ZERO MINUTES TO POST TIME

[karlskorner]

Is Churchill Downs 5 tracks "0" minutes to post working ? I don't think so. Certainly not from the fans standpoint and the drop in the mutual handle is making officials wonder.

At CRC today (Churchill Downs owned) first race, my choice at "0" minutes to post was at 9/5 ( I can live with that ), the win pool stood at $13,575. At the 3/4 pole horse dropped from 9/5 to 2/5
(thats 7 steps down on the odds scale) and the final win pool stood at $31,966. Figuring 2 min. to load to the gate and 1.14 to the 3/4 pole adds up to 3.5 minutes from when the polls closed.

PAST POSTING ? It sure looks like that to me. "0" minutes to post is just a band aid on the real problems that has inflitrated the racing industry and it's not working. The Whales and computer people are in the hen house.

Karl

[CapperLou]

Karl:

I have been living with this problem at CRC just as you have for sometime. The parent (Churchill) apparently has not been able to correct this serious situation. If they close 2 minutes or go back to the way it was--nothing is going to change.
It seems to me that what they need is "modern" computers--there are people at IBM and other companies that have looked at what they are using and have been shocked--from what I've heard.
They say the horseracing business is light years behind the rest of other industries where their computers are concerned.
Until they get some competition amongst the vendors to produce equipment that can crunch the numbers faster--we are still going to experience the changing of odds like you mentioned--and especially at tracks like CRC where most of the handle is from simulcast. In short--the machines are so antiquated--they cannot process the wagers fast enough to get the "outside" money into the pools 2 minutes to post time or even at post time.
This is a terrible situation and the track owners have to once and for all consider their customers--all of us--instead of having a sitting in an ivory tower and not giving a darn.
The time is fast approaching where they will not be able toget away with it any more.
Oh, one more thing---one does not need a degree from MIT to realize today that some folks are getting into the systems and breaking all the laws at our expense.
The Breeder's Cup expose was probably the tip of the iceberg.

[hdcper]

Karl I hate to disagree with you regarding your conclusions of the odds changing during Calders first race today, but I and several of my fellow handicappers were discussing just this issue as the horses were approaching the gate (watching the signal of the race at Tup today).

Anyway as they approached the gate, I specifically jotted down each horses current win odds on my tracking sheet for Crc in numerical order as follows:

4/5, 6/1, 4/1, 16/1, 18/1, 21/1 and 3/1 respectively

Then I continued to watch the odds after the windows reflected closed on the screen to caught the last change hopefully before the gate was loaded and the horses left the gate (realize I do agree that we still have times when the last change still has not posted before the gate opens). Anyway for this specific race the odds did change before the races began as follows (and I verified this posting to the final odds after the race too):

2/5, 9/1, 5/1, 22/1, 25/1, 25/1 and 9/2 respectively

Although I do agree odds should be finalized prior to starting all races, at least I feel things are going in the right direction at tracks which are making this change.

Only the player can impact the importance of this change by wagering on tracks that care and keeping the rubberband on their bankroll for tracks that don't appear to care one way or the other.

Hopefully your odds discrepancy wasn't noted in the actual toteboard at Calder, and if so, it is time to speak up to Calder Management.

How I see it,

Bill

[ridersup]

Karl

Have been tracking CD and CRC for odds changes from 0 to post till horses are in the gate. In my opinion this experiment is working well. Odds do change from 0 to post till the time the horses are loaded in the gate but there is little fluctuation from final horse in the gate till start.

I bet at home yesterday and my odds board showed the horse you mentioned as 2/5 before the gate opened.

Unfortunately I don't think this experiment is going to last because while at the track I hear a lot of people grumbling from people getting shut out. At my track when the monitor shows 1minute to 0 its too late to bet.

Its too bad because I really enjoy knowing when the horses leave the gate what I can expect to collect if my horse wins.

[GameTheory]

In order for this to work they need to not only close early, but to guarantee and lock the odds as final before the gate opens.

[Secretariat]

I wonder if it wouldn't be better if all simulcast tracks shut wagering at the 2 minute to post mark, and transferred wagers during this time. This would allow the track bettor a slight advantage and increase track attendance while still giving the simulcast wager an opportunity to wager, and reduce the chance of these late flash situations.

