Pool Integrity

[FrankD.]

No dog in the fight here. BUT just sayin......

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/225320/santa-anita-to-investigate-irregular-will-pays

[SoCalMan2]

I have no dog in last nights horizontals, but I have previously complained about Santa Anita late Pick 4 payouts. I have numerous times cashed the late Pick 4 there and have had it pay less than what the parlay would have paid.  The explanation normally given to me is that a long horse in my sequence was much shorter in the ML and was probably played more in the horizontals due to lower ML than would have been expected based on actual off odds.

[BB]

A knowledgable fellow I follow on Twitter believes this is explained by a quirk in the will-pays related to a scratch in the finale that occurred after the start of the sequence. Basically, the will-pays treat all runners as a potential favorite, and therefore add in the bets on the scratched horse to every horse\'s pool. This results in all of the will-pays appearing lower than what they would have been once the race had been made official, with the exception of whichever horse eventually went off as the actual favorite. Which, in this case, was the winner.

How about those SA post drags yesterday? We have a new \"Gulfstream Park West\".

[SoCalMan2]

agreed....delayed post is really annoying.....i now make for myself my own expected post times rather than rely on the MTP.  

When I first got into racing, this was a major issue at Narragansett which had fallen mightily onto hard times and in that case you felt them trying to squeeze every last single out of the crowd.

[Topcat]

BB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A knowledgable fellow I follow on Twitter believes
> this is explained by a quirk in the will-pays
> related to a scratch in the finale that occurred
> after the start of the sequence. Basically, the
> will-pays treat all runners as a potential
> favorite, and therefore add in the bets on the
> scratched horse to every horse\'s pool. This
> results in all of the will-pays appearing lower
> than what they would have been once the race had
> been made official, with the exception of
> whichever horse eventually went off as the actual
> favorite. Which, in this case, was the winner.
>
> How about those SA post drags yesterday? We have a
> new \"Gulfstream Park West\".



The standing rule at Gulf has long been: Take the originally-stated post time, and add seven minutes.   So long as there isn\'t a turbulent/weather issue, it\'s been good as gold for years.  

Saves a lot of stress.   Have NEVER been shut out at Gulf, under the current administration.

[BB]

Topcat Wrote:

> The standing rule at Gulf has long been: Take the
> originally-stated post time, and add seven
> minutes.   So long as there isn\'t a
> turbulent/weather issue, it\'s been good as gold
> for years.  
>
> Saves a lot of stress.   Have NEVER been shut out
> at Gulf, under the current administration.

Never getting shut out is entirely the point, yes? But isn\'t it \"add 7, add 14, add 21 etc\"? Post for the SA 9th was 4:00. Off time was 4:48. I think the real problem is that you wind up running your races on top of races at other big tracks. Obviously, it\'s all about maximizing handle, but IMHO it\'s a big \"f-you\" to the customer.

[Topcat]

BB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Topcat Wrote:
>
> > The standing rule at Gulf has long been: Take
> the
> > originally-stated post time, and add seven
> > minutes.   So long as there isn\'t a
> > turbulent/weather issue, it\'s been good as gold
> > for years.  
> >
> > Saves a lot of stress.   Have NEVER been shut
> out
> > at Gulf, under the current administration.
>
> Never getting shut out is entirely the point, yes?
> But isn\'t it \"add 7, add 14, add 21 etc\"? Post for
> the SA 9th was 4:00. Off time was 4:48. I think
> the real problem is that you wind up running your
> races on top of races at other big tracks.
> Obviously, it\'s all about maximizing handle, but
> IMHO it\'s a big \"f-you\" to the customer.


But of course . . . my point was: taking note the posted post time for an upcoming race, once the previous race was completed.    If they\'d just run the eighth, and posted, say, a 5:06 PM post time for the ninth, there\'s be no cause for hurry anytime before 5:13 . . .