MATCH PLAY CHATTER

[Jay Trotter]

Attached you find a blank copy of the Match Play Bracket set-up. Players will be slotted in based on their standings and who has registered to play.

[Ted Craven]

Looks like I have the distinct honour of rank 64 out of 64 - hope springs eternal

I do have a question about Rule #7 re Scratches, which I recall caused me and I think others some concern last year:

Originally Posted by Track Collector

7. SCRATCHES
-- Due to the restrictions imposed on the posting of selections, scratches will be refunded, and ROI calculations will be adjusted accordingly.

Players who tend to have more scratches among their selections (e.g. because they must post BEFORE Scratches are announced) are playing on a somewhat different field than those who prefer to or are able to wait until AFTER Scratches are posted.

Last year, in some of my and others' daily games, the outcome was decided because one side ended up betting less than $100 for the day while winning the same races as their opponent - or combinations of that - because of scratches.

I agree that sometimes it works out otherwise, but I think I was not the only one to find that disconcerting after a successful day of selections and betting. I have not completely thought through a useful alternative treatment of scratches, but if there is any possibility of modifying the rules at this point, here is a thought:

If the outcome (i.e. the ROI) of any daily game would be decided solely because of one player's scratched selections and the refunds issued (i.e. reducing the amount bet below $100), then the favourite should be substituted for the scratched horse(s) and all the money bet on them - for both players.

This treatment of scratches where the day's outcome was decided, puts both players on an equal footing.

Thoughts, critique? Thanks for listening.

cheers,

Ted

[Jay Trotter]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

Looks like I have the distinct honour of rank 64 out of 64 - hope springs eternal
Ted

Ted, you are Ranked 64th and automatically in. You're actual ranking will likely be higher as not all qualifiers are likely to play which would move you up somewhat.

As far as questions about the rules I'll leave that to Track Collector to address.

Trotter

[Track Collector]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

Looks like I have the distinct honour of rank 64 out of 64 - hope springs eternal

I do have a question about Rule #7 re Scratches, which I recall caused me and I think others some concern last year:


Players who tend to have more scratches among their selections (e.g. because they must post BEFORE Scratches are announced) are playing on a somewhat different field than those who prefer to or are able to wait until AFTER Scratches are posted.

Last year, in some of my and others' daily games, the outcome was decided because one side ended up betting less than $100 for the day while winning the same races as their opponent - or combinations of that - because of scratches.

I agree that sometimes it works out otherwise, but I think I was not the only one to find that disconcerting after a successful day of selections and betting. I have not completely thought through a useful alternative treatment of scratches, but if there is any possibility of modifying the rules at this point, here is a thought:

If the outcome (i.e. the ROI) of any daily game would be decided solely because of one player's scratched selections and the refunds issued (i.e. reducing the amount bet below $100), then the favourite should be substituted for the scratched horse(s) and all the money bet on them - for both players.

This treatment of scratches where the day's outcome was decided, puts both players on an equal footing.

Thoughts, critique? Thanks for listening.

cheers,

Ted

Hi Ted,

I understand your concern. Your suggestion sounds like a reasonable one, but the devil is in the details. This contest allows a significant range of wager types, which adds to the complexity. So I offer the following example:

Original Play --> $2 Trifecta key 2 with 1,4,5 with 1,3,4,5,7 (Cost = $24)
The #1 gets scratched, and the #4 is the betting favorite

Under the favorite replacement scenario, the ticket becomes:
$2 Trifecta key 2 with 4,4,5 with 3,4,4,5,7

To make it easier to see the combinations, I'll show it differently:
$2 Trifecta key 2 with 4,a,5 with 3,4,a,5,7 but knowing the 4 and the a are the same.
The combinations become:

2,4,3
2,4,a (not a legal combination)
2,4,5
2,4,7

2,a,3
2,a,4 (not a legal combination)
2,a,5
2,a,7

2,5,3
2,5,4
2,5,a (this is a legal combination, which means having 2,5,4 combination twice)
2,5,7

Total cost of this ticket is $20 after eliminating the illegal combinations.


There are cases where the favorite replacement would be very easy, and others which would be much more complicated than the example above. Will the players be able to score them correctly and consistently on their own? Also bear in mind that in some situations the player may want to exclude the favorite in their selections, so you would be forcing him/her to take the favorite. One option would be to allow the player to decide on a race-by-race basis (in advance of course) when they would accept the favorite as a replacement for scratches. This option then in turn adds more complexity in the posting process and can lead to more disputes.

Also on the negative side is that more than 40+ players have already acknowledged the rules, and introducing a major change like this one after they have already done so seems like a recipe for trouble.

The ROI is a ratio of the returns and the amount wagered, which means that a player incurring scratches can be helped as well as hurt.

Perhaps in the future a better way can be worked out. For now, we are clearly not at that point, and as such, we need to go forward with the current contest rules for this year.


Chris

[Ted Craven]

Chris,

I accept your reasoning that it is now too late to actually change existing rules. Hopefully for next year. And I also accept the 'devilish details' example you provided.

The particularly concerning outcome would be one where a player could lose a game (and match and the contest) yet still have an equal or higher payout for the day than his opponent (because his opponent bet less and ends up with a higher ROI, due to scratches).

