Return to consos on P4/P5/P6

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

You couldn't have misinterpreted my post any more. I completely benefitted by getting the post time favorite after POE scratched...

If for some reason Wise Dan didn't win, there would be massive blather about this. It's worth at least discussing the conso. v. post time fave.

The problem is there is never going to be a "fair" thing to do. Some people will prefer a conso and some will prefer the post time favorite. Either way one group will not be happy with how it is handled.

The fairest thing to do would be to allow people to select a replacement horse in the place of the scratched horse. But that is a logistic nightmare and would create chaos.

Personally my opinion on this is situational based on how it will benefit me the most. If the scratch leaves me with the favorite that I like, I think the rule is fine. If I get the favorite I don't like, I would prefer the conso.

Unfortunately I suspect most think this way, which puts us back where we started. One group is going to be upset.

How about a deadline for trainers to scratch their horse? Based on what I read from the original posters post....the delayed scratch by the trainer is what caused this a discussion.

[Travis Stone]

There is never a right answer to this stuff. It is sort of annoying they scratched so late in the day. Rain was the topic of conversation for the entire week.

I've always thought that giving each ticket the "next lowest uncovered horse" was an interesting idea.

[ranger5830]

Although I rarely play the pick 6, I think having a conso is a bad idea. People play the pick 6 to make a "life changing score", not to make back their investment plus a couple hundred bucks. Denying them the right to the top payout doesnt seem fair and I would think most pick 6 players would be against it. If you don't want to default to the favorite, make alternate selections before the start of the pick 6 an option, I don't know if any jurisdictions still do that after the Volponi Breeders Cup fiasco.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by ranger5830

Although I rarely play the pick 6, I think having a conso is a bad idea. People play the pick 6 to make a "life changing score", not to make back their investment plus a couple hundred bucks. Denying them the right to the top payout doesnt seem fair and I would think most pick 6 players would be against it. If you don't want to default to the favorite, make alternate selections before the start of the pick 6 an option, I don't know if any jurisdictions still do that after the Volponi Breeders Cup fiasco.

seriously? what a mess that would turn into. and better a conso/live ticket then just a cancellation of the entire bet.
it's part of playing the pick 6 ticket, things happen.

[PatCummings]

I think you guys are seriously underestimating the blow back had Wise Dan not won.

[OTM Al]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

I think you guys are seriously underestimating the blow back had Wise Dan not won.

And they would have been wrong.

Let's discuss this without being in a huff or citing issues of morality. The following is, I believe, a complete list of what happens on bets in the US if a horse scratches and the type of bet it is attached to. I'll go by NY rules as I am most familiar with them, but they seem pretty standard.

1. You lose (futures wager)
2. Refund (WPS, verticles, first leg of most horizontals)
3. Consolation (P3 and DD after first leg)
4. Post time favorite (P4, P6....NY doesn't have a P5 but likely would be the same)

So we already have 4 different possible outcomes in the different pools from the same scratch.

Now, the next part of the argument would be to determine why each of these were done differently. That I do not know, but after reading the rules on how a conso is determined in a P3, I have to believe that it is due to the complexity of the calculations. Consos on P3s have 3 different ways to be calculated depending on if the scratch was in the second, third or both second and third legs. Try reading them sometime, just this simple case will make your head spin. This increases at a geometric rate for each additional leg, so a P4 would have 7 ways, 15 (I think) with a P5 and so on. Could we argue that computation is much easier today and these things could be done? Perhaps, but that depends how these calculations are being done in the totalizer and what part of the program itself is governing these things. Believe it or not, even brand new software packages have underlying root code written in something like COBOL that pretty much no one in the industry even knows anymore. This makes fixing such issues extremely expensive and impractical. Some day the whole thing should be overhauled, but even a great overhaul will come with glitches initially,so it's quite understandable why well enough would be left alone. Also given the fact that pretty much everyone does these things the same way leads me to believe that there must have been a rationale for it. Deride this comment if you wish, but one would assume if there were a real benefit to doing it a different way, someone would. Maybe HK has found that way with the single pool thing.

