nothing). Well, at least that’s what the professors in B-school taught us, and they had lots of studies to back it up.

I’m not necessarily saying that either New York or Cali has reached the point where each new product offering is more likely to hurt rather than help total sales…but there is a point where that would occur. Concern of that phenomenon would play into any decisions they made.

But I’ll grant your point that when considered in the grand scheme of things, the Pick 6 pools are anemic…usually less than half of the smallest trifecta pool all day. It makes one wonder if the hype and promotion accorded to the P6 is out of proportion.

[the little guy]

The impact of the Pick-6 is not measured in a non-carryover pool.

[Cholly]

The impact of the Pick-6 is not measured in a non-carryover pool.

I don't have a dog in this fight either way--I'm just am curious: If over a twelve month period you lump all the carry-over and non-carry-over pools together, what is the average per day?

[jelly]

On Dec 17 2011 Hollywood Park had a $183,593 Player’s Pick 5 carryover.The next day It had a pool of $1,226,324.


On May 8 2011 Hollywood Park had a $107,487 Pick 5 carryover.The next racing day an additional $799,630 was wagered.

[classhandicapper]

This is true in part but a rather silly way to approach it. Making public anything that is in negotiation can get you in a lot of trouble. From fans if it falls through and from regulators for making discussions public in a state where no govt action is public. To announce something before it is finalized can only result in bad outcomes. Thus let's take off the tin hats and deal with the reality of the situation.

I don't recall suggesting that someone reveal a detailed analysis of where negotiations are or to make promises of eventually implementing it.

A simple "We are interested in the Pick 5 and are looking into that and other popular bets" would have put it to rest. If even that much is not possible, a lot of people are going to assume there is no interest and complain (as you can see in this thread).

I'm not sure where the tin hat comment came from.

I couldn't give a rats ass if there is a Pick 5 or not, but it's obviously popular with many people, especially those that don't feel they have the bankroll to play the Pick 6 properly. And those that prefer the playing Pick 6 carryovers would probably be against it because it would dilute their advantage. I know I would be against it if I was a Pick 6 specialist. So there may be conflicting interests among customers.

[Tom]

On Dec 17 2011 Hollywood Park had a $183,593 Player’s Pick 5 carryover.The next day It had a pool of $1,226,324.


On May 8 2011 Hollywood Park had a $107,487 Pick 5 carryover.The next racing day an additional $799,630 was wagered.

NYRA is not in California.

[David-LV]

NYRA is not in California.

NYRA might not be California, but the .50 pick 5 has worked everywhere it has been implemented.

So I say let's give it a chance starting with Saratoga and see what happens.

_______
David-LV

[David-LV]

Here's what's amazing, it's not the usual " I want something, NYRA doesn't have it, therefore they suck " silliness that frequents this board. It's the stubborn refusal to even entertain the possibility that there may be more than meets the eye as to why changes aren't implemented instantaneously, despite having frequently seen why this doesn't happen.

This comes across like a load of verbal diarrhea.

I'm really sick of hearing what can't been done.

How about we post solutions.

________
David-LV

[the little guy]

This comes across like a load of verbal diarrhea.

I'm really sick of hearing what can't been done.

How about we post solutions.

________
David-LV

Well, you are an authority on verbal diarrhea.

You are also completely clueless about everything else.

[David-LV]

Well, you are an authority on verbal diarrhea.

You are also completely clueless about everything else.

I rest my case !

_______
David-LV

[OTM Al]

This comes across like a load of verbal diarrhea.

I'm really sick of hearing what can't been done.

How about we post solutions.

________
David-LV

You mean solutions like what Monmouth did two years ago that you championed as the greatest thing done in racing? You know, the thing that nearly destroyed them? I'm afraid your solution process is suspect at best, especially when you don't want to listen to people like TLG who actually know what is going on, but then you'd rather base your opinions on uninformed wish lists from people that have no idea what it takes to do things. "Why don't they just....." indeed.

