Haven’t been on the board in a bit, just became aware of Bill’s passing this morning. Condolences to Terry and his family, and to Jerry and the TG team.

Affectionately called \"Uncle\", and beloved by all T-Generates who knew him, Bill and I had a particularly close bond. He was a longtime friend and father figure in my life. He taught me more than anyone I’ve known in the last twenty years. Not just about horses, but more importantly about life. About how to be a selfless, caring, outgoing and empathetic human being.

I think of all the lives he so profoundly touched. I recall the countless times where he would come across complete strangers and within minutes it was as if they were all lifelong friends. That was the way Bill was.

We talked regularly for hours at end about our favorite shared subjects, everything from stocks and politics and cars, to food and our health, to his latest broodmare in foal, a dream he’d finally realized and begun pursuing that in recent years had given him immense pleasure and a renewed zest for life.

Missing him already, the world feels that much emptier without him. There will never be another like him. Not in this world. Not in a billion galaxies.

Blessed to have had you in my life Wild Bill. Rest easy my friend.

Post Time was can’t miss television for those of us around long enough to remember.

Jerry’s handicapping acumen was unrivaled, and was not limited to just the ponies, it also extended to the political arena.

To wit - Jerry’s analysis of the 1992 general election:

Political Horse of the Year
Deficit: $4 trillion
Distance: Interminable

Bush: In his 3 year old campaign Bush took a long time to get rolling but started moving forward over the summer, and threw a huge figure in the Breeders Cup. He later repeated that figure in the Middle East, but those efforts took a lot out of him and he tailed way off form. Bush made a forward move in Houston, backed off in the first two debates, and made a slight forward move in his last, but is still a long way off his top. Forced to carry extra weight both for being an older horse and for his past record, Bush would have to improve dramatically to win.

Clinton: Bill Clinton began his career at Oaklawn and had his first major setback in the spring, when his stuttishness became an issue. His handlers dealt with this in the usual fashion, and Clinton had his mind on business again, only to hit another snag, a positive test for marijuana. Since then though it has been ‘read my tail’, nothing but good numbers. It is worthy of note that Ron Brown trainees tend to peak over the summer and tail off in the fall. But on the other hand, he does have some advantages â€" he handles mud very well, and he’s the only one in the field with experience on grass.

Perot: Perot has the most unusual sheet. He didn’t race at all as a 3 year old, and had an abbreviated campaign this spring, eventually pulling up lame. After being given time on the shelf, he quickly got down to his figure once again. Perot’s soundness is obviously a question, as is his ability to get the distance, but he is lightly raced, has lots of early speed and could improve.

Jerry - that one might just top your Imperioli/Mini-Me story.

FrankD. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> IMHO: It defeats the entire purpose of the bets
> structure. In the get more handle regardless of
> who or how it hurts/helps business mode, it’s
> just another advantage for the BOTS.... A 10% or
> 12% rebate on a $2 10k ticket or a $10 50k ticket?
> Plus they still collect a single ticket payout or
> an inordinate number of shared winning
> tickets/consolations.

Yep, well said Frank. It gives the bots a means to grab that pot at the end of the 🌈 and siphon away much of the value that the bet afforded the little guy.

Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Further enlightenment on the jackpot topic from
> @CHRBMike from three July 27th tweets which are
> entirely from his twitter page.
>
> (1) The California Horse Racing Board reviewed the
> wagering transactions that led to one account
> holder winning the entire Pick 6 pool Sunday at
> Del Mar on an $8 ticket. The records show that the
> account holder placed 8,613 individual wagers
> totaling $29,652.
>
> (2) All wagers were placed in batches, the last
> batch approximately 4 minutes before the first leg
> of the Pick 6. All 8,613 wagers used just one
> horse in each race, or using the popular wagering
> terminology, with six singles. However, the
> denominations of those wagers differed.
>
> (3) Approximately 70 percent were made in the
> traditional $2 increment. The rest were in various
> denominations of $4, $6, $8, $10, $12, $14, $16,
> $24, $26, and $60. The horse that paid $114 and
> triggered the massive payoff ($173,912) was on
> only 1 percent of the 8,613 tickets.

Interesting. Either the rules are different in other venues or I was given bad info last year.

I specifically asked a fellow at one of the NYRA booths at the Spa about whether or not a higher-than-base minimum $.20 ticket like this $8 winning ticket (I used $1 as an example in my question) would count as a single winning ticket or cause the jackpot to carry.

