Dunbar/All: Parlay Question

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Scav

So Sunday at Toga I was forced to play the late pick four when I really wanted to play a pick three starting in race 7. I just realized after I am mentally going over the whole weekend that I could have played a win parlay which is essentially a pick three. That being said, the prices of my horses were $9, $16.80, $2.70. If I wanted to play a ticket that was 2x3x2, the parlay would have cost $12 correct? and I would have gotten back $51.03 per $1??

I don't have the opportunity of parlays at Arlington so this was the first experience with them. Given that a pick three wasn't offered, this would have been a decent substitute, I wish I would have thought of it because I got knocked out of the final leg of the pick four....I played the pick four three times at $24 so I would have had the above win parlay 6-10 times if I could have played it.

Let me know if this math was correct.

Correct.
And I feel your pain on the P4 thing, I've asked NYRA to add a P3 starting in that leg because the last leg is usually some bad NYB maidens or something crappy and they said "it would cannibalize the P4 pool" (of course, you can start a P3 OR P4 in the 2nd race every day...)

[jwkniska]

Originally Posted by philcski

Correct.
And I feel your pain on the P4 thing, I've asked NYRA to add a P3 starting in that leg because the last leg is usually some bad NYB maidens or something crappy and they said "it would cannibalize the P4 pool" (of course, you can start a P3 OR P4 in the 2nd race every day...)

Also, it has to do with the betting machines. Alot of times, they may only be able to handle one 'extra' bet in a particular race over what they're normally programmed for.
Arlington's a good example of it this year.... they added a pick 6 this year.... and due to that they switched the mid-day double from race 5 to race 4, so that they don't start the same race.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by philcski

Correct.
And I feel your pain on the P4 thing, I've asked NYRA to add a P3 starting in that leg because the last leg is usually some bad NYB maidens or something crappy and they said "it would cannibalize the P4 pool" (of course, you can start a P3 OR P4 in the 2nd race every day...)

Actually I think that math is wrong. Wouldn't the $4.50 from the first leg get divised by 3 since I had three horses in the next leg?

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Scav

Actually I think that math is wrong. Wouldn't the $4.50 from the first leg get divised by 3 since I had three horses in the next leg?

in that case your total cost would be $2... $1 to win on each of the two horses in the first leg.

[Scav]

The ticket I played on Sunday, the late pick four

3,10
5,7,8
1,3
1,10

I played that 3 times so a total of $72. If there was a pick three, I would have played that instead so the total would have been $12 per $1. The win parlay would have been structured as.

3,10
5,7,8
1,3

So a total cost of $12

Winners paid:

10 = $9
8 = $16.80
3 = $2.70

What would I have gotten back on that $1 win parlay?

[Unstable]

Originally Posted by Scav

The ticket I played on Sunday, the late pick four

3,10
5,7,8
1,3
1,10

I played that 3 times so a total of $72. If there was a pick three, I would have played that instead so the total would have been $12 per $1. The win parlay would have been structured as.

3,10
5,7,8
1,3

So a total cost of $12

Winners paid:

10 = $9
8 = $16.80
3 = $2.70

What would I have gotten back on that $1 win parlay?

$8.505 per $1 bet to win on each of the horses in the first race. Since $2 is the minimum win bet, it would have cost you $4 and you would have won $17.01. Since you wanted to play it three times, it would have cost you $12 and you would have won $51.03.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Scav

The ticket I played on Sunday, the late pick four

3,10
5,7,8
1,3
1,10

I played that 3 times so a total of $72. If there was a pick three, I would have played that instead so the total would have been $12 per $1. The win parlay would have been structured as.

3,10
5,7,8
1,3

So a total cost of $12

Winners paid:

10 = $9
8 = $16.80
3 = $2.70

What would I have gotten back on that $1 win parlay?

for $1, winners paid
10= 4.50
8 = 8.40 (7.40-1)
3 = 1.35 (.35-1)
$1 to win on 10-leg A gets you $4.50

$4.50 to win on 8 in leg B gets you $37.80 ((4.50 x 7.4)+4.50

$37.80 to win on 3 in leg C gets you $51.03 ((37.80 x .35)+37.80

I guess.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

for $1, winners paid
10= 4.50
8 = 8.40 (7.40-1)
3 = 1.35 (.35-1)
$1 to win on 10-leg A gets you $4.50

$4.50 to win on 8 in leg B gets you $37.80 ((4.50 x 7.4)+4.50

$37.80 to win on 3 in leg C gets you $51.03 ((37.80 x .35)+37.80

I guess.

Why would that $4.50 from the 1st leg go automatically to the winner, when the win parlay money is being bet into the win pool anyways, wouldn't it be divided by 3 since I had three horses in that leg?

[cloud_break]

Originally Posted by Scav

Why would that $4.50 from the 1st leg go automatically to the winner, when the win parlay money is being bet into the win pool anyways, wouldn't it be divided by 3 since I had three horses in that leg?

I think your original math is correct.

You would have bet $6 on each horse in the first race. You would have cashed $27 on the winner. This would have left you $9 on each horse in the second leg. you would have cashed $75.60 on the winner. This would have left you $37.80 on each horse in the last leg, leaving a final tally of $51.03 after the third leg. $12 investment = $51 return. This would vary a bit since you couldn't make $.50 wagers but the math for the parlay is accurate.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Scav

Why would that $4.50 from the 1st leg go automatically to the winner, when the win parlay money is being bet into the win pool anyways, wouldn't it be divided by 3 since I had three horses in that leg?

it's the same math. but that's the $1 parlay for those 3 horses. You'd need to bet $12 to cover them all for $1.