Would past off conditional betting appeal to you as a bettor?

[Poindexter]

I am not a programmer, but assume that it is possible that with current technology, players could enter conditional bets that would not process until the final money has entered the pool (after the race has started). At this point the computer will scan every conditional bet, process the ones that will work , and keep going down the stack over and over until no more bets could be made. Obviously prioritizing bets would likely have to be done at random. i would limit these to $100 win bets initially until it proves to have no downside and raise from there.

I know many of us find this game frustrating because we can't get the price we bet a horse as the horses are loading the gate or we don't get our strike price on a horse until the late money that comes in drives the horses price up after they are off. Either way, we are extremely frustrated as a bettor.

My question to you the fellow bettor, if racing were to offer past off conditional betting, would that interest you? This would be very similar to placing a limit order in the stock market. It may mean you may not know whether you even have a bet until deep into the race or even after the race, but it would also mean that on the bets you do make, you would always get your strike price. I would jump at this in a heartbeat. Curious if others feel the same way, or is not knowing whether you have a bet, or whether frustration of not betting a horse who wins at 9/5 because you didn't get 2-1, going to frustrate you even more than the original problem and make this form of betting unappealing to you. Or is there some downside to this that I missing?

[Track Collector]

I am not a programmer, but assume that it is possible that with current technology, players could enter conditional bets that would not process until the final money has entered the pool (after the race has started). At this point the computer will scan every conditional bet, process the ones that will work , and keep going down the stack over and over until no more bets could be made. Obviously prioritizing bets would likely have to be done at random. i would limit these to $100 win bets initially until it proves to have no downside and raise from there.

I know many of us find this game frustrating because we can't get the price we bet a horse as the horses are loading the gate or we don't get our strike price on a horse until the late money that comes in drives the horses price up after they are off. Either way, we are extremely frustrated as a bettor.

My question to you the fellow bettor, if racing were to offer past off conditional betting, would that interest you? This would be very similar to placing a limit order in the stock market. It may mean you may not know whether you even have a bet until deep into the race or even after the race, but it would also mean that on the bets you do make, you would always get your strike price. I would jump at this in a heartbeat. Curious if others feel the same way, or is not knowing whether you have a bet, or whether frustration of not betting a horse who wins at 9/5 because you didn't get 2-1, going to frustrate you even more than the original problem and make this form of betting unappealing to you. Or is there some downside to this that I missing?

How is this possible? How can one be assured of having THEIR conditional wagers evaluated last among the potential of hundreds of other conditional wagers, AND, take into effect the pool changes that would have occurred from the time the pools were initially closed and conditional wagers evaluated before theirs were subsequently entered into the pool?

[Poindexter]

The programming would obviously be pretty complex, but I think it can be done. The way I envision it is the late money comes in, there is a new tote board(the one that currently the final odds) the computer scans each conditional wager one by one. So Say the 1 is 2-1. The computer would start matching bets on all conditional bets on the 1 requiring 2-1 or less starting with the lowest requirement 1st(say 8/5 and working its way up). Preference would be random. Obviously computer wil have to make sure the bet will not knock horse below that 2-1 figure and would match just enough to keep it above 2-1. Computer would then go through each and every runner and do the same thing. Refressh the odds, start over again......................Once it get to the point that no conditional bets can be matched. Odds are final. Since computers can make these calculations so fast it should not take very long I assume.

[Track Collector]

The programming would obviously be pretty complex, but I think it can be done. The way I envision it is the late money comes in, there is a new tote board(the one that currently the final odds) the computer scans each conditional wager one by one. So Say the 1 is 2-1. The computer would start matching bets on all conditional bets on the 1 requiring 2-1 or less starting with the lowest requirement 1st(say 8/5 and working its way up). Preference would be random. Obviously computer wil have to make sure the bet will not knock horse below that 2-1 figure and would match just enough to keep it above 2-1. Computer would then go through each and every runner and do the same thing. Refressh the odds, start over again......................Once it get to the point that no conditional bets can be matched. Odds are final. Since computers can make these calculations so fast it should not take very long I assume.

