Calculating the Dime super, what's good value?

[Stillriledup]

In today's first race at Aqu, i was wondering if someone could tell me what the winning superfecta *might have* paid had the 2-1 shot Speedy's Gal (#5) had been 4th instead of 27-1 shot Beautiful Risk. Would it have paid the same?

I'm a little confused at the super payout comparing it to the tri payout.

[ManU918]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

In today's first race at Aqu, i was wondering if someone could tell me what the winning superfecta *might have* paid had the 2-1 shot Speedy's Gal (#5) had been 4th instead of 27-1 shot Beautiful Risk. Would it have paid the same?

Come on.... You can't be serious with that question.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by ManU918

Come on.... You can't be serious with that question.

The tri paid about 2k for 1 dollar. The super paid 3k for one dollar. I'm confused as to why the super only paid a little more by getting a huge longshot up for 4th in a big field. Do you think the tri and super would have paid the same if the fave was 4th?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

The tri paid about 2k for 1 dollar. The super paid 3k for one dollar. I'm confused as to why the super only paid a little more by getting a huge longshot up for 4th in a big field. Do you think the tri and super would have paid the same if the fave was 4th?

Given the odds, the trifecta paid a lot more than it should have...IMO.

The trifecta was 14X the exacta payoff...with the third horse at only 6/1 odds.

Very rare...

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Given the odds, the trifecta paid a lot more than it should have...IMO.

The trifecta was 14X the exacta payoff...with the third horse at only 6/1 odds.

Very rare...

Hmm, interesting take. I normally look at the tri, with the much bigger pool, and think that the tri price is more "Accurate" of how the public viewed the race. But, if you think the tri should have been 500 instead of 975, that makes the super at 3k not as terrible of a price.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

The tri paid about 2k for 1 dollar. The super paid 3k for one dollar. I'm confused as to why the super only paid a little more by getting a huge longshot up for 4th in a big field. Do you think the tri and super would have paid the same if the fave was 4th?

somehow, I knew that this is what you meant in the first post.

That's not really a knock, but you could have just asked this question, rather than being indirect. It can be frustrating at times.


Short answer = the 4th spot in the super is a spread leg.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

somehow, I knew that this is what you meant in the first post.

That's not really a knock, but you could have just asked this question, rather than being indirect. It can be frustrating at times.


Short answer = the 4th spot in the super is a spread leg.

There's too many posts complaining about stuff that doesnt pay what it should, so i didnt want to have a post like that

Manu was irritated that i thought the super might have paid the same with the favorite, but if the 4th spot is a "spread leg" isnt it possible the super would have paid the same with the favorite? I mean, how much less could it have paid, the entire world had it even though only a few people had the tri.

Maybe the "evil" dime denomination reared its ugly head here?

[Robert Fischer]

I'm just giving you some sh_t SRU.

It is a reasonable assumption, that if you traded the for any position,... the 4th slot would have the least impact.

you had to go about 8 deep in the 4th leg to catch the , and that isn't that crazy for a 12 horse field superfecta 4th slot.

[Robert Fischer]

in other words = especially since change over to dime superfectas, the 4th slot has very little value.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

in other words = especially since change over to dime superfectas, the 4th slot has very little value.

I understand and agree with the logic here, but do you have data to support this? It would be interesting to see.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

I understand and agree with the logic here, but do you have data to support this? It would be interesting to see.

Hey... If somebody has data like that, I would love to see it as well.

The way it is now, a player can put together a ticket in one of these cheaper full-field turf races for less than $40 and try to hit a big super.

Add in any rebated players (some of whom are known to maximize rebates with a coverage approach),

...and the 4th slot tends to be well covered, relative to say the win or place positions.

[ArlJim78]

Don't have my DB at work, but when I get home I can run some queries and post the results.

We're talking about how the oddsrank of the fourth place finisher effects the super ROI right?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

Don't have my DB at work, but when I get home I can run some queries and post the results.

We're talking about how the oddsrank of the fourth place finisher effects the super ROI right?

Payouts before and after the intro of the dime super - which I believe was Sept 2007 at BEL.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

Don't have my DB at work, but when I get home I can run some queries and post the results.

We're talking about how the oddsrank of the fourth place finisher effects the super ROI right?

It might be a wrong on my part to assume that the win odds are a good barometer on the 4th place finisher. This particular bomb who was 4th was a one move closer who probably had a much better shot to finish exactly 4th than she did to win, so maybe people stuck her in the 4th slot figuring she's a clunk up type, she didnt provide much value in the 4th position. I'd love to see what the super would have paid if the fave was 4th.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

Payouts before and after the intro of the dime super - which I believe was Sept 2007 at BEL.

I only go back thru 2009