Real solutions take time and effort and have failures along the way. If you really want something good, don't count on it happening soon and given certain political climates, don't count on them at all. Then if it is done, you can be pleasantly surprised, if you can take time from complaining.

[OTM Al]

I'm not sure where the tin hat comment came from.

.


Sorry, not directed at you but rather those who seemed to think there is some Templar/Illuminati//Masonic/Steve Crist plot to not supplant the P6

[jelly]

You mean solutions like what Monmouth did two years ago that you championed as the greatest thing done in racing? You know, the thing that nearly destroyed them? I'm afraid your solution process is suspect at best, especially when you don't want to listen to people like TLG who actually know what is going on, but then you'd rather base your opinions on uninformed wish lists from people that have no idea what it takes to do things. "Why don't they just....." indeed.

Real solutions take time and effort and have failures along the way. If you really want something good, don't count on it happening soon and given certain political climates, don't count on them at all. Then if it is done, you can be pleasantly surprised, if you can take time from complaining.




Please,the little thing doesn't know what's going on.All he does is attack people when they question NYRA.

[OTM Al]

Please,the little thing doesn't know what's going on.All he does is attack people when they question NYRA.

No, he points out when people, like you, behave like fools.

And never confuse someone not blabbing things he knows because he is a professional with a fool like you who knows nothing.

[tzipi]

Please,the little thing doesn't know what's going on.All he does is attack people when they question NYRA.

Met him in person and he's a great guy who always takes his time out to say hello AND if you follow his twitter or NYRA prerace show, you'd see he's questioned the stewards calls somtimes and some of the jockeys and horsemen. Pretty fair to me.

He might attack in situations when people sitting at home in their AC on their couches yell at horses, jockeys and NYRA for not running in 100 degree heat.

[PaceAdvantage]

What OTM Al and tzipi said... :ThmbUp:

jelly should be banned just for saying TLG doesn't know what's going on when it comes to NYRA.

One of the more clueless things I've ever seen written around these parts.

Seriously people...leave your personal issues at the door, and at least acknowledge the obvious.

[jelly]

My mistake,i meant to say he doesn't know what's going on with the NYRA board.Those who make decisions about the pick 5.

[the little guy]

Always good to read insight from people that have none.

The simple question is how could he possibly know what I do or don't know.

The answer? He couldn't....and he doesn't.

Jelly....never right and never in doubt.

[Dahoss9698]

What OTM Al and tzipi said... :ThmbUp:

jelly should be banned just for saying TLG doesn't know what's going on when it comes to NYRA.

One of the more clueless things I've ever seen written around these parts.

Seriously people...leave your personal issues at the door, and at least acknowledge the obvious.

Yeah...but people like Jelly add so much to the forum, why ban them? You save the bannings for the people that really deserve it, right?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Sorry, not directed at you but rather those who seemed to think there is some Templar/Illuminati//Masonic/Steve Crist plot to not supplant the P6

What is Crist's position on a NYRA Pick 5? Why is it crazy to think he'd try to influence the process (if a Pick 5 were under consideration)?

[cj]

What is Crist's position on a NYRA Pick 5? Why is it crazy to think he'd try to influence the process (if a Pick 5 were under consideration)?

Come on man, get real.

[jelly]

Monmouth started the popular and successful pick 5 bet back in 2007.Gulfstream,Churchill,California and others followed.



NYRA is still working on It. :lol: :lol:

[Saratoga_Mike]

Come on man, get real.

Why can't you give a substantive response? But since you want to give me such a flip response, let me return the favor. What's so hard to understand about the term "influence?" Influence might include a Crist-penned column that suggests a Pick 5 is a bad idea; a casual conversation with someone from NYRA about the issue; or a comment to the NYR&WB. Now I want you to explain to me what isn't "real" here? NYRA and the racing regulator are both political bodies (I'm not using the term "political" pejoratively in this case). You think they aren't influenced from time to time? I don't even know what Crist's position is on this matter - do you? Did I suggest he controlled the outcome? That would merit the rejoinder "get real." In this case, the usage looks just plain silly (to use what has become the tritest descriptor on this board).