OK, so say your "strike" odds for a particular horse is 4 to 1, and that you know when going off at less than 4-1, your "value" play actually turns into a negative ROI. So say your program goes in and looking at the "off" odds calculates the odds of the horse in question to be 4.7 to 1. Your conditional wager parameters are met, and a $x wager is submitted on your behalf. All is fine and dandy until you find out that after your conditional wager turned into an actual wager, multiple other competing horseplayers had their conditional wagering parameters met, and with inclusion of their collective wagers, the horse's absolute final odds became 2.8 to 1. (Whether this horse won or lost is irrelevant, as you have already determined via your studies that odds of 4 to 1 or less result in a negative ROI over the long-term.). And of course once your conditional wager is submitted, you can not back it out. As an adjustment you could build in some factor amount in advance to your required "strike rate" odds, but unless you are as good as some of the sophisticated high dollar wagering teams, you are very little head with this proposed Conditional Off Race betting than under today's betting conditions. All this too, despite a favorable assumption (that in fact might not be true) that one will be able to refresh the odds to make them reflect newly submitted conditional wagers.

An interesting theoretical topic, but one that IMO has almost zero chance of future implementation.

BTW and as an aside, I think this type of conditional off race wager has been implemented before, It goes something like this:

Condition --> If horse that wins has saddlecloth #X and horse that finishes 2nd has saddlecloth #Y. Then submit $100 Exacta X-Y. (It's called Past Posting.). :rolleyes:

[Poindexter]

OK, so say your "strike" odds for a particular horse is 4 to 1, and that you know when going off at less than 4-1, your "value" play actually turns into a negative ROI. So say your program goes in and looking at the "off" odds calculates the odds of the horse in question to be 4.7 to 1. Your conditional wager parameters are met, and a $x wager is submitted on your behalf. All is fine and dandy until you find out that after your conditional wager turned into an actual wager, multiple other competing horseplayers had their conditional wagering parameters met, and with inclusion of their collective wagers, the horse's absolute final odds became 2.8 to 1. (Whether this horse won or lost is irrelevant, as you have already determined via your studies that odds of 4 to 1 or less result in a negative ROI over the long-term.). And of course once your conditional wager is submitted, you can not back it out. As an adjustment you could build in some factor amount in advance to your required "strike rate" odds, but unless you are as good as some of the sophisticated high dollar wagering teams, you are very little head with this proposed Conditional Off Race betting than under today's betting conditions. All this too, despite a favorable assumption (that in fact might not be true) that one will be able to refresh the odds to make them reflect newly submitted conditional wagers.

An interesting theoretical topic, but one that IMO has almost zero chance of future implementation.

BTW and as an aside, I think this type of conditional off race wager has been implemented before, It goes something like this:

Condition --> If horse that wins has saddlecloth #X and horse that finishes 2nd has saddlecloth #Y. Then submit $100 Exacta X-Y. (It's called Past Posting.). :rolleyes:

You are not understanding me. It really isn't that difficult of a concept. Obviously you understand conditional wagering. Bet horse 3 at 2-1 or higher. Some ADW's will try to find you that 2-1 all the way until off (so I have seen posted) others will just search at 0 mins to post and either will make the bet or not depending on whether the odds are available at the time posted. The problem is that whichever the case, once the whale money comes in that 2-1 often becomes 7/5 and even though your conditions were met at the time of the wager, you did not get the odds you wanted.

My idea is that everyone is given the option of making a condiitional bet past post(limit $100 bet per person per horse at least to begin with). This bet is not for whales it is for the rest of the public who suffer the consequence of what whales do to the game. It is not my program it is the program that the racetrack would theoretically write and implement. The way it would work is as follows.

After the closing money is put into the pool, the odds refresh. That 3 horse who I wanted 2-1 on and would have had a bet prior to post on will no longer be a bet because he is not 2-1(he is now 7/5).

