Awful Bad Beat - Ticket screen shot/photo

[davew]

I hate being results orientated and have to say (even though they lost half the amount wagered) this was a very ballsy bet, that could have taken down the entire pool.

[Some_One]

Originally Posted by davew

I hate being results orientated and have to say (even though they lost half the amount wagered) this was a very ballsy bet, that could have taken down the entire pool.

It was slots-like gambling, betting and hoping chaos is on your side on the day.

[1st time lasix]

on the other hand....a $710 payout from a pick five is pretty good if you only spent around 32 on the wager! Singled in leg 4 and 5. Only two legs of the five didn't have the chalk ....and both of those were easily findable. Leg one and leg three. In real time i truly thought the favorite lost that last leg....tough beat! Having experienced many of those....I feel his pain!

[Track Phantom]

Originally Posted by davew

I hate being results orientated and have to say (even though they lost half the amount wagered) this was a very ballsy bet, that could have taken down the entire pool.

It's interesting. The guy who took down the GP Pick 6 6 months ago went all in 5 legs and, I think, 2 deep in one race. He was playing for chaos and won 6M.

This guy, despite my attempts to back him off of it, had no issue with doing it. He said he was going to Vegas this week and needed "some seed money". I had some email exchange with him afterwards and he took it in stride.

All in all, I think the idea of narrowing a hopeless horse here or there to bring a ticket from 1500 down to, say 1200, or 1000, is silly. If you're going to go in with a bet like this AND you can afford to do it without an issue, you'd be much, much, much more upset if you left 2 or 3 horses out of an entire sequence and one of them won and it cost you 50k.

I think he played it right if his strategy was to harness chaos in his favor.

(By the way, Destino would have been one of the horses I would have narrowed out of the sequence, same as everyone else except redboard extraordinaire, SRU).

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by Valento

It's interesting. The guy who took down the GP Pick 6 6 months ago went all in 5 legs and, I think, 2 deep in one race. He was playing for chaos and won 6M.

This guy, despite my attempts to back him off of it, had no issue with doing it. He said he was going to Vegas this week and needed "some seed money". I had some email exchange with him afterwards and he took it in stride.

All in all, I think the idea of narrowing a hopeless horse here or there to bring a ticket from 1500 down to, say 1200, or 1000, is silly. If you're going to go in with a bet like this AND you can afford to do it without an issue, you'd be much, much, much more upset if you left 2 or 3 horses out of an entire sequence and one of them won and it cost you 50k.

I think he played it right if his strategy was to harness chaos in his favor.

(By the way, Destino would have been one of the horses I would have narrowed out of the sequence, same as everyone else except redboard extraordinaire, SRU).

Well, that GP bet was also a situation where you HAD to be the only winner to hit the bet, so there was no point in playing it if you didn't put in the longshots. The late Dan Borislow, the guy who hit that GP bet, also had the idea that no one would be playing the bet on the next-to-last day of the meet because they were waiting for the last day of the meet, which was correct---and that bet had a carryover, so different ballgame there too.

To me, while you can argue that maybe with four chaos races you could have a day where this bet made sense, over the long run you'll get slaughtered going "All" in four legs. It's a bad bet. But then when you're actually alive in the last leg and you lose $30,000 by a nose, that's a bad beat. So to me, it's both a bad beat and a bad bet. Bad all around.

[andtheyreoff]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

I have to admit, i lied to you and i humbly apologize.

In the "worst announcer tampa" thread in post 780, i told you that you could call me Mr 10 and 2.

I lied. Its Mr 12 and 2.

I think we should have a handicapping contest on here: SRU versus a chicken randomly pecking at numbers on paper.

Something tells me the chicken would win pretty easily.

[DeltaLover]

This ticket structure is not as bad as it looks from a first glance.

Although I never use all, I still can understand the underlined way of thinking and can see how this approach can potentially lead to a huge score.

