Prediction Contest - Race Winner Opinions Needed

[ales17]

On one hand, a conservative player might hold onto points if none of the predictions looked good. On the other hand, Players like phil (sorry phil) could be beaten by a player who didn't place any bets.

I agree! I think it OK as it is .... all the RTP that are unused are lost because otherwise there is no thrill in the game and as you said someone will save point's and beat someone that was unlucky in the bet!

Another point of order: Race winner picks. Should a player be limited to 1 bet? Or maybe be required to place at least 10-20 points?

I also like this one! And I think 10 RTP is minimum because you can still bet on 10 riders and that's a good chance to get one right!

[Doca]

I think you should only bet on one race winner. You can't believe there will be 2 race winners! That way you don't have to limit the bet, if someone wants to put 100 on Rossi then so be it, it will just lower the odds.

[ales17]

I think you should only bet on one race winner. You can't believe there will be 2 race winners! That way you don't have to limit the bet, if someone wants to put 100 on Rossi then so be it, it will just lower the odds.

If I understood correctly you would only be limited on the minimum points not maximum!
So in theory you could bet 90 rtp on Casey and 10 rtp on Dani for instance!

[heng47]

I think you should only bet on one race winner. You can't believe there will be 2 race winners! That way you don't have to limit the bet, if someone wants to put 100 on Rossi then so be it, it will just lower the odds.

If I understood correctly you would only be limited on the minimum points not maximum!
So in theory you could bet 90 rtp on Casey and 10 rtp on Dani for instance!

I don't think there's any problem with betting on multiple players, wasn't there some idiom about betting against your favourite players so you end up satisfied whether or not they win?

[carty]

FWIW my opinion is that one should only be able to predict ONE race winner - as Doca said you can't believe there will be two race winners and it is a prediction contest not a betting contest

I also agree that leftover points for the round should be included in a persons end total. But only if that person chooses to place A bet in the round. So if someone places no bets, they get 0 points for the round. If they only use 50 points, then the remaining 50 can be added to the total won on the predictions.

I have no idea how much hassle this causes in the administration though and I can certainly see that the rule above would cause some headaches so Rats gets final say

Cheers,
Matt

[ieism]

I think betting on 1 racewinner is the way to go. I assumed this was already the case, but then noticed some people betting on a lot of racewinners and changed my own bets to 2 racewinners too.

I don't want to be beat by somebody who put 5 points on all riders as racewinner....

There can only be one racewinner, and should only be one racewinner bet. You could always predict who will come second and make a separate bet for that yourself....

[chakraist]

I think we should be able to bet on more than one race winner; it allows for more things to happen- like in real betting, you can place multiple bets against yourself. But I think 10 minimum- that way, if you bet 10 times on 10 guys with 10 points, the chances of that paying off are very, very slim.

[OZintheDesert]

Im against more than one race winner. Its not in the spirit of the prediction contest. we only started the race winner component when betting on the race winner in the usual predictions area got messy. Back then you predicted a race winner and stuck to your guns.. Now its being treated like a separate contest which it just isn't. I don't typically hedge my bets as this is not a local day the dog track. I am here to test my knowledge and reasoning against the rest of you..


rant over

[Pantah]

One race winner choice.
Unused points are lost.
Im with the keep it simple theory.

[coyote]

Should a player be limited to 1 bet?

Yes.

[banda]

I didn't realize one could bet on more than one race winner. If that's true, it should be kept, because hedging is natural in a multiple choice "market" and results in odds that are much more realistic.

The fact that each bettor can place a small amount on multiple riders with small chances does two things in the case of a long shot winner- First, it increases the total pot, AND spreads the payout over more thoughtful bettors, instead of giving it all to one delusional bettor who just happened to get lucky. Further, it presents a much better picture of what the odds are for each rider - which is one of the most interesting aspects of the game.

Remember, if every one can bet on multipe riders to win, then one cagey bettor won't take the whole pot - all the cagey bettors will have to share the pot, with more of the pot going to the bettors that put more points on the correct winner.

[Rusty Bucket USA]

OK, I think maybe there should be a rule against putting a RatPt on every rider, just to score on those 1,000:1 odds. I think it should be "Choose One" per ID.

I know in real betting one can do that, but there's no money here, and this is still a prediction contest at its roots, after all. "Predicting" that all 17 riders will win the race is not exactly clairvoyance...

OZ is exactly right. (and not just because the race winner pool was my idea... )

In keeping with that thinking, I also think if points are not placed on a prediction, they are lost.

[phil]

I am here to test my knowledge and reasoning against the rest of you..

Well said. Here here.

[heng47]

I am here to test my knowledge and reasoning against the rest of you..

Well said. Here here.

I'm inclined to agree. This isn't a gambling joint.
I'm changing sides to 'One man one wif.... bet'.

[The Scribe]

I am for the minimum 10 points per bet, enough to avoid the odds being to high. On the contrary I like the idea of betting to multiple winners. Yes, it might be against the spirit of the contest, but it was already allowed past year.

As for the points not spent, I think they should be lost. A player not placing any bet throughout the year will end probably in the top 20 or very near to it, and I don´t like this idea.

