Santa Anita offers a tri-tri

[Rutgers]

Assuming 8 horse fields, the number of possible outcomes for various bets:

Win - 8
Exacta - 56
Daily Double - 64
Trifecta - 336
Pick 3 - 512
Superfecta - 1,680
Pick 4 - 4,096
Pick 5 - 32,768
Pick 6 - 262,144
Three by Three - 37,933,056

With that many possible outcomes in the Three by Three, in order to offer fair value on combos that include horses that have a better than random odds of finishing in the money, the pool would need to be in the millions.

Unless the pool reaches well into the millions (which it won’t), the amount of the takeout does not matter. It is a terrible bet, even with a takeout of zero

For what it is worth, guaranteed pools do not lower the effective takeout unless the guarantee is not reached.

[TrifectaBox]

Yeah, think you're right.



The pool size is nowhere near enough for this bet.



Even HK with huge pools , only does it as an any order tri.



So you hit this with a 500,000 to one shot and get paid 20k ?

[cj]

Originally Posted by TrifectaBox

Yeah, think you're right.



The pool size is nowhere near enough for this bet.



Even HK with huge pools , only does it as an any order tri.



So you hit this with a 500,000 to one shot and get paid 20k ?

I have no idea who came up with this bet and thought it would work. Even the CAWs wouldn't have played it IMO, which might be why they are supposedly "not allowed" in.

[proximity]

maybe they could try a quad quinella or triple omni?

I don't know too many answers out there???

[Jeff P]

Maybe they can reintroduce Horse Racing Roulette... this time with a 25% takeout?

If some is good more is better, right?



-jp
.

[thaskalos]

Maybe they can create a wager where we get to bet on which horse will finish LAST, along with exactas and trifectas on the worst-finishing horses in the race. If nothing else, this might cut down on the horse fatalities plaguing this sport...since some of the horses won't be pushed so hard to perform in the race.

[davew]

Originally Posted by Rutgers

Assuming 8 horse fields, the number of possible outcomes for various bets:

Win - 8
Exacta - 56
Daily Double - 64
Trifecta - 336
Pick 3 - 512
Superfecta - 1,680
Pick 4 - 4,096
Pick 5 - 32,768
Pick 6 - 262,144
Three by Three - 37,933,056

With that many possible outcomes in the Three by Three, in order to offer fair value on combos that include horses that have a better than random odds of finishing in the money, the pool would need to be in the millions.

Unless the pool reaches well into the millions (which it won’t), the amount of the takeout does not matter. It is a terrible bet, even with a takeout of zero

For what it is worth, guaranteed pools do not lower the effective takeout unless the guarantee is not reached.

Except you do not need all 9 horses in correct positions to get some money back.

If I read it correctly, 9,8,7,6,5,4,3 correct out of the 9 positions get some back. If you go deeper than boxing 3 in a race you could get multiple 'wins'

similar to those slot machines with paylines all over the place, you are not even sure which of them won.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by davew

Except you do not need all 9 horses in correct positions to get some money back.

If I read it correctly, 9,8,7,6,5,4,3 correct out of the 9 positions get some back. If you go deeper than boxing 3 in a race you could get multiple 'wins'

similar to those slot machines with paylines all over the place, you are not even sure which of them won.

In those slot machines you are not competing against other bettors. If some folks are putting in 3 k because of a big carryover, does, the person putting in $36 have any real chance of outperforming them (in other words you are cold decking 1 tri x by two 3 horse boxes while the guy next to you have a 3 horse box a 4 horse box and a 4 horse box). So in general the players making large bets into the pool will have a much greater chance of both pulling down the major prize and of course dominating the minor prizes. Whether it equates to being profitable for large players, I don't know, I would have to see how it plays out. But the small bettor is getting crushed in every way, takeout, no realistic chance of hitting the major prize and very little chance of making noise in the secondary payouts. Why would a struggling racetrack introduce something to their fan base that will put the small recreational bettor (you know the people who they need) at such a disadvantage.

Btw, what I said also applies to pick 5 and pick 6 pools and ridiculously the ones who are at the huge advantage often get large rebates, but as illustrated by Rutgers, this is a pick 6 on Steroids (maybe not so much at Santa Anita with their 6 horse fields). So even if the caw isn't involved, what is to prevent another advantage horse player (not caw) to take advantage of large rebates (maybe 12% in this case). Big carryover, big rebate and huge advantage over the layman. I imagine this could actually become fairly profitable for some well capizalized players (who are not caw). The recreational player of course will get crushed. Then again, when has that ever been a problem for the "smart" people.