He said he wasn\'t sure and would have to talk to his supervisor, then got back to me that evening with the following text message:

“Hi Rocky, this is Bill from NYRA. Talked to my supervisor about the $1 Empire 6. He said you would lose the “single winner” chance to take the whole pool if you did this.”

BitPlayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I have only analyzed the accuracy of the DD method
> seriously for NYRA.  DRF is obviously casting a
> wider net, and I wonder if the method is less
> accurate for smaller tracks and if using the early
> win betting to refine the DD projections is more
> important there.

I\'ve probably done at least 20K races myself over the years. Haven\'t noticed much of a difference in accuracy between bigger tracks vs. smaller tracks, or between bigger pool vs. smaller pools. The efficiency of the pools seems to hold up just about the same everywhere.

> An aside:  I looked at the Stronach Five this week
> and the payoff seemed light (not substantially
> better than the parlay).  Do I have that right
> and, if so, does that occur often on carryover
> days?  Thanks.

The payoff did indeed come back light, not all that unusual except for the fact that it was a carryover day, which does make it less likely. In looking at the results, I see the 2,5,7 are all listed as winners of the fourth leg (3rd race at SA). Looks to me like there were two late scratches that got put on the winning favorite, which turned the Pk 5 into a semi defacto Pk 4, hence the lower payout.

Hence my point.

If they analyzed 20K races to come up with their algo, they should\'ve seen that the DD Will Pays are the best predictor of final odds (as they in fact stated they found themselves).

So why are they messing around with 10mtp to 5mtp odds which ultimately end up converging on the more accurate Will Pay odds come post time?

Never thought I\'d see the day. Not sure about that 10mtp adjustment though..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8AWFf7EAc4

FYI -- final odds look pretty good here if you\'re looking to beat the faves, who took all the action in the Will Pays:

https://twitter.com/Mathcapper/status/1190393244628197377

Uggh, don\'t even get me started..

Good seeing you Joe, along with a few other new and familiar faces.

Some great stories and insight, and the weather couldn\'t have been better.


Rocky

Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Toppled:
>
> Closing day and mandatory payout day for the
> Empire. Your theory didn\'t hold up on this one.
> (Leg 1 a 3-5 single to just add on the front end
> of a p5 to increase the payout.  Even 50 cents
> worth of the p6 let\'s say by simply adding the 3-5
> and paying for an equal denomination wouldn\'t even
> get you to the p5 payout).  
>
> 1, Dr. Devera\'s Way.  
> $.50 p5, 65,846.50
> $.20 p6, 23,794.70.
>
> I have the others also. This was the rule not the
> exception even on today\'s mandatory/carryover p6
> sequence for the horses in the finale compared to
> the p5.
>
> **Note**--I know you likely can\'t even play a 50
> cent pick 6 but wanted to attempt to compare
> apples to apples here.  Mathcapper can possibly
> equate this much faster and clearer than I as well
> as correct my mistakes in statistical analysis
> here.  But I don\'t want to put more on his plate.


No worries Richie - I track the payouts every day (it only takes me ~30s) so I\'ve got them readily available.

In today\'s sequence the Pick 5 came back quite generous - the $65,846.50 payout was over 3.6 times (+265%) the equivalent win parlay of $18,058.40.

The $23,794.70 Empire 6, on the other hand, came back surprising light for a mandatory payout day. Instead of paying on the order of 4 or 5 times the equivalent win parlay like it typically does, it \"only\" paid around twice the equivalent win parlay (+106%) of $11,557, which is closer to what it usually looks like on a non-mandatory day.

BTW, for anyone interested, I got word back yesterday from the boss of the boss of the guy I talked to at NYRA Bets on the subject of Empire 6 bet size as it relates to lone winning tickets.

As I suspected, if a player puts in a base ticket that\'s larger than the $.20 minimum, say a $1 caveman ticket like 3x1x5x3x4x4 and that player turns out to be the lone winner, he DOES NOT get the jackpot, it counts as 5 separate $.20 tickets.

So if you\'re playing any combinations that look to have the potential to possibly take down the pool, make SURE you only have a $.20 ticket on those combinations, otherwise you\'re essentially playing against yourself and it could end up costing you a LOT of money.

As we approach the end of the Spa meet with another mandatory payout day coming up, I thought it’d be worthwhile to take a look at the value of the Empire 6 bet, both independently and vis-à-vis the Pick 5.