The way the program will work is it would stack each pending conditional bet starting with the lowest odds requirement first. So when the final money comes in the track's program (not mine) will go through each horse trying to match each conditional wager. It can only match an order that meet th odds requirement. So if the one is 6-1 it will match each conditional wager under 6-1, one by one, refresh the odds and go on to the next one. So it might match all the 5.40-1's and all the 5.60-1 and all the 5.70-1 now the odds are down to 5.80 and the first bet at 5.80-1 will knock the horse down below 5.80-1, so it cannot be matched(although I would suggest partial matches), on to horse number 2. The same procedure happens until no bets can be matched .......through the last horse. Since the money on the other horses have switched the odds the computer will now go back to horse number 1 and see if some of the 5.80-1's that were not able to be matched can now be matched on up the stack. then once again through all of the horses...... Once the computer can no longer match any bets, the condtional wagers are now closed some accepted, many rejected. As I mentioned in a prior post the computer will have to randomly give preference to multiple conditional bets at each odds range So some 5.80-1 might match others might not get matched.

As you can see contrary to the BS you posted no bet would ever match unless it was at the bettor's strike price. Thus I can never get less than the price I want on the horse. In todays wonderful system I can bet a horse at 2-1 and be stuck with 6/5, or i miss out on a horse who I need 25-1 on because he jumps form 20-1 to 40-1 after the race goes off because i have no idea who the whales are going to let drift up. With past post conditional betting both problems solved. The conditional bet on the horse I need 2-1 will be rejected and thus no play, and the conditional bet on the horse i need 25-1 will be accepted and I now have a play at about 40-1 that i want that I would not have had otherwise.

I think it would be fantastic, but given the fact not one person has responded other than you with your nonsense, perhaps I am the only one who thinks so. Maybe others like getting 6/5 on horses they bet at 2-1 as they are loading the gate. Or maybe my explanation sucks. Also, think about it, these are all basically additional bets. The betting has closed the money is in and the pool would normally be closed. If the race track is now able to get in extra money on past post conditional betting, it is basically free money to them. Even the pinheads that run racing should go for that.

As far as little chance of it being implemented, that basically applies to everything I post about. I assume that one day the decision makers in this industry will get their heads out of their asses, just not sure racing will make it that long.

By the way i realize this contradicts my stance on wanting the pools closed and final odds posted, but i really do not think this type of conditional betting would have a much affect on the final odds. It's just a tool for the little guys to assure they are getting decent prices on their plays. So in my perfect world they would close the pools, post the final odds, send the horses off and then apply the past post conditional wagers.

[Track Collector]

My "BS and nonsense" were based on a faulty understanding. I now understand your concept after your subsequent posts clarified/detailed some things from earlier posts.

Given that you appear passionate about such a concept, have you taken any action to move forward towards possible implementation?

[Poindexter]

My "BS and nonsense" were based on a faulty understanding. I now understand your concept after your subsequent posts clarified/detailed some things from earlier posts.

Given that you appear passionate about such a concept, have you taken any action to move forward towards possible implementation?

It's all good. I just recently thought of this an threw out the concept because I thought it made a lot of sense. Judging by the lack of response to this thread, I am guessing that something about the idea is rubbing people the wrong way. Perhaps it is too complex to gain widestream acceptance? Perhaps lack of trust or the idea of not knowing you have a bet until the race is over are perhaps deal breakers. I do think it would make a nice option for those who might be interested. I certainly would like it. I would imagine it would be costly for racing to implement (they may have to replace those commodore 64's) and without a strong demand I could not even advise it no matter how much I like the idea.

As far as what action have I taken, I counter with what action can any of us take to get any idea implemented? What is that hotline number or email? Do we use Track Collector as the referal?

[ultracapper]

It's all good. I just recently thought of this an threw out the concept because I thought it made a lot of sense. Judging by the lack of response to this thread, I am guessing that something about the idea is rubbing people the wrong way. Perhaps it is too complex to gain widestream acceptance? Perhaps lack of trust or the idea of not knowing you have a bet until the race is over are perhaps deal breakers. I do think it would make a nice option for those who might be interested. I certainly would like it. I would imagine it would be costly for racing to implement (they may have to replace those commodore 64's) and without a strong demand I could not even advise it no matter how much I like the idea.

