![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() 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.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
facilis descensus Auerno |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() 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? |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() 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.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
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.
__________________
facilis descensus Auerno |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]() 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
__________________
For 'tis the sport to have the engineer. Hoist with his own petard. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
facilis descensus Auerno |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
__________________
"I don't need nice horses at Philly, just ones with conditions."---Cannon Shell ![]() |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Gee, I wonder how that happened.
__________________
Just more nebulous nonsense from BBB |