Tell Churchill Downs You Want Dime Supers!

[Thunder Gulch]

Originally Posted by booner

I can understand them not wanting to offer dime supers at the track on Derby Day. I would hate to be a teller constantly handing out the extra $.60 all day long.

I don't see any reason why they couldn't be offered through ADW's.

I'd play the supers, but like many others here, I will be in attendance and adding them to the wagering menu could cause a nightmare at the windows. It's not unusual to wait 30 minutes in line to wager and still get shutout of a race. Think about what you have. 75% of the tellers are temps there for one day, and 75% of the crowd doesn't have any clue what they are doing. I've heard a lot of folks go to the window and try to call the horse's name instead of number.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Dime supers actually hurt overall handle believe it or not. It detracts from the overall pools. For example, if someone decides to bet $50 on a race at your track, they'll bet $50. But, if dime supers are available, they might only bet $30 (because they can bet for cheaper) and they spend the $20 on other racetracks.

In a big race like the Derby, I don't disagree with them not allowing 10-cent supers, with so much money being handled.

This is a very naive approach and exactly the kind of thinking by racetrack management ( on a variety of situations ) that helps keep racing in the dark ages. Just because a change, in this case a popular one, does not pay immediate dividends does not mean it won't be successful in the long run. While takeout obviously doesn't change from $1 supers to dime supers, the dime super obviously allows more coverage overall for all your players, and probably rates to keep more money in action, and thus possibly raises the churn on this bet....which is what increases handle. Instead of the money from the pool being dispersed to a few bettors it ends up spreading it more thinly to many betters. Theoretically this is better for churn ( and thus handle ). It's early ( for me and this bet ) and over time it is highly possible that this bet will prove a handle booster.

It's also worth noting that the $20 you give as an example that is wagered at another track, through simulcasting, provides only incremental less dollars to the simulcasting outlet. One could argue that the few lost dollars are more than made up by keeping your customer happy.

Churchill Downs Inc. makes baffling decisions all the time ( did they not raise their takeout substantially on Pick-4s and, I think, Supers or Pick-3s for the recently begun Calder meeting? ) so this recent one comes as no great surprise. However, the simple solution offered in this thread of allowing Supers on only self-service machines on Derby Day seems to have alluded them. Do they honestly believe that the carnage of Derby Day will be further exacerbated by doing so? Or, more likely, did they not really think this through? Your core players should never be dismissed just because it's the one day you can do no wrong. Racetracks seem to make this kind of mistake far too often.

[mik9872]

I agree that Churchill should offer .10 supers on Derby and Oaks days, even if only on automated machines or Adw. Oops, there won't be Adw

[booner]

If I read an article correctly (can't remember where), you will be able to bet the Oaks, Woodford Reserve and Derby through twinspires and Xpressbet. Those 3 races are the sole property of CDI and they can offer those.

It went something like that, but I may be wrong.

[Monarchos1]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Dime supers actually hurt overall handle believe it or not. It detracts from the overall pools. For example, if someone decides to bet $50 on a race at your track, they'll bet $50. But, if dime supers are available, they might only bet $30 (because they can bet for cheaper) and they spend the $20 on other racetracks.

In a big race like the Derby, I don't disagree with them not allowing 10-cent supers, with so much money being handled.

I haven't seen any evidence to support your assertion that dime supers hurt the pools. What is the source for your information?

I, for one, play the bet in multiples, usually equally a dollar, to avoid the tax withholdings when I hit. I don't think punching the repeat button takes much time at the machines or the windows.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

This is a very naive approach and exactly the kind of thinking by racetrack management ( on a variety of situations ) that helps keep racing in the dark ages. Just because a change, in this case a popular one, does not pay immediate dividends does not mean it won't be successful in the long run. While takeout obviously doesn't change from $1 supers to dime supers, the dime super obviously allows more coverage overall for all your players, and probably rates to keep more money in action, and thus possibly raises the churn on this bet....which is what increases handle. Instead of the money from the pool being dispersed to a few bettors it ends up spreading it more thinly to many betters. Theoretically this is better for churn ( and thus handle ). It's early ( for me and this bet ) and over time it is highly possible that this bet will prove a handle booster.

It's also worth noting that the $20 you give as an example that is wagered at another track, through simulcasting, provides only incremental less dollars to the simulcasting outlet. One could argue that the few lost dollars are more than made up by keeping your customer happy.

I don't think the churn figures are as high as we might think. People are not attacking the wager properly. If you walk around our track, the floor is scattered with $2.40 super boxes. Obviously, this is an ineffective way to bet the wager (and yes, all tix on the floor are losers to begin with). Personally, I am constantly struggling with the best way to play them and have almost phased them out completely.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by Monarchos1

I haven't seen any evidence to support your assertion that dime supers hurt the pools. What is the source for your information?

