pk4 payout to the Travers
 

That is a crime that the pk4 pays to both eaqually and the win/double and pk3 pay out separately.

My wife gets her wish. Pk4 is out of my betting menu.

I got roayally jobbed.

I would have to agree with you. I hope you atleast hit it to the bigger price.
It used to be the same way in California, but i think it is changed.

The payoff on Golden Ticket dropped from $7,485 for $1 to $495, or over 93%. The payoff on Alpha dropped from $530 to $495, or just over 6%. How anyone can say this is remotely fair or acceptable is beyond me.

It's completely "fair" and "acceptable" because it's in the rules

4011.26 (h) Dead heats. In the event of a dead heat for win in any or all pick four races, all pick four tickets designating either horse to win in said race or races shall be eligible for participation in the remaining pick four races, and the net pool shall be equally distributed to the winners, that is, the net pool will be divided by the total amount represented by all winning tickets and the resulting price, per dollar, and after breakage, shall be the payoff price, which shall be uniform for any winning combination.

If you don't know the rules of a bet and you still play it, it's your fault when something like this happens.

How is it the bettors fault when a dead heat happens?

It's the bettor's fault for playing the bet and not knowing the rules.

Fault is the wrong choice of words. No one is questioning the rules here.
Looks like you have the case of schadenfreude.

I think the point was that they know it's a possibility and should bet accordingly. The rule is clear and everybody should know it going in. It's not an obscure scenario to have a dead heat, is it? Does it suck that someone's payout was affected? Sure. I'd feel hosed. Looking over the rule, though, it seems pretty logical. Not really sure how to make it any "fairer." Many people seem to think fair is whatever result nets them more money as opposed to what makes more sense.

Fault is the exact word I mean. And how is it misfortune? If Alpha sticks his nose in front, those backing Goldem Ticket get nothing. If it goes the other way a few people hit it big, but a lot more get nothing. In this outcome, more people won something.

I take it you dont bet often or at all

Fair to most people in this world seems to occur only when they get treated better than the next guy. It ticks me off when people think they were mistreated when they didn't even bother to know the rules of the game. Can't wait for someone to write somewhere how this is NYRA's fault and blah blah blah the biggest travesty since they created the AIDS....

In the case of the poster, what should he have done if had taken into consideration a dead heat possibility :zz:. What kind of a pick 4 ticket should he have placed to ensure a higher payout. Please advise.

Ensure a higher payout? Kinda figured this was what it was all about. The concept of knowing rules and agreeing to abide by them when you place a bet seems to be quite beyond you. Rules just aren't fair...

I do get it, that is the "rule" and I am not claiming "foul play". I am simply asking the question, why do they pay the win pool, double pool and pick 3 pool out with different amounts to each horse, based on how many people held winning tickets to their "half" of the pool, but the pick 4 gets paid out evenly? I would just like to know the reasoning behind the rule. I wouldn't expect to get my 7500 or so dollars, but as someone earlier pointed out, the dead heat cost me 7000, and those holding a ticket to alpha barely more than you tip the guy in the bathroom after a days worth of good drinking.

Because for whatever reason the P4 is not split for dead heats but calculated on the number of winning tickets. This bet also has many other different features from the P3. They do it because that's what the rule is. The dead heat didn't cost you 7000, it resulted in a fixed payoff exactly like it is supposed to. Your horse didn't win outright, but unlike most times that happens, at least you got something for it. You don't like a rule, try to get it changed, but complaining about an outcome of a rule you accepted when you put your money down seems foolish to me.

Still waiting for you to answer the original question....

The answer to your question is to be able to accurately foresee the future. Let us all know when you figure that out.

I remember OTM AL once arguing this about the forced P6 carryover rule in the event of a mid sequence surface switch ... that eventually had Steve Crist flying off the handlebars on his blog after the second time it happened in about a month.

I agree with OTM Al here... it's a rule (maybe not a fair one) and no one got robbed (unlike the forced carryover rule -- which is basically downright robbery and turns all winning tickets into losers with only a conso and makes the bet a higher takeout than you'd have if you responded to all of the E-mails you get from Nigerian Princes )

Obviously, the people who had only Alpha got a good break -- the people who had Golden Ticket in a winning sequence got a genuine bad break.

Just to clarify, I didn't have a pick 4 bet so it didn't cost me anything one way or the other.

I certainly don't doubt that the rule is as stated above, my point is it's a terrible rule and needs to be changed. The people who had the 3 in the last leg had half the winners but got less than 7% of the pool, that is patently unfair. The rule IMO should be in a dead heat the pool is split evenly, which in this instance would have led to approximate payouts of 3700 on the 3 and about 265 on Alpha.

They changed the off-the-turf pick 6 rule at gulfstream, why can't they change this one too?

They probably will now. It happened in a spot where enough people will complain about it -- and I can't really think of a position anyone can argue or make to say that it is a fair or competent rule.

Thanks for making my point.

I'm reasonably certain the P4 to Golden Ticket was paying 3700 for a dollar not 50 cents. Thus, anyone who had a 50 cent ticket lost about 1600 with the dead heat.

