Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   this is a shocker.... (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22684)

jwkniska 05-22-2008 10:12 PM

this is a shocker....
 
Quick-Pick under Scrutiny A computer glitch that invalidated hundreds, possibly thousands of bets has brought Scientific Games beneath the spotlight of the California Horse Racing Board, which learned of the matter on May 7, although its probe was not disclosed until last Sunday. The story has now been picked up by various California news outlets, although the San Jose Mercury News has the best rundown of the situation.

The problem was uncovered by a bettor at San Mateo's Bay Meadows track who placed 1,300 $1 superfecta bets on the Kentucky Derby, using Scientific's randomizing software. However, not one of the 1,300 tickets listed eventual winner Big Brown. Seems Scientific's "quick-pick" function had been routinely omitting the last-numbered horse in the Derby and other races (Big Brown was #20). This isn't Scientific's first brush with notoriety: In 2002, an employee of Scientific subsidiary Autotote pled guilty to an attempted pick-six fix of the Breeders' Cup, a scam that -- had it been successful -- would have netted $3 million

hi_im_god 05-22-2008 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwkniska
Quick-Pick under Scrutiny A computer glitch that invalidated hundreds, possibly thousands of bets has brought Scientific Games beneath the spotlight of the California Horse Racing Board, which learned of the matter on May 7, although its probe was not disclosed until last Sunday. The story has now been picked up by various California news outlets, although the San Jose Mercury News has the best rundown of the situation.

The problem was uncovered by a bettor at San Mateo's Bay Meadows track who placed 1,300 $1 superfecta bets on the Kentucky Derby, using Scientific's randomizing software. However, not one of the 1,300 tickets listed eventual winner Big Brown. Seems Scientific's "quick-pick" function had been routinely omitting the last-numbered horse in the Derby and other races (Big Brown was #20). This isn't Scientific's first brush with notoriety: In 2002, an employee of Scientific subsidiary Autotote pled guilty to an attempted pick-six fix of the Breeders' Cup, a scam that -- had it been successful -- would have netted $3 million

i think the bigger story is the one about retards betting $1300 on random numbers.

just when i start to think i'm too cynical about human nature, i find out i'm actually too optimistic.

jwkniska 05-22-2008 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hi_im_god
i think the bigger story is the one about retards betting $1300 on random numbers.

just when i start to think i'm too cynical about human nature, i find out i'm actually too optimistic.


can you say...... lottery ticket???????

I love it when people put dumb $$ into pools like this... makes my mouth water!

justindew 05-22-2008 10:31 PM

He could have keyed Big Brown on top and still not had it with 1300 combinations. Or even 5000 combinations.

VOL JACK 05-22-2008 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justindew
He could have keyed Big Brown on top and still not had it with 1300 combinations. Or even 5000 combinations.

Wow, I thought I was dumb for not hedging my BB-DoC exacta with a BB- ALL-DoC trifecta.

hockey2315 05-23-2008 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VOL JACK
Wow, I thought I was dumb for not hedging my BB-DoC exacta with a BB- ALL-DoC trifecta.

Glad I wasn't the only one. . .

10 pnt move up 05-23-2008 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hi_im_god
i think the bigger story is the one about retards betting $1300 on random numbers.

just when i start to think i'm too cynical about human nature, i find out i'm actually too optimistic.

I don't get this line of thinking....yes we should discourage (and saying its idiocy certainly does) all forms of uninformed money from trying to get "lucky" betting on horses. This certainly helps us compete against each other and make money.

3kings 05-23-2008 04:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up
I don't get this line of thinking....yes we should discourage (and saying its idiocy certainly does) all forms of uninformed money from trying to get "lucky" betting on horses. This certainly helps us compete against each other and make money.

In Gods defense(not that he needs it), I think we can assume that that most of the people on a horse racing board are not spending $1300. on random selections. Therefore he is not discouraging anyone, just making a comment on the lottery mentality.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.