Aqueduct will be a tough nut to crack

[TrifectaMike]

As I compile my stats for the upcoming Aqueduct meet (including inner track), the syndicates and "whales" have crossed a threshold. A threshold which will impact everyone.

Ten years ago, the public odds were capturing approximately 8% of the variance. As of last meet this number has risen to 17% and odds distribution is still a power law (pareto distribution). This means it still appears that the public is still betting winners and not value.

Now, we know that more people are betting value than in prior years. So, why the dichotomy?A rational explanation is that the value is basically the rebate enjoyed by some, which is not reflected in the odds distribution of the race winners.

The result is that a "slight" decrease in rebates will cause a loss to many syndicates and "whales". That may be good news for some of the average players, but will also mean lower mutuel handles.

Why the rise to 17%?

Odds smoothing, as a feedback mechanism, appears to be the major contributor. I expected this to occur, but not so fast. This is bad news to some and good news to others. Odds smoothing will soon become iinsignificant in search for profits

Bad news for modelers using a two-step regression. It makes the odds derived probabilities so dominant as to make many regression factors insignificant. (In simple terms the model is so dominated by the final odds that the model becomes insignificant)

Mike

[Ocala Mike]

What "upcoming" Aqueduct meet? Don't they go to Belmont after the Spa? Are you getting your ducks in a row that far out?

[Mineshaft]

As I compile my stats for the upcoming Aqueduct meet (including inner track), the syndicates and "whales" have crossed a threshold. A threshold which will impact everyone.

Ten years ago, the public odds were capturing approximately 8% of the variance. As of last meet this number has risen to 17% and odds distribution is still a power law (pareto distribution). This means it still appears that the public is still betting winners and not value.

Now, we know that more people are betting value than in prior years. So, why the dichotomy?A rational explanation is that the value is basically the rebate enjoyed by some, which is not reflected in the odds distribution of the race winners.

The result is that a "slight" decrease in rebates will cause a loss to many syndicates and "whales". That may be good news for some of the average players, but will also mean lower mutuel handles.

Why the rise to 17%?

Odds smoothing, as a feedback mechanism, appears to be the major contributor. I expected this to occur, but not so fast. This is bad news to some and good news to others. Odds smoothing will soon become iinsignificant in search for profits

Bad news for modelers using a two-step regression. It makes the odds derived probabilities so dominant as to make many regression factors insignificant. (In simple terms the model is so dominated by the final odds that the model becomes insignificant)

Mike







I will be honest with you I don't have a freakin clue what you just said.

[dnlgfnk]

Mineshaft,

It's not often that I laugh out loud behind a keyboard.

I have no worries about this or that disappearing (but rather my ability to capitalize), when the best handicapper of every race, The Crowd, gets it wrong two-thirds of the time, not to mention the underneath legs of intrarace exotics.

[Clocker]

What "upcoming" Aqueduct meet? Don't they go to Belmont after the Spa? Are you getting your ducks in a row that far out?

The schedule I saw says Aqueduct opens Nov. 1.

[TrifectaMike]

I will be honest with you I don't have a freakin clue what you just said.

Sorry about that.

Mike

[TrifectaMike]

Mineshaft,

It's not often that I laugh out loud behind a keyboard.

I have no worries about this or that disappearing (but rather my ability to capitalize), when the best handicapper of every race, The Crowd, gets it wrong two-thirds of the time, not to mention the underneath legs of intrarace exotics.

Okey dokey

What does The Crowd get wrong?

Mike

[dnlgfnk]

If you're being serious, the favorites, Mike.

[TrifectaMike]

If you're being serious, the favorites, Mike.

Aren't what are called favorites simply one data point in a vector of data points?

I'd say the crowd does rather well in getting the data vector correct.

Mike

[thaskalos]

Mineshaft,

It's not often that I laugh out loud behind a keyboard.

I have no worries about this or that disappearing (but rather my ability to capitalize), when the best handicapper of every race, The Crowd, gets it wrong two-thirds of the time, not to mention the underneath legs of intrarace exotics.
The Crowd getting it wrong two-thirds of the time is good news only if we can do better...

[BetHorses!]

A statistician is a person who stands in a bucket of ice water, sticks his head in an oven and says, "On average, I feel fine"...

[dnlgfnk]

Agreed, Mike.

Knowledgeable individuals have stated that public odds are the best predictor of the race winner, yet that is roughly 1/3 of the time. Several in the bottom of the field collectively have a chance equal to the favorite, and the solid middle of the field collectively win most often. You know this, so I'm not sure where you're headed.

Whatever situation you're initial post is describing, I'm not ready to hang the "gone fishin" sign on my door just yet. Opportunities abound.

[TrifectaMike]

The Crowd getting it wrong two-thirds of the time is good news only if we can do better...

Thask,

The Crowd does not get it wrong two-thirds of the time. You have to consider that the crowd sets all the other odds also.

Mike

[dnlgfnk]

The Crowd getting it wrong two-thirds of the time is good news only if we can do better...

Agreed, Thask. As I stated to Mike..."I have no worries about this or that disappearing (but rather my ability to capitalize)"...

[Stillriledup]

I can't wait for the Big A, lets just say i'm a fan of that place. ;)

[dnlgfnk]

Thask,

The Crowd does not get it wrong two-thirds of the time. You have to consider that the crowd sets all the other odds also.

Mike

Why the linguistic gymnastics?

Hey, I'd love it if all horses in an 8 horse field went off at 5-1. But once They stagger the odds, there are still opportunities aplenty.