[cj]

Why can't you give a substantive response? But since you want to give me such a flip response, let me return the favor. What's so hard to understand about the term "influence?" Influence might include a Crist-penned column that suggests a Pick 5 is a bad idea; a casual conversation with someone from NYRA about the issue; or a comment to the NYR&WB. Now I want you to explain to me what isn't "real" here? NYRA and the racing regulator are both political bodies (I'm not using the term "political" pejoratively in this case). You think they aren't influenced from time to time? I don't even know what Crist's position is on this matter - do you? Did I suggest he controlled the outcome? That would merit the rejoinder "get real." In this case, the usage looks just plain silly (to use what has become the tritest descriptor on this board).

What do you mean "might" he have penned a column? He didn't, not that I can find. I've never seen any indication that he doesn't like the P5, especially if it is at a low takeout which seems to be the current trend.

Anything is possible, but I find it very hard to believe that even a comment to a NYRA employee would have much effect, and a comment to the R&WB even less relevant. How hard is it to read between the lines? It seems to me the bet was asked for, and approval wasn't given. I'd be shocked if I'm wrong on that.

[Saratoga_Mike]

What do you mean "might" he have penned a column? He didn't, not that I can find. I've never seen any indication that he doesn't like the P5, especially if it is at a low takeout which seems to be the current trend.

Anything is possible, but I find it very hard to believe that even a comment to a NYRA employee would have much effect, and a comment to the R&WB even less relevant. How hard is it to read between the lines? It seems to me the bet was asked for, and approval wasn't given. I'd be shocked if I'm wrong on that.

I wrote originally: "Why is it crazy to think he'd try to influence the process..."

Note the tense of the highlighted phrase - I'm was suggesting Crist might in some way try to shape the debate (IF the debate even exists). Where did I say he did? He's written numerous columns on betting and different types of wagers over the years, correct? I've seen lobbying firsthand and trust me conservations, formal or otherwise, matter. To think otherwise is true "get real" material. And I'm not even suggesting it would be improper for Crist to make his view heard, publicly or privately.

With all that said, why must I read between the lines? Why not have an open debate on the issue? Perhaps it's a horrible idea. Maybe it's a great idea. Let's get everyone on record. You spend much more time on racing matters than myself, so do you think it's a good or bad idea?

[cj]

You spend much more time on racing matters than myself, so do you think it's a good or bad idea?

A pick 5? Personally I think just adding more and more pools as overall handle shrinks is an incredibly stupid idea. It is short sighted and only adds to the decline. Now, if you add some bets but remove others, fine.

I hear how great these P5s are at other tracks, but I don't see handle growing. It is still shrinking. P5s aren't growing the game, they are moving the shrinking money.

[Charli125]

With all that said, why must I read between the lines? Why not have an open debate on the issue?

I agree with this part.

If NYRA did ask the NYSRWB for permission to have a P5, and it was denied, I think that should be common knowledge. If the players really want the bet, and they keep pestering the NYSRWB and their elected representatives to get it, they might eventually give in. (Though that's doubtful given the amount of pestering that's been done in CA with no change.)

It would probably be political suicide at this point for NYRA to announce something like that because it just makes the NYSRWB look bad, and NY is far from the only jurisdiction that lacks transparency, but what is to be gained by keeping this hush hush?

I'm all for open discussions and I don't understand keeping these types of things secret.

[cj]

It would probably be political suicide at this point for NYRA to announce something like that because it just makes the NYSRWB look bad, and NY is far from the only jurisdiction that lacks transparency, but what is to be gained by keeping this hush hush?



Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner. But, people want to blame NYRA.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner. But, people want to blame NYRA.

Just to be clear, I wasn't blaming NYRA for anything (okay I'd like an open debate), so I hope my remarks didn't cause you to post this. Nine out of my ten posts on NYRA are positive in nature.

[cj]

Just to be clear, I wasn't blaming NYRA for anything (okay I'd like an open debate), so I hope my remarks didn't cause you to post this. Nine out of my ten posts on NYRA are positive in nature.

