|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Mystery solved!
Quote:
Also, when they showed the amount bet on each horse in the Win pool, they were actually showing 84% of the amount bet on each horse. For example, at the end of betting TwinSpires showed Uncle Mo with $72,532 in bets. But really Uncle Mo had $72,532/0.84 = $86,348 bet on him. Because they reduced all the figs by 16%, the odds calculation produces the same number. But I'm guessing that there is some roundoff difference that explains the $1-$2 discrepancy I mentioned above in some of the "final" exactas. It's pretty clearly a goof-up, but it had minimal consequences. Here's the only negative consequence I can think of: Big bettors need to know the pool size in order to guage how much their bets will move the odds. In this case, they were left underestimating how much they could bet, because TwinSpires was displaying an exacta pool figure that was 19% smaller than the actual exacta pool, and a win pool figure that was 16% smaller than the actual win pool. --Dunbar
__________________
Curlin and Hard Spun finish 1,2 in the 2007 BC Classic, demonstrating how competing in all three Triple Crown races ruins a horse for the rest of the year...see avatar photo from REUTERS/Lucas Jackson |