As far as what action have I taken, I counter with what action can any of us take to get any idea implemented? What is that hotline number or email? Do we use Track Collector as the referal?

Simple solution. Just don't make your bet conditional.

[Poindexter]

Simple solution. Just don't make your bet conditional.

Of course and they also could continue with the pre post conditional bets as well. It would just be another really good option for bettors, but I suspect the idea of a computer dangling in the pools during the running of race could make some bettors uncomfortable(even if it is just the track's computer trying to fill conditional bets).

[Track Collector]

As far as what action have I taken, I counter with what action can any of us take to get any idea implemented? What is that hotline number or email? Do we use Track Collector as the referal?

I have no special influence within the Racing Industry.

There is not a central racing czar or access point, but there are some very knowledgeable people who participate on this forum who have higher level Industry contacts. IMO one such person is HANA's President Jeff Platt. He among others could give you some help, tips, and/or direction regarding how to proceed if you have more than just a casual interest in getting this Conditional Off-Odds wager option made available.

[ultracapper]

What do you do with the situation with Bettor A making a $3000 bet conditional at 2/1, but including that bet into the pool would drop the odds to 9/5? If the bet doesn't go into the pool, the horse goes off at 2/1, and Bettor A is sitting there wondering why his bet didn't get placed.........or, wonders why he got 9/5 when he demanded 2/1. How would that work?

Or, you cover only as much of Bettor A's bet as will keep the odds at 2/1, but Bettor B behind him made a $500 bet conditional at 2/1, and none of his gets covered as he sits there looking at the tote and seeing his horse at 2/1?

Is that where your random processing comes in? Maybe a conditional bet couldn't be guaranteed to be covered, regardless of what the condition was, or what final odds are?

It's getting kind of sticky now.

[AltonKelsey]

Just make betfair available nationwide.

[Poindexter]

Alton, I would love to see nationwide exchange betting. Used to do it offshore when it was available there and loved it I have pretty much come to the conclusion this probably will not happen in my lifetime. I am hoping I am wrong. I am a little bit skeptical about Betfair based on some of the stuff I have seen posted over the years. Heresay, but usually where there is smoke there is fire. I don't see why racing just couldn't offer exchange betting themsleves with no middleman. Player X throws out an offer of 5-1 on horse 1 player Y accepts. The racetrack takes it's cut from the winner. What else is needed and why?

TC, that is probably the major reason I post here. I feel people in the industry probably are reading at least some of it(or are at least being told about some of it) and while they certainly don't act on what is posted most of the time, maybe eventually their actions will be swayed in the right direction. I probably need to lay off the ridicule, but their arrogance coupled with their misguided ways tends to set me off. I don't mind arrogance if you are right, and I can accept that people are misguided, but arrogant and misguided, that really bothers me. As far as trying to reach out to them about getting this through I will pass(it's not my job). If someone in the industry finds this or anything else I post, interesting they can pm me and I will be happy to help them implement it or answer any questions they have. This can be a very useful feature to the everyday bettor who is frustrated about late odds changes. However, my passion is for horse racing itself. I love the game and want to see it succeed and grow, and not continue on its downward path. Don't worry about me, I find plenty of bets to make all the time. This would just help me find more.

UC, the major reason I suggested $100 max bet per horse was to stop large bettors from hogging up the conditional wagers. Policing might be an issue(maybe some sort of licensing would be required-otherwise someone can bet $100 at 6 different adw's). Just to clarify, the bet would go to the lowest requirements first. So if after the money is in, the horse is 2-1 the lowest conditionals are honored first, 1.60s then 1.70's ........ It the horse is still 2-1 when it gets up there those conditional bets will start being honored and yes all bets will have to be selected randomly. Should only $22 of $100 bet be honored to keep th horse above the required odds that would be the amound of the bet filled, of course once it goes through the other horses more will become available, but eventually someone will be stuck with only a partial bet (obviously an opt out feature of partial bets could be added) unless every bet can be matched. The biggest negative in my mind is that one can put in a conditonal bet at 2-1+, the horse ends up 2-1 after the betting is done, and his conditional wager doesn't get honored because the other conditional wagers were selected prior and there is no more room to keep it above 2-1. Obviously, had he just bet the horse in the pools he woudl have had the bet. That would be the tradeoff. They would never be given a bet at less than their strike price. I could live with that, because the assurance that I am not getting below my strike price is worth the occasional not getting a bet I otherwise would have had. Others that don't want to experience that can bet the horse themselves or make a pre post conditional wager if they so choose.

