A Call for a Debate on a Certain Aspect of the Daily Comp Bonus System

Being 2 places in a 4 runner field, which I feel should be discarded.
My case for this rests on two points:
1/ In reality it isn't accepted,
2/ It's over-weighted on the generous side and is, therefore, too soft for comfort.

I understand it's a level playing-field, the same for everyone, but at the same time it devalues the bonus system as it adds too easy a way to qualify for a bonus when folks are fairly regularly achieving 5/6 or even 7 placed at a meeting.

If the consensus is to not change the system then fair enough, I'll fall into line with that decision.

Your thoughts please?

Happy to go with the majority on this. Valid points made by Charles.
However......these rules have been up since November with a couple of requests for amendments, improvements etc. It's now April.........
Question for settlers.......do you pay attention to the E/W protection rule? The one about fields being cut to less than eight by late non-runners. This cuts the place payment to 1-2.
Possible amendment..........
Go back to 'traditional' settling for places...
i.e 5 runners or less - Win only
6 or 7 runners - 1-2
8 runners+ - 1-2-3
16 runners (handicap only) - 1-2-3-4

But then if you want 'traditional'
6 or 7 runners - 1/4 odds 1-2
8 runners+ - 1/5 odds
12-15 runners (handicap only) - 1/4 odds 1-2-3
16 runners (handicap) - 1/4 odds 1-2-3-4

How complicated/easy do you want it???

I agree with Charles.  Just discard 2/4.  I still haven't read our rules though... 

Yeah i agree discard it

The general view is to change the system so as from tomorrow I will total using the traditional system 1-5 win only 6-7 1,2 1/4 the odds ew 8+ 1,2,3 and 16+ handicaps 1,2,3,4 ew odds 1/5

Apologies, Steve, for being slow to respond to your post. I am permanently under sedation and can only think/operate slowly.
I agree there is inconsistency in respect of the bonus system adherence and the real-world settling methods, my understanding of the bonuses and giving opinions at the relevant time.
I don't also check the e/w protection rule - laziness being the reason, I'm afraid.
I think we have a mandate as per Clive's above, on the main issue.
Save to say in 5 runner races the places are 1st and 2nd. Thus: 1-4 win only, 5-7 places 1st and 2nd, 8+ etc 
I hope this is a satisfactory outcome for everyone?

I think it needs to be 1-5 win only

Dmouse wrote:I think it needs to be 1-5 win only

Do you, Clive?
The bookies pay a place on 1st and 2nd with 5 runners.
Isn't that okay?

Bookies also pay 1/4 odds 1-2-3-4 on handicaps Charles.
I ask again....how complicated do we want to make this??

I'd go with....
1-5 runners - win only
6/7 runners - 1-2
8+ runners - 1-2-3
16+ in handicaps - 1-2-3-4

All paid at 1/5 odds

Scrap E/W protection rules, as it seems no-one bothers with it so no point having it.

Sorry Steve, I never checked the E/W protection 'before/post noon' rule and always gave the benefit of the doubt instead (i.e. scored as though they had posted their choices pre-noon)

Whilst I dont mind further complexity, I think to move the settling system too close to 'real-life' would also mean opening the door to the whole bonus system anyway - which would mean alot of re-work....

We arent (at least I dont think we are) trying to replicate the results of a real world bookies here -- which is a good thing, because 99.9% of the time everyone would have a negative balance at the end of the year

The bonus system as it is, creates an aspect of fun, introduces a degree of strategy (i.e. bet on small odd's/faves and cash in on the bonus, or bet the outsiders and win enough to get big dosh - or - in a perfect world - a combination of the both!) and means players can go home at the end of the year with some chance of a positive balance

I think there's enough general consensus above to say "if there's less than 5 runners, there is no 'placed' donkeys" ... and we should continue with the rest of the rules and scording policy as they are.


Lastly, I agree with you Steve - these rules were posted last year - to have gripes 4 months in is silly       

Good luck to all with your picks btw!

upduck wrote:Bookies also pay 1/4 odds 1-2-3-4 on handicaps Charles.
I ask again....how complicated do we want to make this??

I'd go with....
1-5 runners - win only
6/7 runners - 1-2
8+ runners - 1-2-3
16+ in handicaps - 1-2-3-4

All paid at 1/5 odds

Scrap E/W protection rules, as it seems no-one bothers with it so no point having it.

I only seek to change the bonus rule on 4 runner races, (which has been done democratically), but not to put it to only one place for up to 5 runner fields.
But if the majority agree to that then so be it.
Whatever that decision would end any further discussion on the matter and lay it to rest as far as I'm concerned.

i dont think theres anything wrong with mirroring real life where it is appropriate and in other parts of the comp doing whatever we want (ie the bonuses).

but in this case i think it would be better to mirror real life and have win only up to 4 runners and have first 2 placed for 5-7 runner races.