No, just the general nature of this thread.

[classhandicapper]

If NYRA has already asked for the Pick 5 and it was denied, then NY racing is even more screwed up than I thought. My "read between the lines" interpretation was that it takes time because not only do you have to ask and get approval (always a tedious and slow process) you have other logistics to handle after you get approval.

It's sort of a shame that when NYRA screws up, NYRA gets the blame and when the way racing is organized in NY is the problem, NYRA still gets the blame, but I've seen this before at the OTBs. Some of the problems were external and forced by the state.

[PaceAdvantage]

Yeah...but people like Jelly add so much to the forum, why ban them? You save the bannings for the people that really deserve it, right?Yes, it's quite tough to get banned around here. You really have to be a total prick on a constant basis...

[PaceAdvantage]

If NYRA has already asked for the Pick 5 and it was denied, then NY racing is even more screwed up than I thought.Or maybe they asked for it and it hasn't been approved yet. Either way, do you really think anyone from NYRA is going to make an official statement on the matter?

I mean I realize it's not like the NYSRWB to drag its feet on things... :rolleyes:

[Dahoss9698]

Yes, it's quite tough to get banned around here. You just have to piss off one of the chosen few...

FTFY

[PaceAdvantage]

Yes, it's quite tough to get banned around here. You just have to piss off one of the chosen few...over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over...ad infinitum

FTFY

[jelly]

What do you mean "might" he have penned a column? He didn't, not that I can find. I've never seen any indication that he doesn't like the P5, especially if it is at a low takeout which seems to be the current trend.

Anything is possible, but I find it very hard to believe that even a comment to a NYRA employee would have much effect, and a comment to the R&WB even less relevant. How hard is it to read between the lines? It seems to me the bet was asked for, and approval wasn't given. I'd be shocked if I'm wrong on that.






Thank you,this was the first time I've heard that the pick 5 was asked for and denied.

I'm not even gonna ask when this happened :lol:

[classhandicapper]

Either way, do you really think anyone from NYRA is going to make an official statement on the matter?


Apparently not. I guess I don't see the big deal in giving some kind of carefully worded response.

The way it is now, people see that other tracks have already implemented it and will complain that NYRA doesn't have it yet.

You can't have your cake and eat it.

If people want it and you don't have it you have to either give them a status or live with the complaints - justified or not in this particular case. They aren't going to just assume that everything they want is being addressed and it's not NYRA's fault.

[salty]

Sorry I can't read through the entire thread. I just have to say something about the pick 5. This year I started playing it at keenland and I liked that it pays for 4 out of 5 and even better is that the returns are much higher than pick 4's with a 50 cent minimum bet. Even without carryovers, at a big track like ny it does offer that jackpot payout. In the end it should create more profit for nyra. Even if it does take out some money from the pick 4 and 6 in reverse it could add more money from people who want to try one more leg on the pick 4 and people who want to insure their pick 6's. I don't understand why a big track wouldn't offer every possible kind of bet. If I owned a track I would go nuts and offer twin Trifectas twin supers place puck 9s and anything else because that can only add more takeout to put in my pocket. I mean realy when the end of the year comes it will always add something to the bottom line.

[Vinman]

Sorry I can't read through the entire thread. I just have to say something about the pick 5. This year I started playing it at keenland and I liked that it pays for 4 out of 5 and even better is that the returns are much higher than pick 4's with a 50 cent minimum bet. Even without carryovers, at a big track like ny it does offer that jackpot payout. In the end it should create more profit for nyra. Even if it does take out some money from the pick 4 and 6 in reverse it could add more money from people who want to try one more leg on the pick 4 and people who want to insure their pick 6's. I don't understand why a big track wouldn't offer every possible kind of bet. If I owned a track I would go nuts and offer twin Trifectas, twin supers, place pick 9's and anything else because that can only add more takeout to put in my pocket. I mean realy when the end of the year comes it will always add something to the bottom line.

Salty....You go to the head of the class :)


Vinman