Expert help needed. These bets are described in Wikipedia and the definitions appear the same. Also it says that the Tricast is known in America as the Trifecta. Yet the Trifecta paid more than the Tricast in all 5 qualifying races at Doncaster on Saturday. Tricast___Trifecta _153.31____288.8___188.38% 2887.46___ 8736.1___302.55% _175.24____178.1___ 101.63% _278.73____999.1___ 358.45% __26.35_____33.6___127.51% Can anyone explain please.
The tricast has me Ron. The Trifecta is straightforward 1-2-3 in the right order. At least here in Oz.
The Tricast is a computer calculated dividend and the computer is owned by and uses an algorithm generated by the bookmakers. The Trifecta is a pool bet just like any other ‘Tote’ or PMU bet. The winning dividend is entirely a reflection of how many winning tickets there are and how much money was wagered. If you did a Trifecta on a handicap where the first three horses in the betting came in, there is every probability that the dividend would be worse than the Tricast because the computer only takes into account the odds whereas the Trifecta reflect how many people did the bet. That is why when all the favourites are placed at a meeting the Placepot pays next to nothing because lots of punters will have put un-named favourites.
Wikipedia "Tricast A tricast is a wager requiring the choosing of three named selections a, b and c to finish 1st, 2nd and 3rd in the correct order in a specified event. Requires a single unit stake. Accepted on horse races where 8 or more horses are declared and at least 6 run, and on greyhound races of 5 or more runners that form part of the bookmakers' main service. In North America, this wager is known as the trifecta (USA) or triactor (Canada)." "Combination Tricast A combination tricast is a wager on three or more named selections in order to choose three selections to finish 1st, 2nd and 3rd in the correct order in a specified event. Requires multiple unit stakes given by n(n − 1) (n − 2) where n is the number of selections. E.g. 3 selections, 6 bets; 4 selections, 24 bets; 5 selections, 60 bets; etc. In North America, this is a "boxed" trifecta." I'm struggling to spot the difference.
As most races would probably involve a favourite being placed, then it seems that the bookies have found yet another way of reaching into our pockets, if an algorithm is being used to decide payouts. Ron's figures clearly show that in this particular case, the tote is the better option.
I believe that the tricast and forcast are bookie bets,and the exacter and trifecta are tote bets,exactly the same bets, both bets can be boxed,wheeled etc.
Ron, let us say that there was an eight runner handicap and the first three were 2/1fav, 5/2 and 3/1. The computer might calculate the tricast dividend to be £14.75 because it is only interested in the odds. It has no idea how many bettors have done the bet. In Joe Bloggs betting shop, three quarters of them have done it so he has to pay them all out at 14.75 times their stakes. At Joe Tote, three quarters of the bettors have got the Trifecta up, but they are going to receive a seriously poor dividend because the pool of money is going to have the bookmakers’ fixed percentage deducted and then what is left is going to be divided up between the seventy-five percent of bettors who nominated the first three in betting order. The computer will always declare a tricast, but the Trifecta may return a zero dividend if nobody had the correct combination.
Good point QM, but thankfully, most of the time, that doesn't happen. PS. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that there no live tickets on our Trifecta, a payout is posted on any two or something. There is no roll over on the average Trifecta. (I think.)
Cyc, as I only tend to bet in win singles, I cannot tell you what happens to the money in the Tote Trifecta pool if nobody has a winning ticket. I looked in the Longchamp racecard and it makes no mention of what happens to the money if nobody wins the ‘Trifecta’ (called the ‘Trio’, ‘Trio Ordre’, ‘Tiercé’ and ‘Classic Tiercé’ on the PMU, but knowing the French they probably keep it to fund their equivalent of gamblers anonymous!
The exact calculation that the bookies’ computer uses is a closely guarded secret, but as a general rule of thumb multiplying the odds together will put you in the right area (2x2.5x3=15) but I deducted a little as they were the front three in the betting. The actual betting percentage will be a factor, hence some of the astonishing dividends that are declared when three total outsiders fill the places as they represent a very small part of the book.
In the Portland handicap, 14/1 three times multiplies to 2,744 and the tricast was £2,887. In that race they went about 7/1 the field so I would expect it to be more than the bare multiple as they weren’t the favourites and it was an open betting heat. In the St Leger, which is not normally a tricast race because it is not a handicap, the front three multiply out to 112.5 and the tricast was £153. If you look at the odds of all the runners in the race the two 15/2 shots are fourth and fifth in the betting (as Census and Blue Bunting were shorter) so their lesser percentage of the book will have boosted the dividend. Looking at the Portland and St Leger Trifectas, the winning dividend only represents seventy four percent of the money that was in the pool. What a license to print money that is for the Tote, taking twenty six percent for administering it! If the PMU does the same, no wonder racing is so rich in France. The Tote need to bring in the Quarté and the Quinté too.
Qm the take % are very high in the tote,but varies slightly from track to track in north america.Also the % differs on the kind of bet aswell.I believe that the take on a win,place show is around 20 to 23 % and on Exactors 25to 28% and on triactors 27to 30%