I just sent you a PM.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

I don't think the churn figures are as high as we might think. People are not attacking the wager properly. If you walk around our track, the floor is scattered with $2.40 super boxes. Obviously, this is an ineffective way to bet the wager (and yes, all tix on the floor are losers to begin with). Personally, I am constantly struggling with the best way to play them and have almost phased them out completely.

you can go in the Gold Room at Arlington and find $10 super box tickets on the floor.

[jballscalls]

I had a guy yesterday at Keeneland ask me to 'borrow' 1.40 for the last race LOL that meant he either had 60 cents, or had a dime super that was sure to hit!!

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

you can go in the Gold Room at Arlington and find $10 super box tickets on the floor.

I can go to the gold room anywhere and see $10 boxes, just like I go to the first floor anywhere and see $2.40 boxes...

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

I can go to the gold room anywhere and see $10 boxes...

I don't know what Gold room you're going to, but.......nevermind.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

I can go to the gold room anywhere and see $10 boxes, just like I go to the first floor anywhere and see $2.40 boxes...

you implied that people were not playing the dime super effectively, when the truth is irrespective of the amount you can find people that don't play supers effectively.

[Travis Stone]

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not necessarily against 10-cent supers, and the jury I suppose is still out on whether or not they're good thing for the bottom line.

[parsixfarms]

Personally, I'm a big proponent of fractional wagering; it can allow you to spread with a longshot that you might not want to invest the "full" amount on, and as Steve Crist has pointed out on several occasions, given the current IRS withholding structure, it's often better to hit these wagers in fractional amounts.

When there are only a few thousand people at the track on a daily basis, no one that really wants to get a bet in is going to get shut out by some "novice" taking a long time at the windows/machines. (That being said, on a day like Derby Day, I can see why some sort of modification might be necessary, but not banning the .10 super altogther.)

This raises another pet peeve of mine with NYRA. This past weekend I was at Keeneland, which offers a .50 pic-4 wager. NYRA takes the pic-4 wager from Keeneland, and I attempted to make a .50 pic-4 wager through my NYRA One account but was told that I had to bet a $1 ticket through their system. NYRA used to do the same thing with the dime super at other tracks until NYRA adopted the bet. This is an absurd policy, especially when the fractional wagers can be placed at OTB and simulcast locations. All NYRA did in this case was cost themselves $$ because I placed the desired wager on track at Keeneland rather than utilizing my NYRA phone account for that particular wager.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

This raises another pet peeve of mine with NYRA. This past weekend I was at Keeneland, which offers a .50 pic-4 wager. NYRA takes the pic-4 wager from Keeneland, and I attempted to make a .50 pic-4 wager through my NYRA One account but was told that I had to bet a $1 ticket through their system. NYRA used to do the same thing with the dime super at other tracks until NYRA adopted the bet. This is an absurd policy, especially when the fractional wagers can be placed at OTB and simulcast locations. All NYRA did in this case was cost themselves $$ because I placed the desired wager on track at Keeneland rather than utilizing my NYRA phone account for that particular wager.

Just so it's clear, NYRA can't just offer these bets on a whim....they are required to get approval from the New York State Racing and Wagering board first. Whether or not they should, or would, do this is another question entirely...and a much larger discussion that, at least I, don't feel like having right now.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

you can go in the Gold Room at Arlington and find $10 super box tickets on the floor.

Those are usually mine!!

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Scav

Those are usually mine!!

i didn't want to name names.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Just so it's clear, NYRA can't just offer these bets on a whim....they are required to get approval from the New York State Racing and Wagering board first. Whether or not they should, or would, do this is another question entirely...and a much larger discussion that, at least I, don't feel like having right now.

I'm not a NYRA basher (I realize that a lot of their problems stem from NYSRWB), but I doubt seriously that this is a RWB issue. After all, I can bet the .50 pic-4 at either Capital OTB or the Saratoga Harness track. It's pretty clear to me that NYRA, whether through acts of omission or comission, is depriving its players of the opportunity to place the wager in the amount they desire.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I'm not a NYRA basher (I realize that a lot of their problems stem from NYSRWB), but I doubt seriously that this is a RWB issue. After all, I can bet the .50 pic-4 at either Capital OTB or the Saratoga Harness track. It's pretty clear to me that NYRA, whether through acts of omission or comission, is depriving its players of the opportunity to place the wager in the amount they desire.

I wasn't insinuating it was NYRA bashing ( or didn't mean to ).

If the other places are offering it then I may well be wrong. I will check it out.

I will guess that if NYRA can offer them, and have chosen not to, it is because their Pick-4 is a $1 minimum and they don't want to lower it ( I could argue both sides ) and feel there is a basic hypocracy in offering one for $1 and another for $.50.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I will guess that if NYRA can offer them, and have chosen not to, it is because their Pick-4 is a $1 minimum and they don't want to lower it ( I could argue both sides ) and feel there is a basic hypocracy in offering one for $1 and another for $.50.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. I simply don't agree with their view on fractional wagering.