It is incredibly unfair for overlay bettors to bet when the majority of the handle has not been posted on the board to evaluate odds, especially for at the track handicappers.

[ranchwest]

I think the solution is for eveyone else to place their wagers, then each person gets to see the odds and place his own wagers.

Just kidding, of course.

[so.cal.fan]

Ranch....
No......that's a great idea, BRING BACK THE ON-TRACK BOOKMAKERS.
Hell, there are so few people at the track these days, a handbook would work just fine for those of us at the track!

[JustMissed]

I played Aqueduct from Tampa Bay Downs simulcast Saturday. I wasn't affected but I did notice a lot of Calder players cussing and bitching about getting shut out before they could place their bets.

Looks like a lot of the regular players have a built in clock in their head so they overtime have developed a particuliar timing as to when they pull the trigger and place their bet.

My guess is that there will be a huge amount of money lost from people not being able to place their wager. I had rather lose a bet than have the right picks and get locked out.

JustMissed
:)

[rrbauer]

Secretatiat

You'll get your chance come December 4 to see how the NYRA bettors like what you suggest. I think that there will be bitching from here to Times Square (I'm in LA!).

We'll see.

[Dave Schwartz]

In my opinion, this cannot work until such time as the tracks begin rejecting bets taken from off track facilities that come to the home track after the gate opens.

What is happening now is that off-track bettors are wagering up to "post time" (or after) and there is no control at the host track.

This is, after all, the real problem.

I would not be surprised that past-posting is occuring, even if it is only 10 seconds after the gate opens. (How would you like that opportunity?)

Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Holy Bull]

No matter when they cut off bets, there will be huge odds
changes afterward because a very large # of the money is bet in the last 2 clicks and the system is SLOW. The first part of the solution is to update their technology from the 70's. The second part would be to give people a bonus for betting early. A horse that wins can pay $6.20 to people who waited until the last minute to bet and $6.40 to people who bet >5 mtp. You'd see a very large portion of the money in the pools with 5 mtp and if it is important for you to have a good idea of what price you are getting, you can still wait for the last minute and accept the lower payoff.

[karlskorner]

Bill

Printed out your post above and took it with me, stopped by the mutual office and asked a friend about what you wrote

1. The tote board is working fine and has been
2. He explained to me when you are looking at a simulcast
monitor at TUP, it is not the same as I see on the tote board.
He called it an adjusted time delay. Supposedly you are
behind and it adjusts itself along the way and catches up at the
end. If I understand it, we are not looking at the same thing.
3. Yes, there was a very large wager seconds before cut off, was
it past posted I asked, Impossible he answered. Yeah right.

Karl

[cj]

Karl,

Seems to me, the odds at TuP were ahead of those at Crc according to the info posted by Bill. Am I missing something here?

CJ

[Tom]

Is it fair to give on-track bettors more time to bet than off-track bettors?
I don't think so.
Shut ALL the betting down 2 minutes to post, then have ALL money mingled by post time. 5 seconds before the gate opens, freeze the pools. Any bets not mingle are not accepted.

[Dave Schwartz]

How would someone at (say) TUP know if a bet made on a TUP race at (say) Monmouth Park was past posted?

[hdcper]

CJ,

I was going to say the exact same thing, because the odds I recorded prior to the gates opening matched the final odds exactly.

In my opinion, the major issue here is I can acccept the final odds dropping as long as it is posted before the race is started. This way the pool can't be manipulated as the race runs, either betting a horse that is in a position to win or just the opposite backing off one's bet because the most likely winner is not performing upto its expectations.

Every time money is involved questions like this must be addressed and proper controls put in place to stop it from happening. And tracks which don't feel it is important should pay the price of losing our wagering dollar. Only us the bettor can get their attention, by wagering our dollars at tracks that provide just such proof.

Bill

[Dave Schwartz]

Bill,

You are exactly right.

Dave Schwartz

[karlskorner]

NYRA closes another potential loophole in Tote Security

www.drf.com/news/article/42566.html

This sort of fits into this post

It's interesting that all these "loopholes" have existed for years and now they are getting around to fixing them after the BC scandal and the "big hit". There will be more to come. Puts what is happening in the barn area on the back burner which will make some Trainers happy as the "front office" is now under investigation.

