- DRF Bets
- Handicapping & PPsThoroughbred Past Performances
ReportsPremium NewsDigital PapersHorsemen's Products
- DRF Classic PDF PPs
- DRF Formulator PPs
- DRF EasyForm PPs
- Daily Racing Program PPs
- Equibase PPs
- TrackMaster PPs
- Using Timeform Ratings
- NewsCategoriesTrack Notes
- Learn to Play
- History of Horseracing
- How to read PPs
- How to use EasyForm
- How to use Formulator
- How to use TicketMaker
- Beyer Speed Figures
- Moss Pace Figures
- Using Race Shape Symbols
- Using Timeform Ratings
- BreezeFigs Handicapping
- Wagering and Winning
- Harness Night School
- Point of Call Index
- 3-Year Best Time Chart
- DRF TV
- StorePast Performances
- Compare all DRF PPs
- DRF Formulator PPs
- DRF Classic PPs
- DRF EasyForm PPs
- Daily Racing Program PPs
- Expanded Closer Looks
- Equibase & Trackmaster PPs - Thoroughbred
Kentucky approves pick six for Churchill Downs fall meet
LEXINGTON, Ky. -- The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission on Tuesday approved a new pick six bet that is expected to be launched at the upcoming Churchill Downs meet, but it did so only after several commissioners raised pointed concerns about a potential quirk in how a portion of the pool will be paid out.
The new pick six, which Churchill is calling the “Single Six Jackpot,” will have a 50-cent minimum and be offered every day during Churchill’s fall meet, which begins on Oct. 27. Each day, 80 percent of the net pool of the pick six will be paid out to the bettor or bettors who select the most winners, while the remaining 20 percent of the pool will be paid out only in the case of a single winning ticket. If there is no single winning ticket, the 20 percent carries over.
The Churchill pick six is modeled on the Rainbow Six, a bet that debuted at Gulfstream last year that has generated intense interest from some horseplayers due to the size of its carryovers and 10-cent minimum. The Rainbow Six uses 40 percent of its net pool for the single-ticket payoff, compared with Churchill’s 20 percent.
While Churchill has enthusiastically embraced the concept, two commissioners who are avid horseplayers -- Burr Travis, a Cincinnati-area attorney, and Frank Jones Jr., a Louisville businessman – expressed dissatisfaction with Churchill for failing to address a remote possibility in which a horseplayer would be denied the full carryover payout if a scratch in one of the races turns a single winning ticket into two winning tickets.
That situation could arise if the bettor had used two or more horses, including the favorite, in a single leg, with one or more of the selected horses being scratched after the pick six sequence has started. In that case, the bettor receives the post-time favorite in the race for each scratch. If the favorite wins the leg, then the bettor would have two winning wagers, and the jackpot would carry over, even if the wager the bettor originally placed would have been the single winning ticket if the scratch had not occurred.
Travis and Jones had raised the same concern at the commission’s September meeting and asked Churchill to address the situation before the Tuesday meeting. Since then, Churchill officials said, the track has developed a series of notifications that will be distributed to its simulcast outlets and that will appear at the track and at the website of its account-wagering company, twinspires.com, they said. The notifications will clearly explain the rules for the payout of the bet, the officials told the commission.
Kevin Flanery, Churchill’s president, said after the meeting that the track had considered “eight to 10 different versions” of the rules regarding payouts when asked if the track had contemplated adding a specific exception to the rule to address the rare but plausible situation outlined by Travis and Jones.
“We felt this was the best way to handle it, and we’ll monitor what happens during the meet and make changes if we need to,” Flanery said.
Robert Beck, the commission’s chairman, had to ask three times whether there was a motion to approve the bet’s rules as written. Travis eventually offered the motion, and he voted to approve it, along with the rest of the commission.
Dates for 2014 approved
Also at the meeting, the commission unanimously approved live racing dates for 2014 that are nearly identical to the racing dates of 2013, including a September meet at Churchill. The dates were agreed to after Kentucky Downs had requested a sixth racing date for next September but dropped the request because of a conflict with Churchill.
“We are okay with it, but I just want to go on the record with the industry that we would like to run more days,” said Corey Johnsen, Kentucky Down’s president and a member of the partnership that owns the track.