Seeing as we’re less than 20 race days into the launch of the new bet, it’s still far too early to make any statistically significant conclusions, but I’m already seeing the expected tendencies in the Empire 6, and to an even greater degree.

Excluding the mandatory payout day earlier in the meet (which paid +400% more than the takeout-adjusted win parlay), the median payout has been +145% more than the takeout-adjusted win parlay.

To put that in perspective, as I noted in a post on the subject of the Rainbow 6 a few years ago, the median payout over 10 meets (290 days) I tracked of traditional non-carryover Pick 6’s on the NYRA and SoCal circuits was +27% higher than the win parlay. On carryover days, it jumped to +78% higher than the win parlay. And in the 158 days I tracked of the Rainbow 6, it was +98% higher.

At almost two and a half times the win parlay, the Empire 6 is currently paying better than all of them. Much of this is likely due to the same phenomenon we see in the Rainbow 6 (players spreading too deep, driven by both the $.20 minimum and their attempt to capture the jackpot, “sharpies” shunning the bet due to the perceived takeout disadvantage, etc.).

During the same timeframe since the Empire 6 began at the Spa, I also tracked the payouts for the Pick 3, Pick 4 and Pick 5 within the Empire 6 sequences. The median Pick 3 payout was +24% more than the equivalent win parlay, the median Pick 4 payout was +60.4% higher, and the Pick 5 was +123% higher.

So which bet is offering the best value?

To answer that question, we first need to take a look at how much each bet SHOULD pay. In general, the more legs involved in the sequence, the better the value is going to be, because you’re only getting hit with the takeout ONCE, and because you edge is multiplicative. But differences in the takeout between the various bets must also be taken into consideration, which can reduce or increase the value of the particular bet.

Let’s look at the expected value in each bet, after taking into account both of these factors.

The Pick 3 has a takeout of 24%, but because you’re only getting hit with that takeout one time in the sequence vs. three times at 16% in the win pool, the Pick 3 should, on average, pay +28.2% more than the equivalent win parlay.

Similarly, the Pick 4, which also has a 24% takeout, should pay on average 52.7% more than the equivalent win parlay, again, because you’re only getting hit with the takeout once.

The Pick 5 is even better, both because it has an industry-low takeout rate of only 15% and because you now have five legs where you’re only getting hit with the takeout once. As a result, the Pick 5 should on average pay +103% (more than double) the equivalent win parlay.

The Empire 6, another one of the often-derided jackpot bets, is subject to a much higher effective takeout than the Pick 5. With its initial 20% takeout, along with the additional 25% takeout for the jackpot pool, players are looking at an effective takeout of (1-0.8*0.75) = 40%. As I wrote about in my Rainbow 6 post, this may seem quite onerous, but when you compare it to the traditional Pick 6, which has a similar “takeout” for 5-of-6 consolation bets that get paid out to mostly non-winners of the Pick 6, an argument can be made that it’s close to a wash, and the evidence has been that’s it’s actually much better, for the reasons stated earlier.

In any event, the Empire 6, because you’re now looking at six legs where you’re only facing the takeout once, should pay on average +70.8% more than the equivalent win parlay.

All in all, just looking at it mathematically, the Pick 5 currently offers the better value than the Empire 6 (+103% vs. +70.8%). Not a surprise, given the 15% takeout vs the effective 40% takeout in the Empire 6, albeit mitigated by the inclusion of the extra leg in the Empire 6.

However, a mathematical interpretation doesn’t give us the full picture. When we look at what the bets are actually paying, we see differences to what the math is predicting. In the jackpot wagers, as we’ve seen with the Rainbow 6 and now with the early results for the Empire 6, the bet is paying much higher than predicted, likely for the reasons stated earlier.

So while the math is saying that the Pick 5 offers the better value (+103% vs. +70.8%), the actual results are saying that the Empire 6 is a slightly better bet (+145% vs. +123%). A couple of caveats though: (1) the sample size is still way too small and (2) the Rainbow 6, a similar bet to the Empire 6, was shown in a longer study to pay “only” +98% more than the parlay, so it’s quite possible, indeed likely, that the +145% initial early average will come down somewhat over time.

