Quote:
Originally Posted by AltonKelsey
I don't think it has ANYTHING to do with demand curves.
They traditionally imposed higher takeouts on exotics because they assume horseplayers are idiots and would not notice the rake off a much higher average DD , EXACTA, TRI , SUPER payoff.
This recent P5 lower takeout is going in the opposite direction, for whatever reason. Promotional value would be my guess.
There's actually ZERO justification for a single race bet (ex,tri,super) to have a higher takeout.
Multi race, I can see, as you are getting, at least if you are alive after a leg, more than once race worth of action for the bet. Less churn for the track.
The only curve they care about is your money curving into their pocket.
|
Precisely. When I looked at the HANA grid I was aghast at the P4 take and instantly became a P5 bettor, it's a no brainer, especially since I've hit all the horizontals and don't find 5 to bet that much harder if I am hitting that day, anyway. Sometimes it's over 10% take difference. People don't understand how huge that is, or they were never told what the takeouts were, or both.
I think Alton nails it with his explanation of arbitrary lottery mentality by central government type thinkers. When you hear guys like Ed Rendell from PA speak, you know this is exactly how the big wigs think ... and how we got to where we are.
I have found this thread fascinating. I went back and read the original Pricci article and (knew it after the first sentence) found it to be, frankly, retarded and essentially playing into the establishment game, the inertia that's always been there. Be happy with 15% and bargain for 2% here or there (but then skyrocket another bet to 30%!???). I can't believe the man clicked publish on such a thing. And the boomers talk about the "millenials" being a problematic class, uff