[RatsMC]

Im against more than one race winner. Its not in the spirit of the prediction contest. we only started the race winner component when betting on the race winner in the usual predictions area got messy. Back then you predicted a race winner and stuck to your guns.. Now its being treated like a separate contest which it just isn't. I don't typically hedge my bets as this is not a local day the dog track. I am here to test my knowledge and reasoning against the rest of you..


rant over

Thanks. I think you summed up my feelings on this. There is a real danger of the race winner pick sucking all of the points out of the prediction contest and I don't want this to be just another tipping competition.

However, I am putting this up for a vote. I'll post it later tonight (I have a huge report to finish this morning.).

[banda]

I feel like people aren't thinking this through.

If each player is allowed only one pick for race winner, then in the event of a long shot winner, the game will be completely lopsided.

My crazy 10 point bet on Bautista to win will net me a thousand points on the day that we all find out how brilliant he is in the rain, or that he's the only guy to make the right decision about when to switch bikes. Then the rest of the players in the prediction contest might as well retire as losers, because the long shot won't win again for the rest of the season, and there won't be any more thousand point opportunities.

I'm not saying it's me who will ruin the game by picking the long shot winner. Anyone could. And then the game is effectively over for the season.

Limiting contestants to one race winner pick could be disasterous. Allowing multiple bets balances that risk.

[ales17]

I'm also for the multiple winner bet but really it's all the same to me as I'm more interested in other bets!

I'm the player with the highest Raw Score!

[RatsMC]

I get what you are saying but the odds cause me some concern. At 400+ to 1, a sinlge point would win the round for you - and that doesn't include anything you might win on predictions. It is entirely conceiveable that a player could bring in close to 1000 points in a single round by putting 1 point on each dark horse and the rest on predictions. Last season, the contest winner only took in 2000 points.

My thinking, right now, is that if a player must put at least 10-20 points on any race winner bet (could be more than one) they will think carefully about whether or not they really believe that Bautista has any chance at all. they could, however, put 10-20 points on 5 or six riders but that would be a risky approach. Additionally, the greater number of points on long shot riders will lower the odds for that rider and bring down the potential winnings.

The alternate is to only allow one pick for race winner which could be any number of points (1 to 100). This will also force players to consider carefully whether they really believe that Bautista will win since they can hedge the bet with points on Rossi. There is still the possibility that a player will win that long-shot and bring in a huge number of points, however, it is likely to cost them a lot of points over the season to do that.

[banda]

I get what you are saying but the odds cause me some concern. At 400+ to 1, a sinlge point would win the round for you - and that doesn't include anything you might win on predictions. It is entirely conceiveable that a player could bring in close to 1000 points in a single round by putting 1 point on each dark horse and the rest on predictions. Last season, the contest winner only took in 2000 points.

But if just one other player uses the same strategy, the payout is only 500 per. Another cagey palyer lowers them all to 333. If everyone did it, the payout would be a pittance. Hardly worth it.

Your disaster scenario assumes only one player makes the bet, when every player could.

The odds are so ridiculous for longshots right now BECAUSE everyone is only placing one bet. Players placing more than one bet evens out the odds.

[Desmo44]

I'm not much of a gambler, but to me, calling the race winner only makes sense if you predict one winner. I look at this as the purest part of the prediction contest. The call is to predict the winner. If you asked me at the pub who will win at Motegi and I answered Stoner, Rossi, Lorenzo or maybe Bautista, my prediction is completely worthless, as it is absolutely no prediction at all.

[RatsMC]

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.

[heng47]

The odds are so ridiculous for longshots right now BECAUSE everyone is only placing one bet. Players placing more than one bet evens out the odds.

The odds are ridiculous because the prediction is ridiculous. If we are restricted to only one player and whoever still chooses to luck it out by betting on a non-favourite, that should be their prejorative. Maybe then, what we should do is alter the odds instead to prevent the astronomical odds. Reward the user for his daringness, but do not over indulge. Maybe Rats could enlighten us on how the odds are formulated, and maybe someone with enough smarts can come up with a better solution.

I'm guessing it's calculated by taking the sum of the bets, some fancy calculus here and there, and averaging it between all 17 riders. How about reducing that average to only the riders that are bidded on. Something like, if bids=0, value=false. Or 1. Or something.

[banda]

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.

[RatsMC]

Currently, all bets are put into a single pool. Then the odds are calculated based on the number of points bet for each rider.

So, if 30 points are bet for Rossi, 20 for Bautista and 10 for Hayden, the total pool will be 60 points. Since Rossi makes up half of that, the odds for a Rossi win would be 60 to 30 which reduces to 2 to 1. The odds for Bautista would be 60 to 20 or 3 to 1 while Hayden's would be 60 to 10 or 6 to 1.

Now, lets increase all of those by a factor of 10: 300 on Rossi, 200 on Bautista and 100 on Hayden. The odds for these riders remain the same however...

The odds of every other rider are now 600 to 1.

But as banda points out, a bet of 10 points on any other rider will bring the odds down to 60 to 1 (it is actually 61 to 1 but I am trying to simplfy things). However, this is still way, way better odds than you can get on any prediction.

So, the real problem here is when a single player bets a single point on every rider and no one else does - and then Simoncelli win the race. Given that the total pool was over 1100 points, that player will take home all of those.