Flanery told the commission that Churchill objected to the additional date because of a “matter of horse inventory.” Tracks are struggling to maintain full fields of races due to precipitous drops in the foal crop over the past five years and a reluctance of many tracks to cut racing dates from their schedules due to opposition from horsemen.
Commission curious about Turfway's ties to Caesar's Entertainment
At the end of the meeting, Travis asked Chip Bach, the general manager of Turfway Park, whether he had had any discussions with the track’s majority owner, Caesars Entertainment, since it was disclosed on Friday that Suffolk Downs in East Boston had asked Caesars to drop out of its bid for a casino. Suffolk officials said that they made the request after investigators for the state’s gambling commission indicated that they were unlikely to grant a license to the company.
Bach said he had only recently been made aware of the situation in Massachusetts but that he intended to follow up on the news.
Susan Speckert, the commission’s legal counsel, told the commission that she had placed calls to Turfway’s legal counsel and Caesar’s compliance officer seeking information about the situation. Like all racetrack companies in the state, Caesar’s holds a Kentucky racetrack license.
I don't like it. Burr made a valid point about the scatches. But then approves it. Should have stuck to your guns on this one Burr. And I like the $2 pick six and wish the pick 4's would go back to a buck. Along with the Superfecta, the Trifecta and Pick 3's.
The 20% being withheld and going only to a single winner makes about as much sense as DRF charging folks to read an article about a horses workout. Oh, by the way, Game On Dude worked in 1:11 2/5, and Beholder went in 1:24 2/5.
The 20% carry over going only to a holder of a single winning ticket makes this a bad wager and amounts to an additional 20% takeout on top of the already high takeout. Not good. I never understood that a pick five is 50 cents but a pick 6 is $2 with a very high disparity between the two. Now a pick 6 that's 50 cents but has the additional 20% carried over. Seems simple enough to me, make them all $1. Management at most tracks seem to think that pari mutual horse racing is like the lottery and there is a need for a big pot. Maybe for some, but I want reasonable value and when I win I expect to get paid properly. Reminds of a bad beat pot in poker. Seems fun, what a big pot, but the odds are that in your lifetime you will never be a part of it, yet have no problem with the house taking an additional cut from every pot. No logic in it for me.
I feel conflicted about this new wager. Yes, it is a 'sucker's wager' that plays to the lowest common denominator. These massive jackpot bets, which have a small minimum and pay out to one unique winner, make wagering on horse racing seem more akin to the lottery. Elusive jackpots will not cultivate a new generation of strategy-minded horse players. Players should be encouraged and given incentives to play easier to hit wagers. Traditional wagers like WPS create enough positive reinforcement to keep players coming back. Furthermore, they form the basis of thinking about the game in strategic terms. On the other hand, Churchill has made an important modification to their pick 6 by paying out 80% of the pool on days the jackpot is carried over. Furthermore, the 50 cent minimum is an improvement over pick 6 pools with a 2 dollar minimum (at least for players with average bankrolls, as one can play 2 horses in each leg for 32 rather than 144 dollars. Personally, I think Churchill should eschew the jackpot approach while keeping the 50 cent denomination pick 6. By coupling the lower entry cost with a reduced takeout (like the 14% charge in California's Players Pick Five), they would breathe life into their lifeless pick 6 while simultaneously generating more handle in their other pools.
this isn't a pick six. its a joke and a sucker bet just like the rainbow and others with this ridiculous jackpot side pool. the whole concept is stupid and once again racings attempt to dumb down the sport and make it easier for idiots too make giant lottery type scores. then you throw into it the fact that the entire brain trust behind it cant seem to figure out a simple solution as to how to change it so a lone winner gets paid. its common sense for Christ's sake. how difficult is it for them to just look at the winning ticket and decide if that person was the lone winner? there is a big difference between notifying the players and fixing the problem. the way they are going forward with it is the dumbest thing I have ever seem and is just a perfect example of the idiots doing the decision making. you will never see me wagering on this bet until the end of the meet.
Sounds good to me.
Matt Hegarty doesn't tell us a very important fact, and that is ,what's the takeout on the new pick 6?
Why didn't they just use LONE TICKET HOLDER language so regardless how many scratches provided extra winning tickets....the customer shouldn't be penalized and the LONE TICKET HOLDER should win the jackpot.