The 4-1 was the price BEFORE the flash when the gates open...

The 7-2 is the price BETWEEN the flash before the gates opened and at the opening of the gates...

The 3-1 is the price OFF THE FINAL TOTE FORCE which comes 10 seconds after the gates open...

Understand that these prices get into the television visual package in that order ONLY IF THERE IS A CHANGE IN THE RUNNING ORDER... The odds are NOT changing as the race is being run the way that visual makes it appear...

NO MNEY GETS IN THE POOL AFTER THE 10 SECOND FORCE..

Not to mention the fact, how many times are the start of races delayed so that they can get to everyone in line. Like Chuck said, it was tried before and it SUCKED. And it will SUCK again if they decide to do this.

The odds in that race were dancing like crazy from the first flash to last flash.
I wouldn't go jumping to any conclusions. The one was a Paraneck firster who took a lot of money at first flash and I was a little surprised. I don't remembering it drifting as high as 4-1.

I don't think you'll ever make everyone happy until Scavs develops his buzzer to close of betting. In the meantime just how big of a problem is it aside from banter on this forum. Closing off betting early will drive gamblers and handle away from your track and if you think everyone will agree to do it, think again. You can never do one thing and with your idea, you'll cause more negative than positive IMO

Spyder

Who's not happy? I'm happy.

It does seem to be the logical option.

I remember that. Never really affected me too much, but I've never been a big pick-6 player. I don't think our sport is hanging on a thread because of wagering up to the gates open, but believe me it is a big pain in the butt.
I'm not sure where your from, but if you've ever been to Saratoga, check out the lines with 1 mtp. There would be a riot if they shut the windows down.

Steve, there is at least a 99% chance that all of the above is true, but can you speak with 100% certainty? Because if you can, you are privy to some information or computer programming code that I am not.
The bottom line is, just like with horsemen who want a level playing field, I only want all pari-mutual wagerers to have a completely level one as well. I don't care if you bet $10 or $10,000, NO ONE should have an advantage over another based on the tote system.
The problem, in my estimation, is the tracks have no financial interest in guaranteeing this, as they care not who wins and loses, as long as they get their $ off the top.

No conclusions drawn, just relating what I saw while betting on, then watching the race.

To many people it is. I know you've been to the Spa. Hoss, can you imagine what would happen 100's of people got shut out? Maybe you weren't playing yet when they tried this before. It was crazy. Sure, people for the most part could adjust but I'd rather not.

I've seen it, but do we really think it's past posting? I've had it happen the other way as well when a horse I bet was 9/2 and ended up 5-1 after the race. Nobody complains aobut that.

Not so fast. When I'm at Saratoga, many times I watch the horses walk past me by the clubhouse hedge. After they pass I make my final decision as to what I'm playing. Most of the time I use the SAM Machine in the Jim Dandy Bar, therefore I have time to make my wager and still have time to get to the rail. Many people wait longer. It's not the fault of the track. When you have 25,000 people at a track, a large % of those people are inexperienced, dumb, stupid, etc. when it comes to placing a bet. That slows lines down.

I feel the same way, but shutting down the windows early is going to increase my chances of getting shut out.

:D I'm glad I've never been that way at the Spa before.

Steve Crist wrote a great article, as usual, at DRF about this topic in DRF.

http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=93283

Here we go again (though what the hell is the guy doing buying $1300 in "quick picks").

CHRB Probes Derby Quick Pick Superfecta
Email Print RSS by Jack Shinar
Date Posted: May 17, 2008
Last Updated: May 17, 2008

An irregularity discovered in "quick pick" superfectas that were wagered on the May 3 Kentucky Derby (gr. I) in Northern California is being investigated by the California Horse Racing Board, the agency's executive director said May 17.

The investigation was launched after a bettor at Bay Meadows purchased 1,300 $1 quick picks for the Kentucky Derby superfecta, in which the first four finishers must be listed in exact order on the ticket. The bettor discovered that he did not have the number "20" once among the 5,200 possibilities. The race, of course, was won by Big Brown, who was the number 20.

The winning Derby superfecta combination of "20-5-16-2" paid $29,368.90 for a $1 investment.

Kirk Breed, the CHRB's executive director, said the quick pick wagering option was suspended May 4 after the discovery of the irregularity. He said agency investigators are trying to determine if Scientific Games, California's bet processing hub, "had any prior knowledge of the defect." He said the investigation is continuing.

A Scientific Games spokesman said that the malfunction has been "isolated to a software glitch in BetJet wagering terminals."

Tom Hodgkins, vice president of government and public relations for SG, added that "the last runner appears to have been excluded" from the quick pick mix.

He said he did not know how much had been wagered on quick picks through the terminals in question or whether the problem also affected other races. He said he doesn't know how many of the machines are being used in California.

"We were only informed of this yesterday afternoon," he said May 17. "We're really just at the front end of this investigation. It will be ongoing."

Breed said the quick pick option will remain inactive until Scientific Games can demonstrate that the malfunction is remedied. Hodgkins said the quick pick buttons on on BetJet teller and self-service machines are being physically removed from the wager boards.

"At this point we have nothing that says there was any impropriety," Breed said. "Our investigative unit is looking into it, as well as our auditors."

Asked if the matter was being investigated by the FBI, as initially rumored, Breed said, "Not to my knowledge."

"At some point," he added later, "we will be asking for outside assistance, yes."

Breed said that the Association of Racing Commissioners International's Integrity Services division has been notified of the issue.

"What happened is the bettor showed his trainer that the number 20 didn't show up on any of the 1,300 tickets," Breed said. "The trainer told the stewards at Bay Meadows that there is a malfunction and they informed us."

Ted Shaine, manager of the western quantum data center for Scientific Games in Sacramento, said, "I have no idea about any of that. I can't answer anything."

Centralizing bets taken from throughout the country, the facility opened in early 2007. It processed more than $19 million on Derby day last year.
Copyright © 2008 The Blood-Horse, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Without the guy winning with a past posted ticket it is difficult to know what to make of this as it does not seem to be an advantage in any way. I agree that any past posting is troubling which is why I started this thread but unless it is connected to some financial gain it's hard to get too worked up about this.

If you were the programmer, and really liked the favorite, leaving him off all the Quick Pick Supers could certainly help your price.

I'm not saying that happened, but who really knows?