2009 NY handle -10%, attendance just -4%

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I agree that fractional denominations make the wager easier to hit for the player with a limited bankroll, but I've never seen any study that establishes that fractional wagers lower the average payouts of those wagers (although recognizing that dime supers may permit a super to get hit, where it previously would have had an "all" in the fourth slot). Pic-4 payoffs at tracks like Keeneland and Gulfstream are plenty generous (often more so than corresponding wagers at NYRA which has the $1 minimum), despite the lower minimums.

I understand the tracks' desire to foster carryovers with wagers like the pic-6 (and am willing to accept the $2 minimum), but for non-carryover wagers, it's about catering to the tracks' customers. The arguments that you are advancing are same as those made by the "whales" or other large bankroll players who want the pools to themselves. If you are going to try to grow participation in the sport, I don't believe that's the way to go. And this speaks nothing to the IRS reporting benefits associated with fractional wagering.

Good points... A study actually would be very cool for review, since I think a lot of the thoughts on this are anecdotal (like the Santa Anita Super v. High 5 story). Can't argue at all with the benefits of the minimum in regards to tax (as currently structured) and participation... Don't you feel there are plenty of 'wade in' wagering minimums already available between the current crop of .10 and .50 increments?