To me the good far outweighs the bad. I think it would likely be used by a small percentage of players and would help them assure they are getting only good value bets, something that cannot be done currrently.

[ultracapper]

Sorry Poindexter. The $100 limit slid by me. Yes, that would be more realistic.

[Poindexter]

Given all the frustration that recreational bettors face today (far more so than when I posted this 6 years ago), just curious if anybody sees value in this idea.
To me it is consistent with betting last that is so "valuable" in that it enable the recreation bettor to make conditional bets that can only be matched if the odds condition can be met. Not the silly conditional bets made at post time when a horse is 2-1 only to go off at 4/5.

Change of heart 6 years later?

[classhandicapper]

People that complain about late odds moves in the win pool should look at David Aragona’s value plays.

Each day he selects around 4-6 horses he expects to be good value and gives the minimum odds to take. So he is doing two things.

1. Selecting horses with positive attributes.

2. Predicting they are going to go off at odds high enough to offer good value.

The vast majority of the horses that make his daily list go off at prices higher than the cutoff point. That means he’s doing a very good job of isolating horses who positive attributes are hidden enough they won’t get hammered. He’s also profitable on these horses for the Saratoga meet.

Of course he’s an excellent morning line maker also. So he’s good at predicting the final odds. Maybe that’s where a lot of use need improvement. But he’s demonstrating that if you do a good job of finding horses with more hidden positive attributes, they won’t get hammered early, middle or late.

[castaway01]

People that complain about late odds moves in the win pool should look at David Aragona’s value plays.

Each day he selects around 4-6 horses he expects to be good value and gives the minimum odds to take. So he is doing two things.

1. Selecting horses with positive attributes.

2. Predicting they are going to go off at odds high enough to offer good value.

The vast majority of the horses that make his daily list go off at prices higher than the cutoff point. That means he’s doing a very good job of isolating horses who positive attributes are hidden enough they won’t get hammered. He’s also profitable on these horses for the Saratoga meet.

Of course he’s an excellent morning line maker also. So he’s good at predicting the final odds. Maybe that’s where a lot of use need improvement. But he’s demonstrating that if you do a good job of finding horses with more hidden positive attributes, they won’t get hammered early, middle or late.

There's a reason they are "hidden" values.

If you're good enough to find horses that the CAWs don't see AND they go off at higher than expected odds AND they win, you should be a millionaire and you don't have to worry about anything but where to put all your money. It's just there are probably 10 people in the world that can do that. Maybe Aragona is one of those 10. He's also literally setting the odds, which helps a bit.

[GMB@BP]

People that complain about late odds moves in the win pool should look at David Aragona’s value plays.

Each day he selects around 4-6 horses he expects to be good value and gives the minimum odds to take. So he is doing two things.

1. Selecting horses with positive attributes.

2. Predicting they are going to go off at odds high enough to offer good value.

The vast majority of the horses that make his daily list go off at prices higher than the cutoff point. That means he’s doing a very good job of isolating horses who positive attributes are hidden enough they won’t get hammered. He’s also profitable on these horses for the Saratoga meet.

Of course he’s an excellent morning line maker also. So he’s good at predicting the final odds. Maybe that’s where a lot of use need improvement. But he’s demonstrating that if you do a good job of finding horses with more hidden positive attributes, they won’t get hammered early, middle or late.

How are they doing? I have no idea, but its actually pretty easy to find horses who will go off higher than the ML.