How about that Race 3-4-5 Pick 3 payoff at Belmont today.......

[SoCalMan2]

the $2 pick three at Belmont on the 3rd race today paid $2875 with horses paying $5.80, $20.20, and $22.00.  Pretty nice, huh?  I wish I had it.....I didnt play it.  Whenever I hit pick threes with horses with prices like that it never pays anything in that neighborhood.  I would usual hope to eclipse $1000 for payoffs like that.

[Mathcapper]

Looks like the 4th race was the key to all those overlaid payouts in the horizontals.

Likely a combination of two things:
1) much of the public singling the 1/5 shot, and
2) the winner\'s odds being much lower in the win pool than he was in the gimmicks (he was 21-1 in the doubles vs. 9-1 on the board, a disparity you rarely see).

The Pk3, Pk4 and Pk5 all paid around 3x more than what they should have based on the win odds.

[FrankD.]

Rocky to the rescue!

This one should have been attached to the race of the week (out of control) string. I don\'t know anything about this race, didn\'t play a dime yesterday and didn\'t look at a thing.

I\'ve had this very conversation with TGJB more than a few times at the Spa about knocking out 95% of the tickets in a horizontal pool by beating a very odds on choice and turning it into a tote bag race!

A tote bag race for those not acquainted with the term or glued to living room downs is a race where you make such a score that your pockets and wife\'s or girl friends purse can\'t fit all the money. In such an instance one is required to go to the tracks gift shop and buy the tracks signature tote bag to fill up with your winnings!

Good luck,

Frank D.

[SoCalMan2]

Mathcapper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Looks like the 4th race was the key to all those
> overlaid payouts in the horizontals.
>
> Likely a combination of two things:
> 1) much of the public singling the 1/5 shot, and
> 2) the winner\'s odds being much lower in the win
> pool than he was in the gimmicks (he was 21-1 in
> the doubles vs. 9-1 on the board, a disparity you
> rarely see).
>
> The Pk3, Pk4 and Pk5 all paid around 3x more than
> what they should have based on the win odds.


Thank you.  The pick 4 and pick 5 seem more understandable because the added variance of the longer bets, the first leg in those sequences having beaten favored horses, and only one horse in the sequences paying less than $12.  It seems to me the Pick 3 was significantly further out of the range of reasonable expectation than the Pick 4 and Pick 5. You had the 9-5 favorite winning the first leg (which should considerably moderate what it could end up paying), there were only two more legs to go, (a 5 horse field and a 10 horse field which were won by the third choice and 6th choice).  It seems to me the Pick 3 paid more than 4x of the parlays (which seems really extreme) whereas the Pick 4 and Pick 5 have more license to go extreme with the added variance.

[Mathcapper]

SoCal - yeah, the Pk3 actually did pay a little better (3.5x) relatively speaking than the Pk4 or Pk5 (both closer to 3.0x).

It\'s also true you do see wider variance in general with the longer horizontals. Like you say, a 3.5x discrepancy sticks out like a sore thumb in the Pk3, but you do see it on occassion in the Pk5 or Pk6.

On average though, they all pay what you would expect based on the takeout-adjusted win parlays. One thing to keep in mind that a lot of people don\'t consider when comparing payouts to their win parlays is that because of the fact that you only get hit with the takeout once, Pk3\'s should actually pay, on average, 15.5% more than the win parlays at NYRA tracks; Pk4\'s 53% more and Pk5\'s 103% more.

In this particular case, with the variances for each bet all around 3 to 3.5x, it looks like the overlaid payouts were driven more by that 4th race anomaly than any random statistical variance.

Rocky

[Boscar Obarra]

Combination of that 1/5 getting beat + the FTS was a bad stat for the barn.   Prob a lot of players left it off on that alone.