An alternate type of straight wager

[dvlander]

This may be a very simplistic idea so ponder it and feel free to kick it to the curb if it makes no sense. In addition to offering place and show wagering, why don't tracks offer straight bets that require the horse to finish exactly second or exactly third?

I was thinking about this when looking at one of those races where a low-priced favorite is the clear choice to win the race but one of the longer-priced longshots appears to have a real good chance at being the best of the rest. If you take a conventional place wager, the favorite will often dilute your contender's place mutuel to the point where it offers minimal value. Granted, you can also take a shot at a straight exacta (with higher takeout) underneath the favorite but those are rarely overlays.

Say you have a legitimate 3-5 win favorite. What would fair odds be on this horse finishing exactly second in an 8-horse field? It probably depends on many factors including the horse's running style but if we say for fun that our internal oddsline gives the horse a 50% shot at winning, would it have a 25% chance of getting second (i.e., 3-1)? Who knows?

How about my "best of the rest" longshot example above? Say, he is 18-1 to win but you like his chances to get 2nd. What's a fair "exactly second" price? Who knows but if it's 10-1, maybe it's worth a shot.

It seems to me that these type of wagers would open up some interesting handicapping dynamics into the game that are not there at present. Most importantly, it may open up more opportunities to capture a price when running 2nd or 3rd that would not likely be available otherwise.

I value the opinions on this board so consider this idea the pinata and take a swing at it.

Dale

[bisket]

one aspect of handicapping that many punters can't grasp is some horses just want to finish second. you will see this line on a short odds horse many times. 12 times raced all at similar class. usually these are allowance horses. 12 races 2 wins 7 seconds 2 thirds. why would a horse finish second more than 1/2 the time? the best way for me to explain it is with the well known triple crown rivalry affirmed and alydar. many inculding da bisket thought alydar was actually the better horse. espn did a show about their many races, and i think charlesy canty explained it best. she said affirmed always had to be in front (8 bells) and alydar was running along thinking here i am i'm running with him. when a horse like this is much the best he'll win, but he doesn't really want to be the LEADER of the herd. always remember these are herd animals and they have a hiearchy. for some horses its a little to scary running out there in front!! this is why sometimes when putting together a tri or exacta don't be afraid to single a horse in the 2 spot and throw a number of horses in the 1 or 3 hole i like the second only idea for a wager. da bisket would clean up!!

[kenwoodallpromos]

How will betting just for 2nd or 3rd be different from, and not dilute, the win pool? 2nditis- In Ca the winner and 1 of the other finishers get tested, and ony 1/2 of the test get checked, so I looked for trainers who liked 2nd money but did not find any. I do see in the PPs horses however who are gentlemen and let another go 1st! Now I'm wondering if they should workout to the wire in company? Don't like the crowds yelling (during the last furlong)?

[bisket]

Originally Posted by kenwoodallpromos

How will betting just for 2nd or 3rd be different from, and not dilute, the win pool? 2nditis- In Ca the winner and 1 of the other finishers get tested, and ony 1/2 of the test get checked, so I looked for trainers who liked 2nd money but did not find any. I do see in the PPs horses however who are gentlemen and let another go 1st! Now I'm wondering if they should workout to the wire in company? Don't like the crowds yelling (during the last furlong)?

i think if the steeds trainer could figure a way to break the habit he'd be a millionnaire i'd love to be a fly on the wall when the trainer is trying to explain to the owner why his/her horse always finishes second

[kenwoodallpromos]

Originally Posted by bisket

i think if the steeds trainer could figure a way to break the habit he'd be a millionnaire i'd love to be a fly on the wall when the trainer is trying to explain to the owner why his/her horse always finishes second

Years ago a cl 6f ep type had 5 in a row where he let the others past in deep stretch. The 6th was my 15-1 shotwho past him!!
I'm thinking maybe every TBred has a specific distance they can run full out uncontrolled carrying say up to 123 lbs; maybe some of these placer plater's clain trainers can get them to pace. If I remember right Funny Cide and War Emblem were full-out runners but had better stamina than claimers? I guess morning glories and and some auction babies have limited distance runs in them?

[markgoldie]

I think many trainers will tell you that seconditis often occurs because of a "chase" mentality on the part of the horse. They love to chase another competitior but do not want to be chased (ie. on the lead). You will see many of these animals in maiden races, where they pile up loads of seconds. That's because their overall ability is higher than the competition so it's easy for them to be chasing right at the front of the pace. Sometimes a chaser will find themselves on the front end which usually happens when a horse they had been chasing stops abruptly. In this case, the chaser just slows down until another horse passes him and then he resumes the chase. This sort of mentality actually has some relevance to the evolutionary biology of the horse. A horse is a herd and prey animal, depending on its speed to survive. It has little or nothing in the way of offensive weaponry when confronted by a sharp-toothed carnivore. Therefore, it runs. But running away is an uncomfortable position to be in because it's hard to know when something is gaining on you. So horses do not naturally want to be chased. On the other hand, chasing is something that horses know something about because that's how a male gets rid of unwanted suitors to his harem of mares. So chasing is a sign of strength and dominance. That is also why these "seconditis" types tend to be males rather than females. As for the "head of the herd" theory relating to Affirmed and Alydar, I think it's nonsense. You're trying to tell me that Alydar, in the all-out heat of battle, with his head inches away from Affirmed and the jockeys whipping for their lives, KNEW for a fact that he had to adjust his stride downward to keep Affirmed's nose a few inches ahead of him? Were this true, Alydar would not have just been a better horse than Affirmed, but also the sharpest-visioned horse in history, with the greatest body control of any species of athlete, AND the greatest judge of exactly how much energy his opponent had left in every remaining stride of the race, because if Affirmed had as much as hiccupped, Alydar would have been past him. I think we can safely disregard this theory no matter how avant garde and sexy it may seem.