[hurrikane]

So what's the deal with the on track NY'rs getting to bet up too post but off track is shut down early. That isn't fair!

If they freeze the odds when the gate opens and the track is responible for paying those odds..I'll bet you dollars to donuts they get every friggin penny in the pool before the gate opens!

Anyone know who the other two companies are that handle the betting?

[Secretariat]

That article on the "cancel delay" is beyond belief...

I understand some grumbling by simulcasters on being cutoff at the 2 minute mark, and there have been some excellent suggestions on this board to improve this from financial incentives to bet early, and improvement of technolgy (IBM says racing is 25 years behind the times), but that takes dough, and time, and it is not in place now. For the integrity of the sport, it seems a small price to pay to insist on some balancing prior to the race.

The one fella who suggested the race not start until all bets are received and accounted for is an interesting persepctive. Does anyone know how long it takes a track before all bets are received at the host track.

I hope this is resolved. The incentive to bet early (say a 5% bonus versus a 5% penatly betting late) is an interesting approach. I'm sure overlay players would hate it though.

[rrbauer]

http://www.drf2000.com/news/article/42616.html

I wonder how many of the "hot" bettors who were pissing about this
situation were supporters of the early shutdown of wagering? Still to
come will be (you heard it here first, and you will hear it here loud and
clear when it happens) the situation where betting has closed early and a
7/2 price will change to 2-1 during the race running. It will happen. It
will get bettors angry. And, we will get "speak" from racing's mighty
leaders as to how the integrity of the game is being protected.

What a sorry and pathetic solution to a non-problem.

Rich

[cj]

rrbauer,

How do you know betting after the bell is a non-problem? I don't agree with the solution, but I certainly would not be surprised if this was happening. Seems a little naive to me to believe it couldn't happen.
I guess I agree its a sorry solution, not so sure its a "non-problem."

CJ

[Bruddah]

What I read indicates the fans are at fault for all of the changes.
"The rule was conceived partly because (some fans believed) the integrity of the parimutuel system was being violated, a concern heightened by the ongoing Breeders' Cup pick six scandal".

Race track management looked for the cheapeast fix possible. One which would indicate that some corrective action had been taken. The real truth is that the racing industry has never invested in the technological infrastructure to hande this type of betting and won't. at least until the betting fans cause them to come up off of their wallets.

IBM says the racing industry is 25 years behind the technology. This would indicate the industry started with old technology and have patch worked the present system. As long as you do nothing that hits management in the pocket and indicates you can/will do it again if a real fix isn't forthcoming, you shouldn't cry in your beer.

NO BETS ON DEC. 7TH. PEARL HARBOR DAY.

[rrbauer]

cj
Either you believe that the method employed via the ITSP and the cutoff time established when the stop-betting signal is sent over the network, that precludes acceptance of any bet with a system-synchronized time stamp that is after the stop-betting cutoff time, works; or, you don't.

If you don't believe that it works then I have to ask why are you playing this game?

I believe that it works. And, this issue is very tiring. If it was so easy to past-post over this network, why did the Autotote employee, who was thoroughly familar with all of the system ins and outs look to things like counterfeit tickets and altering a hub-resident data file instead of simply sending through a bunch of bets after a race had started (or ended for that matter). I mean what could be easier then pumping through a couple bets that were automatic winners, cashing them, and next race, please? He didn't do that because he couldn't figure out a way to beat the system. The level of complicity required at multiple locations to do it even once, against the backdrop of a felony charge in federal court and going up the river for a few years, gives pause to the temptation. Robbing banks is easier.

If past-posting is so easy, then why aren't you doing it; or, any of the other nay sayers on this board who complain that past-posting is happening. I'll tell you why: Because you can't figure out how to do it, the others can't figure out how to do it, and, neither can I!

It ain't happening!

[Dave Schwartz]

Richard,

I think the issue is that we have no guarantees that past post wagers are not being accepted "in the back room" of an otb and then sent to the home track.