Another factor I should briefly touch upon relates to recent discussions about whether or not the computer guys are being kept out of the Pick 5. This may or may not be true, but the supposition is that if they are being kept out, we may see higher-than-expected payouts in the Pick 5 relative to the other horizontal exotics. It’s too early to tell, but based on the results above, the Pick 5 is offering better value than the Pick 4 and Pick 3 relative to expectations (+123% vs. +103% expected for the Pick 5, +60.4% vs. +52.7% expected for the Pick 4, and +24.2% vs. +28.2% for the Pick 3).

Again, the sample size is way too small right now to draw any conclusions. Day-to-day variations still have too much impact on the overall results, like today for instance where the Pick 3 paid +3.1% more than the win parlay and the Pick 4 paid -19.4% less than the win parlay but the Pick 5 paid a whopping +345% more than the win parlay, most likely driven by Remain Anonymous, the 15-1 ML firster in the first leg of the Pick 5 that got pounded to 5-2 in the win pool (6-1 in the Will Pays).

Over time, I’d expect the Pick 3, Pick 4 and Pick 5 payouts to converge on their mathematical expectations, unless the computer guys are indeed being excluded from the Pick 5, in which case it’s possible we see a little extra value in the wager (although not a certainty). The Empire 6 is another matter. Based on the previous studies related to similar wagers, I’d expect the bet to continue to provide more value than the mathematical prediction, albeit probably less than what may be a somewhat inflated +145% figure we’re seeing in the early going.

Until such time that we’ve gathered enough results, the jury’s still out on whether the Pick 5 or the Empire 6 offers the better value. Whichever the case, they both appear to be two of the best bets in racing, aside from the jackpot mandatory payout day and barring any introduction of a traditional pick 6 with a 15% or 20% takeout with NO jackpot and NO 5-of-6 consolation tickets (one can only wish).

Good luck everyone in Monday’s mandatory.

Looking forward also to Penn Derby day down at Parx and to seeing fellow T-Generates like Joe B. and any cameos from other members of the backyard crew.

Rocky R.

Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I\'m not a huge PTF or Music fan.  That doesn\'t
> mean I dislike either.  But I know several on here
> are Really into music and horses so I post it for
> all of you.  Of course, the paragraph below
> resonated with me regardless.  
>
> _____________________________
>
> And then came the best part. “Horseplayers are a
> group of people who exist outside the mainstream
> of normal society, and as a musician who grew up
> in the 60s and 70s, I know what that feels
> like,” he continued. “We were mocked, we were
> oddballs, but we reveled in it because we didn’t
> want to be like the squares. The people at the
> racetrack, they are just the same as us. They
> don’t want to lead a normal life.”
>

Pretty much sums it up for me, always related to musicians/artists for just that reason. Great little story of SJ\'s dad at the track together with Count Basie  -- to this day, that Sinatra-Basie team-up on “It Might as Well Be Swing” remains one of my favorite albums.

Likely heading up to Spa a day or two early this week. I’ve learned to avoid that Saturday morning end-of-meet Travers rush like the plague -- highways jammed with broke horseplayers on a last chance power drive…

Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Most meaningful gambling news of the weekend:
> NYRA doesn\'t allow the bots the same access to the
> late pick 5 that they have in the other pools.
> HINT:  Put your money here where there is already
> a low takeout.  (Compare yesterday\'s pick 5 to
> pick 4 and you will see what I\'m saying on takeout
> and bots front.  Maybe Mathcapper can see if there
> is a significant difference here or if they
> played/paid out as expected??)
>
>
> Perfect weather, great camaraderie, terrific
> handicapping discussions nearly every day and
> race. No where I would rather be!! (This should be
> NYRA\'s Tag line for advertising the Spa).
>

Good to see you again Richie, great time and thx for the heads up on that Pk5 pool info. I checked Sunday\'s results and the Pk5 did indeed pay much higher than expected, more than double what it should have paid in fact, while the Pk4 paid around 35% less than expected.

Could be just a fluke though. Even if the computer guys aren\'t involved in the Pk5 I wouldn\'t expect that significant a difference in value on a day-to-day basis. But I\'ll be checking the results over the rest of the meet, along with the new Empire 6 bet, to see if there are any consistent findings in terms of value offered by either of those bets.

Btw, not sure if you\'re aware but your tagline isn\'t far off from Saratoga\'s actual tagline, and I second your sentiment. The seemingly neverending addition of structures to the surroundings may have diminished the country fair and nostalgic feel for some, but for us lifelong cappers it\'s still and will always be horseplayer heaven.