Can someone please explain this payout?

[Einstein66]

Race 2 at Calder --- $82 winner over a 36-1. Exacta pays a measly $275. What a joke. Trifecta was $7,400 (4-1 finished third) and super was $31,000. NO WAY that exacta should pay less than $500 unless someone really loaded up on it. Only at Calder.

[FrankD.]

Einstein,

I Just looked at the chart for that race the exacta pool was only $ 21,830.00 minus a 25 % take out leaves $ 16,372 to be paid out. A $ 119.00 exacta would eat up the whole pool !

Too bad the numbers were 5/2, could have played my age !!!

[Einstein66]

Thanks for reply, Frank. Still seems fishy to me. So there were 60 winning exacta tickets with the two longshots up top and only two winning tri tickets with a 4-1 at the bottom.

Also --- and I may just not know the process -- but how does a $2 super pay $32K when there\'s only $8,500 in the pool?  

Maybe I\'m just jaded from seeing so many races at Calder/South Fla tracks over the years where I shook my head and thought, \'Yeah, fix was in there.\'

[purplemike]

the 32k payoff was the price for $2, however there was only 1 50cent winning ticket. There total payout was only 8k.

[Topcat]

Wasiluk has a vastly-positive history w/the jock in the very limited sample.
I sort of liked the #2 in there . . . a very broad circleback with a triple-bug
who tries hard.   Did laugh hysterically when I saw the ex payoff . . . playing both horses to win might have been less glaring.

[Boscar Obarra]

Something like this is almost certainly a function of the small pool  and someone  betting too much on a high odds combo.  Could be some other non-nefarious reasons as well.

  If you took the time to look at some of the exacta willpays in NY , on combos that DON\'T WIN, you\'d see this kind of thing all the time.

[Rick B.]

I double checked Frank D\'s numbers, and he was spot on: there was a total of 119 dollars bet on the winning exacta combination.

If you still think \"the fix was in\" after reading that piddly little number, can you at least acknowledge that it is likely the most poorly funded betting coup of all time?

[Boscar Obarra]

Even the drf noticed and wrote this one up, which virtually guarantees it was totally legit.

 Reminds me a bit of the \'washed out\' ruckus in the Preakness. Take a single data point and make a stink.

 I\'ll show you dozens of exacta combos on any card in NY that IF THEY WON, would draw ooh, and ahhs.

[Einstein66]

Maybe it was a function of a small exacta pool or one of those quirks you see on the Will Pays at other tracks.

But Mike Welsch also noticed it, going so far as to say something was \"amiss.\" Welsch wrote \"hopefully somebody here will take a look at the betting patterns for the race and try to ascertain where all those winning tickets came on the 5-2 combination.\"

As for only $119 being bet on the winning exacta. That\'s 30X the amount bet on the winning tri ($4) and 240X the amount bet on the winning super (50 cents).


http://www.drf.com/blogs/calder-something-amiss-exacta-payoff

[Rick B.]

Einstein66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As for only $119 being bet on the winning exacta.
> That\'s 30X the amount bet on the winning tri ($4)
> and 240X the amount bet on the winning super (50
> cents).

Without being too much of a smartass...what would the \"correct\" proportions be?

(Hint: that\'s one damn slippery slope you are on, trying to correlate one distinct pool to other distinct pools. Not even sure there is any statisically meaningful way to do so -- although I hear guys trying it every day.)

Right or wrong, disregard the tri and super pools and just comment on the $119 bet on the winning exacta combo, please:

* How much \"should\" have been bet on this combination?

* Do you think there was a betting coup here?