If a programmer had access to individual bets at an otb, what would be the problem with making a $100 wager on the #4 and watching the horses come out of the gate (with that ticket in an editor) and changing the 4 to a 2 because the 2 was on the lead?

Remember that the programmer only needs to know when the bets are being sent and to get the change saved before the summary calculations start.

Do I know this is happening? Of course not, but it COULD be happening.

And there are other, less taxing, scenarios, such as changing the time at the otb so that the clock is off by a few seconds or simply not closing the race. Remember that the tote at an otb is not mechanically ties to a starting gate. Someone is pressing a button SOMEWHERE to close betting.

Dave

[LOU M.]

I agree with you Dave,I have been at the OTB here in Chicago on many occasions when I'm standing at a machine and a monitor and as I press print ticket I look up and see the horses have already left the gate and look down and see my ticket being printed. I guess though it could be a perception on my part.There may be 7 to 10 tracks going, on a Sat.and you know half of them are going off at the same time so it would be impossible to lock out every track if it were done manually. It wouldn"t take more than two people to take advantage of this. The one pushing the button to tell the one standing at the machine with his $200 wager which track will be delayed that fraction of a sec. Finally to the value bettors,unfortunately even if all the money was posted a sec.prior to the start you couldn't change your bet anyway.

[WaHoo]

my understanding is that all the money is sent in, but only the winning tickets of trifectas and superfectas are picked out by the computers after the race and sent to the main track taking the bet, if this is true there's plenty of time to rob the system..

[cj]

rrbauer,

I never said I thought that it was happening, but I wouldn't be shocked if I found out later it was. To answer some of your questions, I play because I win money, that's pretty simple. I certainly never said past posting would be easy, perhaps you should reread my post.

You asked why I don't do it. Two reasons: 1) I definitely wouldn't have that kind of expertise 2) Even if I did, it's illegal!

Also, I haven't had this happen with home wagering, but when I was betting at an OTB in Cheyenne, WY, several times I was able to place wagers a few seconds after a race started in SoCal. If it can be done by accident, you can do it on purpose.

CJ

[Tom]

Originally posted by Dave Schwartz
Richard,


If a programmer had access to individual bets at an otb, what would be the problem with making a $100 wager on the #4 and watching the horses come out of the gate (with that ticket in an editor) and changing the 4 to a 2 because the 2 was on the lead?

Remember that the programmer only needs to know when the bets are being sent and to get the change saved before the summary calculations start.

Dave


Will this be an upcoming feature in HSH? <G>

[Dave Schwartz]

Tom,

LOL - What an idea!

Actually, I am working on it reading tomorrow's Equibase charts instead.

Dave

[MikeDee]

It all goes back to having standards and requring all OTBs and tacks to follow them and having independent audits. The host track for the race sends a stop signal, but how does the otb site treat that signal does it take a few seconds to turn off the machines? All the more reason for a shorter cycle time and make these OTBs' eat any late bets. If they were stuck with paying out on them, they couldn't update their equipment fast enough.

[Dave Schwartz]

Mike,

Does the host track send a stop signal? Is that how the system works?

Dave

[Figman]

When simulcast wagering was evolving in New York from the combination OTB-track with an in-state only pool, to an individual comingling of wagering with each host track, the guests originally had the responsibility to control the "stop betting" signal and to "send" the wagering data." At the beginning of each wagering day, NY mutuel departments (at all tracks & OTBs) had to adjust their clocks to mirror with the host track clocks, establish dial-up connections, etc. In NY, the triple wagering in the late 1980s was closed eight minutes to post and doubles and exacta pools were closed four minutes to post. This was necessary as it took that long to transfer the data over a slow phone line using a dial-up modems to the host track's mutuel system. Later faster T-1 lines were used. In the late '80s, the time barrier was reduced to four minutes for trifectas and 1-2 minutes for double and exacta pools.
In the early '90s, the method was changed. No longer did the guest issue the "stop betting" signal and then send the pools. The host track closed the guest's mutuel pools by issuing the stop betting signal and pulling the pools from the guest into the host system. Although the four United States tote companies that provide pari-mutuel systems today claim that once the "stop betting" signal is given, all guests receive it instantaneously, I have my doubts in today's world where there are multiple hubs involved - commonly called double hopping." Let's see the proof!