The next part of the argument would involve some sort of equity argument, but as Travis already rightly pointed out, you can always come up with a case where you would have been better off (or at least think you would have been) if a different rule had applied, even the you lose senario. In the end, as long as the rule is clearly stated and covers all foreseeable circumstance, then the bettor must abide by those rules if a bet was placed. Sorry I didn't know does just as well as if you get caught making an illegal turn.

Perhaps the alternate selection scenario would be of benefit. That however would come with a load of caveats: how many alternates, what happens if 2 horses or more scratch, what happens when there is a scratch if all are already covered, just to name a few. It could be beneficial but it will also be very messy. And again implementation might be difficult for the above reason.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

I think you guys are seriously underestimating the blow back had Wise Dan not won.

No, I agree with you. I was REALLY mad when the scratch came down despite using both in nearly the same amount. However, with the scratch, I had twice as much invested in Wise Dan as I originally intended and on top of that had the unenviable position of having to root AGAINST my own pick because of the payoff which would have occurred if he had lost (I think at least).

We had $5 on a Wise Dan-Orb/Overanalyze ticket, $4 on a PoE-Orb/Overanalyze ticket, and between $1-$5 to other horses. If either of those two loses we have $1 to Orb and a couple others and $.50 to a bunch of others. At that point there was probably 95% of the pick 4,5,and 6 pools going through Wise Dan so it would have actually benefitted to lose. That isn't what I intended to bet and I'm sure others were in the same situation.

Shug is a great horseman, among the greatest of all time. Obviously I am very happy he won the big one. But he did everyone a huge disservice this time around- it's not the 9th on a Thursday at Belmont, it's the highest handle day of the entire year and if you're questionable to run, scratch early.

[ranger5830]

Originally Posted by Danzig

seriously? what a mess that would turn into. and better a conso/live ticket then just a cancellation of the entire bet.
it's part of playing the pick 6 ticket, things happen.

Maybe I didn't express myself clearly, nobody (at least not me) is talking about ticket cancellation at all. Here in CA at the otb if you fill out a bet card for a pick 4/5/6/etc there is one field of numbers for your main selections in a race, and then right below it there is a separate field for alternate selections. If one of your main choices was scratched and you chose an alternate for that race, it would become the replacement pick. If no alternate was chosen, you would receive the post-time favorite.

I know it was done that way for years and only turned into a mess because of one unscrupulous employee at autotote. But I think the current method of defaulting to the favorite is fine and in my opinion is better than depriving people the chance at a big score by reducing their ticket to a conso.

[OTM Al]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

There is never a right answer to this stuff. It is sort of annoying they scratched so late in the day. Rain was the topic of conversation for the entire week.

I've always thought that giving each ticket the "next lowest uncovered horse" was an interesting idea.

It is, but what do you mean by "next lowest uncovered". If you mean from win pool odds, now you are asking for trouble because one pool is influencing another, which is specifically forbidden in the rules that I have seen. Pools must be completely seperate. If you mean within the framework of the leg of the horizontal, then that would solve problem #1, but due to pool inefficiency, I would then have no idea who I had for sure. Idea is good in theory, but execution is going to be a problem.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by helicopter11

How about a deadline for trainers to scratch their horse? Based on what I read from the original posters post....the delayed scratch by the trainer is what caused this a discussion.

you'd still have late scratches with gate issues and the like.

yes, shug waited as long as possible to declare, which tells me he was hoping to run, but the weather didn't cooperate.
this is one of the reasons why it's called gambling, not winning. plenty of factors come into play.

[OTM Al]

Originally Posted by helicopter11

How about a deadline for trainers to scratch their horse? Based on what I read from the original posters post....the delayed scratch by the trainer is what caused this a discussion.

First, because it was a stakes race, the scratch was completely within the rules. Second, all most likely senarios that happen by making that horse run are bad. If the trainer knows the horse, and I'm going to go out on a limb and assume he does, the horse would have had a boatload of money bet on him and he would have run badly. His backers are screwed and the participants in the race are endangered. Finally, this is no different at its most fundemental level than if the horse flipped in the paddock and killed himself. Going to try to make rules so he has to run then?