OK yeah I gotcha. I agree.
I'd say in the future scratches = refunds, and late additions get auctioned off in a short little pre-race auction on the day of the event.
Im saying relative to the pot because now with the top horse out then your odds
of winning have increased.
Maybe Im not using the best terminolgy.
Im trying to say your overall odds of winning.
In a parimutual situation your odds get decreased as well. So you bet at the
track thinking you are getting 50 to 1 and then a top horse gets scratched and now you
only get 30 to 1.
Its really not that different is all that Im saying.
See, I don't think your relative odds are necessarily going to be similar.
Let's say there are 5 horses in a winner take all auction, for simplicity.
Horse 1 is currently bid at $20
Horse 2 is currently bid at $15
Horse 3 is currently bid at $10
Horse 4 is currently bid at $5
Horse 5 is currently unbid
I bid horse 5 for $1, thinking I'm getting 50/1 on my bet.
Auction ends.
Horse 1 gets scratched.
I now have horse 5 for $1 to win $30. Drastically different odds.
Sure this is an extreme example, but the fact remains that if an expensive horse gets scratched it can significantly impact the odds on the long-shots, and maybe the bid that you made given a certain set of assumptions about the pot should no longer be binding.
What a mess
For this auction, refunds should be warranted because we had no rule for this, but what was discussed in chat last night should be what is implemented for future ones otherwise horse racing will never work for an auction style.
We must treat this as a FUTURE (w no refunds) and not a ticket window purchase because all horses in the auction are on a future basis to win place or show. In the example MM is using it wouldnt hurt the value of the 50 to 1 being reduced to 30to 1 but if one of the favs goes down using HC's example, then the 2nd fav takes over as the "fav",and the new odds are horrific for that horse.
Problem with above example is 1, its using the $1 horse and 2 (most importantly) it is NOT 50 to 1 and then 30 to 1(this is not a winner take all pot by any stretch so the odds do not correlate to 50to1 then 30to1 once scratch is done).. the odds for the horse according to our payouts would be 60%/30%/10% so lets use those odds below:
Use same example but instead of viewing Horse 5 for $1 , take horse 2 as the example with the way the pot is split at 60/30/10 % or $30/$15/$5
Take out the $20 horse #1 scratched and refund the buyer(as proposed) and it creates this problem - ... leaves 31$ in the pot.. new payout
is now 60% for first or $18.. now the user who took horse 2 is at an extreme overvalued disadvantage.. he paid basically premium dollar as if it were a monster favorite for a potential middle of the pack horse.. it just will not work unless these are all FUTURE bets which never are refunded...
We cannot then hold the bidder who took horse 2 to his pick if we refunded horse 1 and any scratches.. who in their right mind would want to risk $15 to win $18 on a horse unless it was Secretariat's ghost?:Carcajada:
This could be 10X worse if the 2nd Favorite was scratched and it was a year where there was an overwhelming favorite because then first place could end up paying less than the amount of the cost of the big favorite horse.. but nothing like that this year.
the absolute ONLY way we can do refunds in future ones for scratches after close is if its a Winner Take All pot.. if we have split payouts it will never work to not treat this as Future wagering without refunds.
-murph