new wager in NYC

[SaratogaBailey]

i was just watching ESPN and they were talking about a new wager that will take place after May 3rd and it will be called the grand slam. It encompasses four races. For the first three races you have to pick a horse to come in the money (win place or show) therefore loading the bases and then in the fourth race you have to pick the winner.

[Vegas711]

Why would ANYONE play this bet? Race 1 you pick a 20-1 he wins, in 2nd place is the 3-5 favorite. Race 2 your 12-1 horse comes in first, again the 2-1 favorite comes in 2nd. Race 3 you pick a 6-1 horse who wins, the second fav comes in 2nd. You and the other players both have the 3-1 choice in the Grand Slam 4th race.You end up collecting a very small Grand slam payoff. The person who plays your same horses in a pick 4 collects a monster payoff.


If i understand this bet correctly it sounds like a horrible bet.

[garyoz]

Sounds like a situational bet. If you like a price horse in the 4th leg and favorites in the earlier legs it could work, plus it doesn't sound like it will attract very smart money. But overall it doesn't seem like a very good wager.

[Ron]

I think Nader should be applauded for introducing a low-risk bet for the casual fan. Anything that can be done to bring new fans to the sport is commendable.

[OTM Al]

Its actually not a bad idea for the casual fan. Yes, the payoffs will usually not be huge but consider there is no need to spread very much to hit this thing, so the amount invested will likewise be less and if you do spread, you may hit with multiple winning tickets, up to 27 times if you have the first 3 finishers in the first 3 races.

Also it will not be offered on the same 4 races as the standard pick 4, so that comparison is moot.

[BetHorses!]

What is the takeout?

[the little guy]

Even though it is unlikely to be a bet I will play very often, there's nothing wrong with trying something new, and there can be situations where it may be a somewhat juicy play.

Suppose you feel there are a couple of legs where the favorite is very weak, or even one, there could be good value. The favorite will be a substantial part of the pool for each leg, and should it fail to hit the board, the possibilities for decent payoffs exist. Like any bet, it will be worth paying attention to, and seeing if possibly the situation dictates a play. Imagine, for example, had you played it at Saratoga on the day before Travers Day, and pitched Ashado from the Personal Ensign, as anyone that knows me knows I would have, wouldn't there have been big value?

[samyn on the green]

If I take some new jacks to the track I will direct them to play this. It has all the fun and tension building momentum of a pick 4 with substanually reduced risk. Perhaps if you figure this wager out before the masses do you can score for a few months before the value is usurped out of the wager. Instead of being a typical negitive horseplaying loser/cormudgoen, be positive and you may find yourself a winner. There is an oppurtunitry here for those with vision. I can imagine this is going to pay 2X or 3X the win price of the winner of the forth leg but perhaps with a odds on horse off the board it may be overlaid. Something new is the spice of life.

Originally Posted by Ron

I think Nader should be applauded for introducing a low-risk bet for the casual fan. Anything that can be done to bring new fans to the sport is commendable.

[classhandicapper]

Isn't everyone just going to bet the favorite in the first 3 legs and then select the horse they like in the final leg?

If the payoff is the same no matter who you select in the first 3 legs, you might as well have the most probable win/place/show horse - which almost invariably will be the favorite (of course there will be some small exceptions and races where there are co-favorites etc..)

[Ron]

Unless the favorite runs off the board, which happens quite often too.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Ron

Unless the favorite runs off the board, which happens quite often too.

I realize that, but if the payoff is identical whether I pick the typical 3-5 shot or or the typical 8-1 shot, I'd have to be crazy to take the 8-1 shot.

[andicap]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I realize that, but if the payoff is identical whether I pick the typical 3-5 shot or or the typical 8-1 shot, I'd have to be crazy to take the 8-1 shot.

I see your point -- why use a longshot in the first three legs if you think the favorite will finish in the money? True. If you think the chalk is solid for all three legs there is no value in the bet. But don't people bet trifectas and leave out the favorite in hopes of huge payoffs? Here you might get an overlay for less outlay. Probably not life-changing but value is value.

I would think the best races will be E horses with strong Beyers earned from slow paces who are in tougher today pacewise. Or horses with two strong efforts in a row with little rest.

[ceejay]

I see value here if there's a short-priced favoirte that you HATE.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by ceejay

I see value here if there's a short-priced favoirte that you HATE.

Or don't think is going to be in the top three. I hate all short-priced favorites!

[BetHorses!]

I'll ask again

Does anyone know what the takeout will be