[metro]

Originally Posted by Rutgers

Assuming 8 horse fields, the number of possible outcomes for various bets:

Win - 8
Exacta - 56
Daily Double - 64
Trifecta - 336
Pick 3 - 512
Superfecta - 1,680
Pick 4 - 4,096
Pick 5 - 32,768
Pick 6 - 262,144
Three by Three - 37,933,056

With that many possible outcomes in the Three by Three, in order to offer fair value on combos that include horses that have a better than random odds of finishing in the money, the pool would need to be in the millions.

Unless the pool reaches well into the millions (which it won’t), the amount of the takeout does not matter. It is a terrible bet, even with a takeout of zero

For what it is worth, guaranteed pools do not lower the effective takeout unless the guarantee is not reached.

I understand how you got the 37.9 million combinations for the 3x3 but it really doesn't make any sense. If someone plays this bet (won't be me) and they hit the 1st leg their odds on hitting the 2nd leg would be 336-1 again not 112,896-1, same for the 3rd leg. If they're live to the last leg they're not going to turn to their friend and say "well I'm 38 million to 1 to hit it!"

[Vince P 777]

Can someone sponsor me, or Start a Go Fund Me Page so I can wager on this ridiculous thing.

Thanks in advance,
Vince P

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by metro

I understand how you got the 37.9 million combinations for the 3x3 but it really doesn't make any sense. If someone plays this bet (won't be me) and they hit the 1st leg their odds on hitting the 2nd leg would be 336-1 again not 112,896-1, same for the 3rd leg. If they're live to the last leg they're not going to turn to their friend and say "well I'm 38 million to 1 to hit it!"

First off just because there might be 336 combinations doesn't mean that the chances of hitting a trifecta cold in a random 8 horse field is 336-1. (how many dollar tris pay $336 for a dollar or higher in 8 horse fields-not a very high percentage). Obviously if you play the favorites to come 1-2-3 you have a much, much better chance to hit and if you play the 3 longest shots on the board you have a much, much smaller chance of hitting. Every other combination will fit somewhere in between those 2 extremes. I think the point of his illustration is to show how many more available combinations there might be in this wager than there will be in a typical pick 6.

But back to the point you are making. Lets say the typical chance of hitting a trifecta in an 8 horse field is actually 1 in 60 (obviously all races are different, but by calculating the average trifecta price in 8 horse fields over a large sample you can get a decent idea of what the chances are to hit a trifecta in a typical 8 horse field). We are assuming the chances of hitting each one would be roughly 1 in 60, or 1 in 3600 for the 1st 2 and 1 in $21,600 for all 3. So obviously if you hit the first one your one (i am assuming you have one combo in each leg) you have transformed your probability of hitting to 1 in $3600. If you hit the 2nd one, you have transformed your probabilty of hitting to 1 in 60.
What doesn't make sense?

[proximity]

Originally Posted by Vince P 777

Can someone sponsor me, or Start a Go Fund Me Page so I can wager on this ridiculous thing.

Thanks in advance,
Vince P

idk? in California, off topic says you can make $$$ working fast food?
or you could try this fake wedding ploy I saw on tilt, episode 6 (about 18:00)!

YouTube

[davew]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Maybe they can reintroduce Horse Racing Roulette... this time with a 25% takeout?

If some is good more is better, right?



-jp
.

I liked that bet, but many races ended with less than a $100 pool

[metro]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

First off just because there might be 336 combinations doesn't mean that the chances of hitting a trifecta cold in a random 8 horse field is 336-1. (how many dollar tris pay $336 for a dollar or higher in 8 horse fields-not a very high percentage). Obviously if you play the favorites to come 1-2-3 you have a much, much better chance to hit and if you play the 3 longest shots on the board you have a much, much smaller chance of hitting. Every other combination will fit somewhere in between those 2 extremes. I think the point of his illustration is to show how many more available combinations there might be in this wager than there will be in a typical pick 6.

But back to the point you are making. Lets say the typical chance of hitting a trifecta in an 8 horse field is actually 1 in 60 (obviously all races are different, but by calculating the average trifecta price in 8 horse fields over a large sample you can get a decent idea of what the chances are to hit a trifecta in a typical 8 horse field). We are assuming the chances of hitting each one would be roughly 1 in 60, or 1 in 3600 for the 1st 2 and 1 in $21,600 for all 3. So obviously if you hit the first one your one (i am assuming you have one combo in each leg) you have transformed your probability of hitting to 1 in $3600. If you hit the 2nd one, you have transformed your probabilty of hitting to 1 in 60.
What doesn't make sense?

That seems a little more logical than the way I was trying to explain it.

Don't hate the bet, just the type that I won't play, much like the all turf pick 3 bets now at Keeneland and some other tracks. Those they just price me out of with the $3 base.