Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kasept
When pools accept reduced minimums, they make it far easier to hit and thereby generally diminish the average payouts of said wager. This whole conversation has been had regarding the creation of the Super High 5 from focus group discussions with disaffected Superfecta bettors at Santa Anita. They complained that the .10 super had so greatly impacted the payouts that they were no longer interested in the play. Hence the creation of a higher minimum/higher risk/higher reward wager in the '5'.
|
I agree that fractional denominations make the wager easier to hit for the player with a limited bankroll, but I've never seen any study that establishes that fractional wagers lower the average payouts of those wagers (although recognizing that dime supers may permit a super to get hit, where it previously would have had an "all" in the fourth slot). Pic-4 payoffs at tracks like Keeneland and Gulfstream are plenty generous (often more so than corresponding wagers at NYRA which has the $1 minimum), despite the lower minimums.
I understand the tracks' desire to foster carryovers with wagers like the pic-6 (and am willing to accept the $2 minimum), but for non-carryover wagers, it's about catering to the tracks' customers. The arguments that you are advancing are same as those made by the "whales" or other large bankroll players who want the pools to themselves. If you are going to try to grow participation in the sport, I don't believe that's the way to go. And this speaks nothing to the IRS reporting benefits associated with fractional wagering.