Are you ready for SA Showvivor?

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by mbahadur

Probably going to go with Barbaric, dropping in class in the 4th race against an extremely weak 7-horse field.

Are you seeing the same double listings in the first 2 races that I am?

--Dunbar

[mbahadur]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Are you seeing the same double listings in the first 2 races that I am?

Yes, I saw the same double listings in the first couple races.

Good job with your pick in the 1st race. I originally had Tribal Face but switched to my pick in the 4th race since the 1st race seemed to have a more competitive field.

[mbahadur]

With only 12 racing days left in the meet, the tiebreaker looks definitely like it will come into play. The tiebreaker is the highest show payoff before the Breeders Cup. I will have to keep my eyes open for a potential high show payoff when selecting horses and any bridge jumper opportunities.

[gorvy]

A quick review of the website reveals that at the current pace about 24 players will remain at the end. So, I wouldn't panic just yet. Let the others panic and see where you are the last 3 days, which is relevant for the second tie breaker.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by mbahadur

With only 12 racing days left in the meet, the tiebreaker looks definitely like it will come into play. The tiebreaker is the highest show payoff before the Breeders Cup. I will have to keep my eyes open for a potential high show payoff when selecting horses and any bridge jumper opportunities.

I count 14 days left in the meet. Only the next 11 will count for the first tie-breaker. (But more than one person will have to survive the next 14 betting days before the tie-breaker would go into effect.)

Originally Posted by gorvy

A quick review of the website reveals that at the current pace about 24 players will remain at the end. So, I wouldn't panic just yet. Let the others panic and see where you are the last 3 days, which is relevant for the second tie breaker.

The average rate of loss per day since the 5th day is 11%. (Before that, large numbers of people probably lost by forgetting to pick.) If we project 11% forward another 14 days, there would still be 38 people left. Of course, that's a highly variable estimate. I don't think one of the top 2 picks has failed to show so far. Something like that would decimate the number of players.

I'll probably start looking for higher payoffs a couple of days before the BC, unless the # of remaining players is like 3 or 4.

--Dunbar

[gorvy]

ah, didn't catch that not all events count toward the first tie breaker system. Your strategy seems sound, waiting for now and seeing where you are just before the 1st tiebreaker closes. What a convuluted tie breaker system. You can't complain too much since its a free game, but when the goal is survival, why reward somebody for getting a lucky pick that no one else has as your first breaker? Why not reward the player that consistently hits the harder choices by simply totalling up all the show prices. Then perhaps going to # of wins, then # of places, then price of wins etc. This is why I wish these contests were long enough to avoid the need for tie breakers in the first place. Oh well.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by gorvy

ah, didn't catch that not all events count toward the first tie breaker system. Your strategy seems sound, waiting for now and seeing where you are just before the 1st tiebreaker closes. What a convuluted tie breaker system. You can't complain too much since its a free game, but when the goal is survival, why reward somebody for getting a lucky pick that no one else has as your first breaker? Why not reward the player that consistently hits the harder choices by simply totalling up all the show prices. Then perhaps going to # of wins, then # of places, then price of wins etc. This is why I wish these contests were long enough to avoid the need for tie breakers in the first place. Oh well.

I agree with using the sum of all show prices as the tie-breaker. That makes the most sense to me. They could also use that for the ongoing ranking, instead of # of wins.

Or maybe they should start everyone with a $100 hypothetical bankroll, and rank us by how much bankroll we have (assuming total reinvestment).

I'm still in "last place", btw! My winning selection yesterday did me no good. I'm now the only one of 193 remaining players with just 3 wins.

--Dunbar