Longshots in trifetca

[Aner]

Did you ever feel snake-bit? I have seen 3 horses with the highest odds fill the trifecta before, but not with odds as high as this. I bet this is a new high when adding the odds of the 3 trifecta horses. These are the 3 horses I told everyone to not bet.

Mth 9th 7/5/20

#1 Promise Illgetyou----off at 107:1-----216.00, 83.00, 32.00
#2 So Hot----------------off at 65:1--------------, 44.40, 21.20
#4 Shoeless--------------off at 107:1--------------------, 34.00

If my calculation is correct, you could expect a score like this once every 750,000 races.

[stuball]

I will be looking to bet in 750,000 races

[wisconsin]

Originally Posted by Aner

Did you ever feel snake-bit? I have seen 3 horses with the highest odds fill the trifecta before, but not with odds as high as this. I bet this is a new high when adding the odds of the 3 trifecta horses. These are the 3 horses I told everyone to not bet.

Mth 9th 7/5/20

#1 Promise Illgetyou----off at 107:1-----216.00, 83.00, 32.00
#2 So Hot----------------off at 65:1--------------, 44.40, 21.20
#4 Shoeless--------------off at 107:1--------------------, 34.00

If my calculation is correct, you could expect a score like this once every 750,000 races.

That tri was a gyp. A once on a lifetime score that should have paid much more than it did. I would have been pissed if I had it.

[castaway01]

I thought the trifecta was low too, but the race result was so incredibly random that I'm not sure what we can take from it other than it was a freak event.

[Zman179]

That tri was super low at $11,000 for a deuce. Numbers players, perhaps?

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by Zman179

That tri was super low at $11,000 for a deuce. Numbers players, perhaps?

IDK, seems low,

and the first-glance heuristics I can think of (pool-size, field size, form, etc...) get mostly dismissed by the raw WPS payouts posted ITT.

If you were on some 1/750,000 race 'system' from hell, it SUCKS... but if you were some knucklehead who played his house number or 'baxed the three longest shots for a 'lotto' ticket, you're on cloud nine.

[alhattab]

Originally Posted by wisconsin

That tri was a gyp. A once on a lifetime score that should have paid much more than it did. I would have been pissed if I had it.

Seemed light to me at first glance, too. If my calcs are right the hit rate on the exacta was lower than the tri which seems weird but is probably purely randomness. I was surprised so many people hit even the exacta. There was about $90,000 to distribute in the exacta pool, so there were 9 $1 winning bets, but the tri rate was a little higher. I guess the lower denomination on the tri helps create the higher hit rate and thus lower price.

[therussmeister]

Originally Posted by alhattab

Seemed light to me at first glance, too. If my calcs are right the hit rate on the exacta was lower than the tri which seems weird but is probably purely randomness. I was surprised so many people hit even the exacta. There was about $90,000 to distribute in the exacta pool, so there were 9 $1 winning bets, but the tri rate was a little higher. I guess the lower denomination on the tri helps create the higher hit rate and thus lower price.

I believe there was $9 bet on the winning trifecta. I don't know for sure because I don't know what their takeout is.

[iwearpurple]

I was wondering if anyone on pace advantage took Aner's throw outs and boxed the 3, just to do it.

[metro]

Turf routes at Monmouth yesterday looked like they favored inside trips, and to a degree speed. This is from the charts for that race:

PROMISE ILLGETYOU raced off the pace inside, advanced on the rail in upper stretch, angled out at the sixteenth marker, made a late run
and was just up for the win. SO HOT showed good early speed to set the pace, showed the way into the far turn, shook free again at the furlong
marker, dug in gamely and was caught at the wire. SHOELESS raced off the pace inside, saved ground on the far turn and rallied mildly inside

Would have never had it but know guys that live for these type of bets, where it's a function of how a track is playing more so than who the best horses are.

.10 cent super box with the 5 inside horses ($12) would have gotten 25K.

[iwearpurple]

Originally Posted by metro

Turf routes at Monmouth yesterday looked like they favored inside trips, and to a degree speed. This is from the charts for that race:

PROMISE ILLGETYOU raced off the pace inside, advanced on the rail in upper stretch, angled out at the sixteenth marker, made a late run
and was just up for the win. SO HOT showed good early speed to set the pace, showed the way into the far turn, shook free again at the furlong
marker, dug in gamely and was caught at the wire. SHOELESS raced off the pace inside, saved ground on the far turn and rallied mildly inside

Would have never had it but know guys that live for these type of bets, where it's a function of how a track is playing more so than who the best horses are.

.10 cent super box with the 5 inside horses ($12) would have gotten 25K.

Actually, another winner would have cut the payoff to $12,975 and pennies. Nevertheless, a good payoff. There was only 1 winning ticket on the superfecta.

[marksinger]

Did anyone think that with these results a drug test could've been in order??
They had to be the worst 3 horses in the bunch.
Makes me wonder.

[SG4]

Originally Posted by marksinger

Did anyone think that with these results a drug test could've been in order??
They had to be the worst 3 horses in the bunch.
Makes me wonder.

I do believe the top 3 finishers in any race are tested, so looks like you'll get your wish. Is there any jurisdiction where all the horses in the money aren't subject to a post-race sample?

[alhattab]

Originally Posted by therussmeister

I believe there was $9 bet on the winning trifecta. I don't know for sure because I don't know what their takeout is.

I believe you are correct. Pretty sure the tri takeout is 25%.

[depalma113]

The $.10 super paid nearly $26k with one of the two chalks in 4th.