the tote board and you

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:09 am

http://racing.ustrotting.com/(5r1vdr3lwzy5tqqyijkci0n0)/chart.aspx#36975

this is why it's important to read and understand what's going on with the toteboard.

Discovery · Postby **Discovery** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 12:22 pm

wowww

Toccet02 · Postby **Toccet02** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 12:41 pm

do you mean just the huge payoff, or some error I missed?
The odds?

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Tue Dec 16, 2008 4:59 pm

okay...

the winner had to be at 201 to 1. that's pretty darn high.

some dummmies were just doing what I call "lazy handicapping"...and just figering "man a 200 to 1 horse on top of the favoraite woul dhave to pay at least 1,000!"

without looking at the acutla tote board and the exacta pool

the exacta with a 201 to 1 shot on top of a favoriate payoff was the exact same as a 201 to 1 shot to win. 406 bucks. there was no point in playing the exacta, it was a ripoff.

Toccet02 · Postby **Toccet02** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 8:55 am

oh . . . .
yes, you're right.
I have to remind myself to look at the pools . . .

DDT · Postby **DDT** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 8:02 am

bdw

Unless you figured the odds yourself, the tote would only show 99-1, so just looking at the tote would not indicate that the horse was 201-1. Looking at the tote exacta payout would show you the amount of the exacta, but again, unless you figured the odds on the winner to be close to 200-1 the tote would not have shown you that the exacta was a bad bet.

DDT

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:49 am

DDT wrote:bdw

Unless you figured the odds yourself, the tote would only show 99-1, so just looking at the tote would not indicate that the horse was 201-1. Looking at the tote exacta payout would show you the amount of the exacta, but again, unless you figured the odds on the winner to be close to 200-1 the tote would not have shown you that the exacta was a bad bet.

DDT

lol, good point.

even with that said... 400 bucks for any ticket wiht a 99 to 1 shot on top for an exacta is a ripoff

Dave C · Postby **Dave C** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:20 pm

Not that much of a rip off. I know a number of people who will box with the favourite against all. When you know there are people making that bet you know the payoff can't be too high regardless of who the other horse is in the exacta.

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:58 pm

Dave C wrote:Not that much of a rip off. I know a number of people who will box with the favourite against all. When you know there are people making that bet you know the payoff can't be too high regardless of who the other horse is in the exacta.

\

http://sharpsportsbetting.com/forums/fr ... es/read/89

it's a ripoff. if you are takin action on 99 to 1 over a fav at 400 dollars you are on a slow road to the poor house.

DDT · Postby **DDT** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 2:19 pm

I was going to let this pass but how is it a ripoff? It may have resulted in a bad betting situation but a ripoff, are you saying the track skimmed off the top of the exacta pool? The payout is a result of the amount in the pool, less takeout, divided by the number of winning tickets, it has absolutely nothing to do with the win pool odds, they are calculated in a different pool. As to the attached going to fair exacta odds, well good luck with that approach, I have yet to find a race where all of the horses had an equal chance of winning, even a race full of first time starters.

DDT

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 3:41 pm

you are trying to pick a fight DDT, stop it.

400 dollars for a 99 to 1 (really 200 to 1) shot on top of a favoriate is not a good bet. you know it, every handicapper here knows it.

who looks at the tote, sees 99 to 1 on top of a favoriate will pay is 400 bucks and says "oh i'm all over that".

Dave C · Postby **Dave C** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:23 pm

Just because it isn't a good bet doesn't mean it is a rip off. As for boxing horses with the favourite, absolutely it is a quick trip to the poor house from there. Doesn't mean that people don't make that bet.

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:39 pm

Dave C wrote:Just because it isn't a good bet doesn't mean it is a rip off. As for boxing horses with the favourite, absolutely it is a quick trip to the poor house from there. Doesn't mean that people don't make that bet.

I think you are taking the word rip off too seriously / literarly. it's a figure of spech.

no one is implying the horse track is heisting the customers.

madelyn · Postby **madelyn** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:45 pm

Well... to be picky, ripoff means to steal or deceive and profit from the deception or to gouge or profit from rapacious pricing. "He was selling that $1 widget for fifty bucks! What a RIPOFF!" "He ripped off (stole) my car!" The Nigerian scams might be considered a ripoff, but the Nigerians claim no wrongdoing, that the Americans were victims of their own greed. A bad bet, on the otherhand, or an unwise bet.. well it is what it is.

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:21 pm

madelyn wrote:Well... to be picky, ripoff means to steal or deceive and profit from the deception or to gouge or profit from rapacious pricing. "He was selling that $1 widget for fifty bucks! What a RIPOFF!" "He ripped off (stole) my car!" The Nigerian scams might be considered a ripoff, but the Nigerians claim no wrongdoing, that the Americans were victims of their own greed. A bad bet, on the otherhand, or an unwise bet.. well it is what it is.

i think the difference between scam and ripoff is that when you scam someone you have no intention of fufilling obligations. hence the nigerian scam.

okay i should have said it was a bad value play which was the whole point. you pay a 2 doll exacta only to find out that the win bet on the top horse would have paid the exact same amount