RatsMC wrote:Race winner picks. Should a player be limited to 1 bet? Or maybe be required to place at least 10-20 points? The reason this is an issue is that a player could place a single point on every rider to win Donington 2009 and take home closed to 400 points because of that single point on Dovi.
You have it completely backwards. A single player can bet one point and win the whole game BECAUSE everyone can only make one bet.
If everyone has the option to bet one point on every longshot, then more people will bet the longshots, leading to smaller payouts per competitor in the event of a longshot winner.
With a single bet per player, a longshot winner is a staggering lottery win for the longshot bettor.
With open betting, a longshot winner is tempered by the fact that many more bettors could have a slice of the win.
Does the NYSE force you to only own shares in one company? Would you be well served to buy a single share in every company? No, and no. You make hay by diversifying smartly, not blindly.
Also, it allows for a real picture of the collective wisdom of the players - what does the best thinking say about the field of riders? You can't tell if everyone is forced to be all-or-nothing on a single rider.
Vote any way you want - but if the rule is a single bet for winner, then I guarantee you I won't waste valuable points on boring bets with less than 2:1 odds (Stoner, Rossi). I'll put a point or two on the guy no one else has bet on. If I'm wrong - then 40 of you get a share of my 2 points. If I'm right, I have dominated the entire game for the season. Game on.