Ted

[iceknight]

Originally Posted by cj

Almost sure the official "off time" from Equibase is used, and always has been. There was one contest (AsD Parlay) where the scheduled time was used for the order in which scores were calculated, but never for the posting deadline.

Thanks cj.

Anyhow, I am 152nd on the list of PACS points... so let us see if I make into the 64

[Track Collector]

Hello everyone,

If you have not heard from you opponent, in addition to sending him/her a private message, you should also try to contact them via e-mail as well (if they are set up for that option), as some folks check their e-mail regularly but maybe only periodically log on to the PaceAdvantage Website.

Remember too that in the event your opponent does not show up for a game, you will still need to post YOUR selections in order to receive credit for a forfeited game. Otherwise, the game will be scored a double loss.

Finally, if a player misses game 1, they can get back into the contest with game 2.


Chris


...

[pat5336]

I email and PM buffaloxp

[Aner]

Moderators will only get involved to resolve disputes and/or help with scoring questions when requested to do so by one of the players.



This question has nothing to do with a controversy. I was trashed soundly today. I wasn't paying attention and posted a $24 superfecta in today's race #2 at Belmont which had no super. I think the rule that applies is:

-- Should a player wager LESS than $100 in a given race, $100 will still be used for the purpose of calculating ROIs.

But it could be treated like a scratch. After all, if you had tried to bet this super at the track it would be refused - the same as if you tried to bet a scratched horse. See this rule.


-- Due to the restrictions imposed on the posting of selections, scratches will be refunded, and ROI calculations will be adjusted accordingly.


So how is it calculated? Refund or tough luck?

[Track Collector]

Originally Posted by Aner

Moderators will only get involved to resolve disputes and/or help with scoring questions when requested to do so by one of the players.



This question has nothing to do with a controversy. I was trashed soundly today. I wasn't paying attention and posted a $24 superfecta in today's race #2 at Belmont which had no super. I think the rule that applies is:

-- Should a player wager LESS than $100 in a given race, $100 will still be used for the purpose of calculating ROIs.

But it could be treated like a scratch. After all, if you had tried to bet this super at the track it would be refused - the same as if you tried to bet a scratched horse. See this rule.


-- Due to the restrictions imposed on the posting of selections, scratches will be refunded, and ROI calculations will be adjusted accordingly.


So how is it calculated? Refund or tough luck?

Although many times we will never know all the info needed to make a "correct and fair" decision, in general it comes down to was it something beyond the player's control, or was it a mistake on the player's part.

For example, if the player made a superfecta selection in the 7th race at Belmont, and Belmont did not offer a superfecta in the race regardless of the field size, then it is "tough luck". If the player made their selections at 8:00 a.m. in the morning and scratches were announced at noon which reduced the field size to a point where Belmont had to cancel the superfecta in the race, I would tend to believe that it should be treated as a scratch.

One should give the player the benefit of the doubt (treat is as a refund) when there is not enough evidence to suggest otherwise.


Chris

[PaceAdvantage]

OK, so somebody pointed out something about cancellations and needing an official ruling. If anybody needs my input, I'll need to be briefed on what is going on...I've been too busy handicapping in this contest and haven't paid attention.

Links to pertinent posts would suffice...

[tiger rose]

want to see definition of unsportmanship

check out fridays thread posts 171 thru 176
thats the beef i guess

cause other players that played there counted it as a game

[Track Collector]

Can we please get an official statement from the contest admins as to the rules that are in play if there are further cancellations at any tracks? There was obviously a ruling made in this type of situation already and it needs to be spelled out. -- From FunkyMonkey in another thread.

No specify contest rules address cancellations, so with the involved cancellation at LaD (after only 1 contest race) I made an on-the-fly decision to void the results (based on only one race) and have the players do a make-up game. I gave the players the option to do it on either Saturday or Sunday, and let them know of my decision via private message.

I would plan to have any future cancellations dealt with in a similar way.

If the contest is offered again in another year, I would suspect the rules could be improved to specify how cancellations will be handled.


Chris

[FunkyMonkey]

Originally Posted by Track Collector

Can we please get an official statement from the contest admins as to the rules that are in play if there are further cancellations at any tracks? There was obviously a ruling made in this type of situation already and it needs to be spelled out. -- From FunkyMonkey in another thread.

No specify contest rules address cancellations, so with the involved cancellation at LaD (after only 1 contest race) I made an on-the-fly decision to void the results (based on only one race) and have the players do a make-up game. I gave the players the option to do it on either Saturday or Sunday, and let them know of my decision via private message.

I would plan to have any future cancellations dealt with in a similar way.

If the contest is offered again in another year, I would suspect the rules could be improved to specify how cancellations will be handled.


Chris

Chris,
thanks for this. however, it is still ambiguous. do all five races need to be completed to be considered official? What about if 3 of 5 races are completed before a track cancels? Is that considered okay since 60% of races for the day will have been completed before the cancellation? Just want to be sure we avoid any potential hard feelings if it happens again. thanks, again.

[PaceAdvantage]

I would have ruled that there would be no makeups. This thing runs five days. That's plenty of time in my opinion, even with a lost day or lost race(s).

I just don't see the need for makeup races.