Sorry, but that's just not correct. Here are all the $1 pick 4 will pays ending in the Travers:

1-$10656
2-$7086
3-$7485
4-$3798.50
5-$1049.50
6-$530
7-$1508
8-$887
9-$1020.50
10-$671.50
11-$8309

It was 3742.50 for .50 cents.

Travers Pick 4
 

Thought it odd that there was just one payout no matter which horse you had, when the pick 3 had two.

The argument would be that the pool is split amongst all winning tickets, just as would happen had only one horse won. One could argue that the rules on the win, double, etc. are the wrong way to do it and inconsistant with standard payoff rules and they should be changed.

Pretty much everything else suggested is based on subjective ideas of "fairness", whatever that is supposed to mean. Fair to me means unbiased, that the rules were followed exactly and not interpreted, which is what happened here. What is more "fair", reducing the payoff of the majority of winners by a lower percentage or rewarding the few who had the longshot by reducing the payoff by a lower percentage? The answer to that question is completely subjective, but I'd dare say if you took a vote amongst the winning ticket holders, the current rule would stand. This wouldn't be the case with the P6 rule you mentioned.

What is also a fact is people will complain when an oddity like this happens regardless of the rules.

It's completely "fair" and "acceptable" because it's in the rules


Wow!

If history has taught us anything......and I'm not convinced it has......statements like the one above allow for excuses such as , "I was only folllowing orders" or, "I'm just doing my job"

Just because it is a rule does not make it right...

If the other exotics can have different pay-outs the pick 4 should as well.

The rule is wrong...it is wrong because it is not a FAIR rule and it should be changed

I've yet to see a convincing argument about how it isn't "right". But as I said before, by playing the bet, you have subject yourself to the rules. Don't play the bet and then complain the outcome isn't fair when the rules have been followed to the letter just because you don't like the outcome. The outcome was fair.

Gee, I wonder how that happened.

Ok dude, we get it. It is the rule. You find that the be logical and reasonable and therefore accept it as "fair". Specifically in terms of what I got paid to the 3 yesterday, it was "fair". In terms of what I find logical and reasonable, I am still in search of an explanation as to why that is the rule, and applied differently than every other wager with the exception of the pk6. There was nobody at the track that could actually explain it and once they uncovered the "rule", there was certainly nobody to provide a reasonable explanation. I only point that out because of your insistence that we should have not made the bet without knowledge of the rule. I'm pretty sure at least 90% of the sharp folks on this board were as surprised to see a single payout in the pk4 yesterday.

No, you can do whatever you want with your money. Complaining after the fact because you didn't know a rule that was followed to the letter is pretty lame in my book and is all on you. Try it with the IRS or a State Trooper and see what happens. I don't know why they made the rule the way they did, but if you think about it, splitting pools is just as arbitrary as paying one pool to all winning tickets.

I do agree it would be simpler to have the rules consistant across bets, but if you want that, a well reasoned letter to the NYR&WB will go much further than complaining on a message board. In fact, they've established a fan advisory board that you can also write about such issues. At least you seem pretty reasonable and understand why it happened. There's some guy at DRF claiming that NYRA altered the finish line for the photo and stole some of the money because he couldn't figure out the math so it couldn't be right. Almost as priceless as the guy that claimed Ellen McLain should be let go because there was no t-shirt giveaway this year. I always figure a lot of things must be going right if so many are complaining.

Ok, I think you have finally found the word to put us all on the same page, it is "inconsistent". When I started off by saying I got "jobbed" I was saying so in a different fashion than your friend over at DRF. Other than it is the rule, I have yet to find a person to be able to explain it.

Thanks for being voice of reason... I will gladly trade my tickets that had Nonios and Street Life.

If one does not like terms and conditions under which one chooses to wager, simply do not make wager. Personally, dead heat impacts a successful wager for me about every 5 to 7 years.

The pool should be split, then the winning tickets divided. Just like in the pk3 pool. Everybody and their grandma knows this is the way it should be done. Period. Who cares what the rule is? The payout is unfair. Period. Now, the goat is saying that when you make the bet you play by their rules, and that is true. However, most people play hoping not to split any pools with dead heats. It is a rare chance. Lets review: Fair according to the rules, Yes....Fair according to actual fairness, No.

Agree hopefully it will be looked at, continuing to dwell on it is a waste of time at this point, no one is giving us anymore money.

Serling commented on this on talking horses. Not sure who said what, I missed the shows on Capitalotb this morning. Not even sure if I was said on capital, but something was said and he responded. If anyone knows what exactly was said, I am curious.

by divine intervention i had the 3 on my ticket
i was watching the race with Heels, and this was the sequence of events

mid-stretch i was 3700+ richer
the tax man was dialing my number

nearing the wire he started to hang up the phone

photo hits, i think my pk4 just went up in smokes, b/c also by divine intervention i didn't have alpha.

DH happens, woo i'll take 1700

payoffs, WTF

in a nutshell

the closer they got to the wire the more money i lost, and the horse i picked, technically, WON, ha

-bt-

Its one thing to feel this way. TotAlly understand. It was a HORRIBLE BEAT. Its another thing for people to say robbery or that they were cheated. The rule is flawed, maybe it gets adressed?

Agree. Bad rule but we have to live with it. Anyone defending the rule as fair is simply an idiot looking for an argument.

I only had Alpha, so I only benefitted from the outcome. Still, this is my stance.