Return to consos on P4/P5/P6

[goodcopy]

There is no argument here,The bet and the payoffs are clearly defined before the bet is made!
If you don't like the rules of the pick 4,5,or 6 then don't play or parlay your bets for what would be surprisingly close payoff to the exotic price anyway(not exactly but close enough to quell any arguments either way!
ONE MORE THING WISE DAN WAS NEVER GOING TO LOSE!

[Danzig]

i think shug waited as long as he did because he was hoping the weather would clear. and of course he has no control over the weather. i think he wanted to run the horse. if he was ducking, he would have declared first thing.

[OTM Al]

So much for a greater discussion. Too bad as I was interested to see what people think. The lack of response seems telling.

I don't think the blame, if any, should be directed towards the trainer. He was well within the rules to scratch when he pleased. He has no obligation to the bettor.

The track, however, should have placed a deadline before the start of the exotics for trainers to scratch their horses. Any scratch after that deadline would only be a vet scratch.

[JohnGalt1]

It would have been the same situation if Point of Entry was scratched after injuring himself in the gate.

If we know the rules we have to be accordingly.

The frustrating thing for me is the rules are different in every jurisdiction.

[golfer]

Speaking of multi-race wager rules, got hammered by something I had never seen before yesterday at Arlington Park.

Was singled to the favorite in the last race, final leg of pick 5. Will pay was $440.

They get to the gate, and the jock loses control of the 9 horse, who runs off and is a late scratch. Now I understand the rules, and I know the $ switches from the 9 to the favorite, my horse. He wins and the pick 5 comes back $300

Again, I get why it happened and how, but this seems terribly unfair to me and anyone who had the favorite on the ticket, while of course it's quite fortuitous for anyone who used the 9 horse.

Gate scratches in the final leg of a pick 4 or 5 sequence can be very costly.

[3kings]

Originally Posted by golfer

Speaking of multi-race wager rules, got hammered by something I had never seen before yesterday at Arlington Park.

Was singled to the favorite in the last race, final leg of pick 5. Will pay was $440.

They get to the gate, and the jock loses control of the 9 horse, who runs off and is a late scratch. Now I understand the rules, and I know the $ switches from the 9 to the favorite, my horse. He wins and the pick 5 comes back $300

Again, I get why it happened and how, but this seems terribly unfair to me and anyone who had the favorite on the ticket, while of course it's quite fortuitous for anyone who used the 9 horse.

Gate scratches in the final leg of a pick 4 or 5 sequence can be very costly.

for inovative redboard. I agree, it seems like you are seldom helped by these type of situations. The horses that gate scratch almost always seem the most hopeless.

[OTM Al]

Originally Posted by golfer

Speaking of multi-race wager rules, got hammered by something I had never seen before yesterday at Arlington Park.

Was singled to the favorite in the last race, final leg of pick 5. Will pay was $440.

They get to the gate, and the jock loses control of the 9 horse, who runs off and is a late scratch. Now I understand the rules, and I know the $ switches from the 9 to the favorite, my horse. He wins and the pick 5 comes back $300

Again, I get why it happened and how, but this seems terribly unfair to me and anyone who had the favorite on the ticket, while of course it's quite fortuitous for anyone who used the 9 horse.

Gate scratches in the final leg of a pick 4 or 5 sequence can be very costly.

Not sure how it is costly, or how the final leg affects the sequence any more than any other leg. You are making the mistake known as the fallacy of the predetermined outcome. The event in which your horse won was not one in which the 9 horse ran. How can you say you lost out with any certainty? You have no idea what would have happened if the 9 ran. You could have lost completely and got nothing. It actually could have been beneficial to you that he was scratched. You do once again prove my supposition that people feel rules are unfair only when they are adversely effected. I'm sure everyone who had the 9 thought it was quite fair as well.

[OTM Al]

Originally Posted by helicopter11

I don't think the blame, if any, should be directed towards the trainer. He was well within the rules to scratch when he pleased. He has no obligation to the bettor.

The track, however, should have placed a deadline before the start of the exotics for trainers to scratch their horses. Any scratch after that deadline would only be a vet scratch.

The standard is a fixed time for regular races and one hour before stakes races. Such a rule is not unreasonable, but likely was created before all the superexotics came into play. A review of such rules is not unreasonable.