Santa Anita Mandatory Pick 6 Payout. Pool should easily pass 5 million dollars

[rrpic6]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

$600/.20 ,3k/$ does not entice...

5 of 6 favorites won, and a third-choice won the other race

in order to profit from a payout that low, you either need to have scored a lottery 'single' type of ticket, played all favorites, or a whale really 'emphasizing' favorites with a series of tix.

If you did the ABC thing, you could spend $300 or so in 20cent tickets ...

Redboard alert! Great value for a 20 cent bet. The only time I bet the Pick 6 this meet. Hard to believe it would have paid 6K for the conventional $2.00 Ticket. Parlay was less than half that.




Race 5 Santa Anita $0.20 P6 (PWHL) 3, 6, 11 / 1 / 6, 8, 11 / 3, 8, 9 / 4, 6 / 2, 3, 9, 10 Bet $43.20 $601.10


RR

[airford1]

Horse racing keeps making the wagering so difficult to understand for the new player. The jackpot wager is STUPID and we have to listen to Santa Anita officials keep telling us that it is a ray of hope for the future of racing in this Economy. I cant believe horse racing goes from Breeders Cup on Saturday and then HIPES Up the mandatory pay out on the Crappy Jackpot 6. Pretty sad.

[Andy Asaro]

Originally Posted by airford1

Horse racing keeps making the wagering so difficult to understand for the new player. The jackpot wager is STUPID and we have to listen to Santa Anita officials keep telling us that it is a ray of hope for the future of racing in this Economy. I cant believe horse racing goes from Breeders Cup on Saturday and then HIPES Up the mandatory pay out on the Crappy Jackpot 6. Pretty sad.

The mandatory payout days are the best bets you're ever gonna bet on. 7.9 million dollar pool. It doesn't get better than that.

[ronsmac]

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

The mandatory payout days are the best bets you're ever gonna bet on. 7.9 million dollar pool. It doesn't get better than that.

When it's 20c bet the 6.8 million bet doesn't really help the bettor but it's great for the track. The payoff would have been much higher if yesterday's pool had been much smaller. The 1.1 million dollar carryover would have had a greater impact on the payoff.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by ronsmac

When it's 20c bet the 6.8 million bet doesn't really help the bettor but it's great for the track. The payoff would have been much higher if yesterday's pool had been much smaller. The 1.1 million dollar carryover would have had a greater impact on the payoff.

The carryover didn't even cover the takeout on the new money. Hard to get terribly excited about jumping into that pool.

[Andy Asaro]

I've never heard the "pool was too big for me to bet" argument but here it is. If the payouts were 20K for 50 cents instead of $600 I don't think people would be making the same argument IMO

[JohnGalt1]

How many lost money winning the SUCKER jackpot 6 Sunday with $7 million in the pool?

On e should not lose money on bets like superfecta's, pick 5's and sixes.

I played Santa Anita twice this fall, and yes I played a pick six ticket yesterday for $28.80, because it was cheap. After I saw what it paid, I felt I had just bought a fake Rolex that didn't work. I'm a SUCKER.

At least I had winning days both times I played.

I was surprised Churchill had $2 pick six bets Friday and Saturday.


I hope new York doesn't change.

At least there are pick 4 and 5's to play than can return boxcar payoffs, except at tracks like Canterbury that have a SUCKER jackpot 5.

Another good thing is if people avoid all SUCKER bets they will have a better chance at profits because they will churn their money more efficiently.

[ronsmac]

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

I've never heard the "pool was too big for me to bet" argument but here it is. If the payouts were 20K for 50 cents instead of $600 I don't think people would be making the same argument IMO

The point isn't that the pool is too big or too small ,the point is the larger the pool in relation to the carryover the less value. If only $1,000,000 was bet yesterday it would have been a tremendous value to have a 1.1 million dollar carryover. It was still better than the horrible value you normally get with the jackpot p6 I'll give you that.but it's bankroll sucking get every other day.

[Andy Asaro]

Originally Posted by ronsmac

The point isn't that the pool is too big or too small ,the point is the larger the pool in relation to the carryover the less value. If only $1,000,000 was bet yesterday it would have been a tremendous value to have a 1.1 million dollar carryover. It was still better than the horrible value you normally get with the jackpot p6 I'll give you that.but it's bankroll sucking get every other day.

I'll take the 8 million dollar pool over the 2.5 million dollar pool anytime.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

I'll take the 8 million dollar pool over the 2.5 million dollar pool anytime.

With the $8 million pool, the pool is that big because of all the players who are smarter than you are had the winning ticket multiple times. When it comes out chalky, you lose a lot of your advantage from that carryover.

I guess when the best thing you can say is that one day a year our sucker play is actually decent instead of gouging you to death, then you latch onto it though. So good job carrying the water.

[Andy Asaro]

Originally Posted by castaway01

With the $8 million pool, the pool is that big because of all the players who are smarter than you are had the winning ticket multiple times. When it comes out chalky, you lose a lot of your advantage from that carryover.

I guess when the best thing you can say is that one day a year our sucker play is actually decent instead of gouging you to death, then you latch onto it though. So good job carrying the water.

You're like Mr. Wrong 90% of time. What was the last shot you took? I was trying to co opt the board because I didn't have any twitter followers. LOL Only about 3400.

If you think betting into yesterdays pool was a sucker play then you have zero credibility. If you thought it would be chalky you play your ticket multiple times. For what came in $600 was pretty good. Without the mandatory payout what would it have paid?

[coachv30]

I don’t get this....I had the payout twice due to the scratch of 7 in last leg..

$1200 return for a $43.20 ticket. Should I not be happy?

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

I'll take the 8 million dollar pool over the 2.5 million dollar pool anytime.

The math says you are wrong unless of course you hit a ticket with 6 longshots. On a payoff like yesterday you want the carryover to be the biggest percent of the total pool as possible.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

If you think betting into yesterdays pool was a sucker play then you have zero credibility. If you thought it would be chalky you play your ticket multiple times. For what came in $600 was pretty good. Without the mandatory payout what would it have paid?

It would have paid about $492. Just a tad bit over an 18% premium.

[Andy Asaro]

Originally Posted by AndyC

The math says you are wrong unless of course you hit a ticket with 6 longshots. On a payoff like yesterday you want the carryover to be the biggest percent of the total pool as possible.

Pool size matters a lot. If it didn't then the experiment at Canterbury where they had P5 takeout at 12% but pools were 10K and they didn't grow during the meet. Same with some other small tracks with low takeout horizontals.

I'd rather play into a pool of 500K with 23.68% take than a 20K pool with 12% takeout.

I understand your point about the math but the reality is that most people want to be able to make a score of 20K -50k in those pools and that can't happen at certain low takeout venues.