[zico20]

I happen to agree that this was a horrible bet. To key the big favorite and hope for long shots in the other four races makes no sense. It was like the guy did no handicapping for the pick 5. I could understand this bet IF he was keying a 20-1 that he had inside info that the horse would win. Then he would have pretty much turned a profit even with a couple of chalks. But keying a favorite baffles me. With that said, he made another huge mistake, IMO. I assume he has money to burn and this wasn't his last 1500. Why wouldn't you go back and get multiple tickets with the other big favorite and some logical ones in the other races. Say a 4x4x4x1x1. That is 32 bucks and get it five times for only another 160 bucks. This "cover" protects against a couple short price horses. If you are going to bet 1500 you better cover your ass.

[HUSKER55]

you guys and gals are a tough crowd. man puts his money where his mouth is and gets beat by less than a quarter step and you call it a stupid bet?

OWEEEE

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

Every time I read one of your posts I find myself thinking of and longing for the exact same thing.

An oversize Ice Pick I can use to thrust into my own Cornea.

Guy takes a brutal beat and all you can do is nag about the construction of the ticket?

Have you ever actually been to the track?

I've been to the track. And it's not the same without your voice wafting over the grounds.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by HUSKER55

you guys and gals are a tough crowd. man puts his money where his mouth is and gets beat by less than a quarter step and you call it a stupid bet?

OWEEEE

The point is he didn't get beat. He won.
If you cash your ticket and lose money it's not a bad beat.

[TucsonGreyhound]

Originally Posted by castaway01

To me, while you can argue that maybe with four chaos races you could have a day where this bet made sense, over the long run you'll get slaughtered going "All" in four legs. It's a bad bet.

Do the posters ridiculing the guy for his large coverage realize there was nearly $100,000 more in carryover money than takeout money for the Pick5 yesterday? The track was paying out $1.04 for every $1 bet into the pool.

Sure, he could have increased his edge even more by sharpening his ticket. But over the long run, even with his 4 alls and one astute single, I would figure he would be breaking even at a minimum.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

The point is he didn't get beat. He won.
If you cash your ticket and lose money it's not a bad beat.

That's not necessarily true.

Consider the following situation (inspired by a plot point in "The Sting").

It's Santa Anita Handicap day, 1950. Calumet Farm has one of the greatest 3 horse entries in racing history, Triple Crown winner Citation, Hall of Fame racemare Two Lea, and Derby winner Ponder. You have figured out, however, that C.S. Howard's Noor, at 6 to 1, is going to beat them. But you have to work that day and you have no way to get out to the track.

So you give $5000 to your wife, who knows nothing about the racetrack. You send her out there and you tell her to "place it all on Noor".

You listen to the radio that day and are excited to hear Noor win the race. He pays $14.20 to win. You eagerly await your wife coming home from the track with $35,500.

She comes home and says "here you are" and gives you $5250.

She bet Noor to place. The entry came in 2-3-4. Noor paid $14.20, $2.10, and $2.10.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by TucsonGreyhound

Do the posters ridiculing the guy for his large coverage realize there was nearly $100,000 more in carryover money than takeout money for the Pick5 yesterday? The track was paying out $1.04 for every $1 bet into the pool.

Sure, he could have increased his edge even more by sharpening his ticket. But over the long run, even with his 4 alls and one astute single, I would figure he would be breaking even at a minimum.

I agree. It was a very solid play.SRU mentioned 3 horses to throw out(only the first 2 were tosses IMO-however I do agree with SRU's point that if there are horses that look like it is impossible for them to get there it is probably a waste of money to use them, BUT, for some spending an extra $300 or $400 to possibly get back the pool makes sense). they were fairly short fields and he was able to lock it up with what turned out to be a solid single(won like a solid single should-though a major contender pulling up did not hurt his chances). Had Destino got up it would he would have got back over $30 K, and add one other price horse in either the 2nd or 3rd and not telling how big a score he gets.Also, the sequence came out a lot chalkier than it looked on paper.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by andtheyreoff

I think we should have a handicapping contest on here: SRU versus a chicken randomly pecking at numbers on paper.

Something tells me the chicken would win pretty easily.

Only if the Chicken can go 13-1 or 14-0.