As for the idea of playing for exactly place. Well, there's nothing inherently outrageous in the idea itself. In fact, you could create pools for every possible finishing position whereby the worst horse in the race would be the "favorite" to finish last. However, the question is: Do we need more wagering options? I think the answer is "no". With rolling doubles and rolling picks and supers and soon (I predict) you will see more and more pents, particularly with 10-cent minimums as Balmoral harness is now doing, the pools are diluted enough. And just IMHO, the more of these wagering vehicles we dream up, the more the carnival atmosphere surrounding the races we create. Somehow the dignity of the sport suffers.

[dvlander]

However, the question is: Do we need more wagering options? I think the answer is "no". With rolling doubles and rolling picks and supers and soon (I predict) you will see more and more pents, particularly with 10-cent minimums as Balmoral harness is now doing, the pools are diluted enough.

Mark, I think you make a fair point here. However, all of the wagering options that you mentioned are the higher takeout variety. I thought these "second" and "third" wagers would offer some different handicapping dynamics while keeping straight bet takeout rates.

Dale

[markgoldie]

Originally Posted by dvlander

Mark, I think you make a fair point here. However, all of the wagering options that you mentioned are the higher takeout variety. I thought these "second" and "third" wagers would offer some different handicapping dynamics while keeping straight bet takeout rates.

Dale

Hadn't thought of that, but now that you mention it, it's a primary reason why the tracks would never consider it. They are addicted to the higher takeout rates that they get from the gimmicks. The last thing they want is some new low-takeout vehicle grabbing handle from their exotics. Won't happen. What I DO think they consider when rolling out a new gimmick (like the pent) is, can they grab the attention of some of these lottery players who dream numbers because the pool of these handicappers is getting older and older and more and more tired with each passing year.

[Steve 'StatMan']

Don't know what amount of action it will attract, considering the existing W-P-S pools as well as the exotics. Some races the bet might be a nice option, others may not set up that way. For us to make money betting on that bob-tailed nag, somebody else needs to bet on the bay.

Because it had a similar style, I'll briefly mention the most unsuccessful bet I can remember - think it was the mid 90's or maybe early 2000's when Arlington offered "The Countdown" It was a 4 race leg wager, where in the first leg, you had to pick the horse that finished exactly 4th, 2nd leg exactly 3rd, 3rd leg exactly 2nd, and final let exactly 1st. The bet rarely ever attracted more than $300-$400 in betting, I can't even remember it they had a carryover on it or not, that $300-$400 might have been the carryover. It was mercifully discontinued after about 1-2 months into the season. Of course, had they made it more like the eventual NYRA Grand Slam, and let any top 4 finish in the first leg, top 3 finish in the 2nd leg, top 2 in the 3rd leg, and Win in the 4th leg, that might have had a hell of a lot more appeal, and frankly not as seemingly impossible of a task as picking a horse to finish exactly 4th just to start off a 4-leg wager. How many people want to do any thinking or resarch into what types of horses run exactly 2nd, 3rd or 4th? And will the bet generate enough of a pool to make payoffs worthwhile?

Maybe 2nd only might have a shot, don't know if one would want to do down much further in the finish order.

[bisket]

i've been wagering on races for a long time, and i've seen many, many cases of two horses racing against each other, horse a beats horse b every time they race. horse b gets away from horse a and wins. many times the win will be more impressive than any of his races with horse a. yes some horses will shy away and not run in front of the other. this is why imhop zenyatta is not hoy. alydar's jock tried many different strategies to beat affirmed; to no avail. yes alydar would race hard to please his jock, but i do believe it takes a will to win to have your nose in front. horses know when they win and when they lose. if they are inexperienced you can trick them, but after a horse has won and lost he/she knows the difference. mainly because they take their cues from how there handlers act after the race.

[bisket]

i think an excellant example of this which never got a chance to play out was quality road beating dunkirk in the fla derby. i watched dunkirk come after quality and he had a very dominating way of coming after horses. you could see it in his posture and ears and eyes. dunkirk had been able to dominate every horse he raced against up until that point. when quality just hit another gear and just spurted away dunkirks posture just sank. you could see that horse was beat. i never got the chance to do it but every race after that would have been quality/dunkirk trifecta and singled in that manner with a wheel of runners in the third spot!!.... excluding the derby. i didn't like dunkirk in the derby. dunkirk did display his dominating type running style in the belmont. he did run down and intimidate mtb, but the horse he wasn't racing against passed them on the the outside. don't just watch the race try to see whats going on in the race!!!