[rrbauer]

A second thing happens when the "stop betting signal" goes down the line. A stop-betting-time threshold is established. If a guest site takes bets after the established stop-betting-time that will show up in the timestamp on the bet records that they send to the host track. The host track will refuse the bets and the guest site has two options: book the bets or refund the bets. The bets DO NOT go into the pools.

[Dave Schwartz]

Richard and Figman,

Where are you getting your information about how hte system works?

Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Figman]

Dave,
Hands-on NY experience! OTB started in the early 1970's in NY. At one time I had a job as a "pool transmitter" for a regional OTB corporation. We drew the data from the tote mainframe into a PC and then sent it on its way through a dial-up modem and phone line to the host racetracks system....partial pools and finals. That job was eliminated when the host track got technology enabling them to reverse the process and began closing the guest pools and drawing the data directly from the guest's main tote at the host track's command. In the 1980's and early 1990s there were many missed pools because of technological failure. The customers were never cheated as they always got paid the track prices even though not all the money got into the host pool to calculate a totally "accurate" price. In summary, the guest booked a portion of their customer's wagers. Over the early years, millions of dollars were in limbo and potential profits for some entity. As a bookmaker, you win some and you lose some....but mostly you win some!The bookies and winners turned out to be the OTB corporations. The OTB corporationswere led by the subsequently deposed and shamed Capital OTB president Davis Etkin. Together with its powerful lobby, the OTBs got the following legislation enacted that is to this day part of the statute. Check it out at www.racing.state.ny.us.
S 523. General limitations on off-track betting.
9. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article any
regional corporation having a missed pool as defined in this subdivision shall dispose of such pool as follows:
(1) Any missed pools of wagers placed at off-track betting parlors subsequent to December thirty-first, nineteen hundred eighty-two and prior to August first, nineteen hundred ninety-four which were not used to calculate payouts to winning bettors because such wagers failed to be transmitted to and were not included in the statewide pari-mutuel betting pool shall be retained by such corporation for its ordinary operating expenses.
(2) On or before August first, nineteen hundred ninety-four the board shall promulgate rules and regulations, which direct said regional corporations and said missed pools to the in-state track conducting the race on which the wager was placed to be used for the next available common pool.

Section (1) above immediately meant a multi-million dollar windfall to the six regional OTB corporations in NYS. Prior to this legislation being enacted, the Racing Board in New York had scheduled either a day or a series of days that were really to be "for the public benefit" in that the missed pool profits were to be injected into the pari-mutuel pools at the State's racetracks.
And that would be the same Racing Board that recently benefited the wagering public by figuring out the recent Fix-Six scandal that resulted in a guilty plea in less than 30 days!
What a world we have interest in!!!!

[rrbauer]

From Dave Schwartz

I think the issue is that we have no guarantees that past post wagers are not being accepted "in the back room" of an otb and then sent to the home track.
Comment:
Excellent point, the guarantee thing. I think that the tote companies to show their level of confidence in their systems, should post a $10-million surety bond, and have a standing offer of $1-million reward to anyone that provides info leading to anyone scamming the tote system. Another issue is the lack of education being provided by the racing industry on just how it "works" and what happens (from a systems perspective) when the "stop betting" signal is sent. The industry only wants to educate you on one thing: How to bet!

More from Dave:
If a programmer had access to individual bets at an otb, what would be the problem with making a $100 wager on the #4 and watching the horses come out of the gate (with that ticket in an editor) and changing the 4 to a 2 because the 2 was on the lead?

Remember that the programmer only needs to know when the bets are being sent and to get the change saved before the summary calculations start.
Comment:
First, the bets are collected at the hub which serves the otb site, not at the site itself (unless it is a hub). A garden-variety programmer would not have access privileges into the directories that contained live betting data. A systems admin type programmer might have access at that level, but the live bet files are locked to update when stop-betting occurs so even if someone could gain access (open the file) they couldn't write it back. Also, if the operating system is configured with the appropriate security alarms, when someone opened a live bet file it should log to several files and send emails to managers. When the attempt is made to write back a record in the file, the system should dial 911. These systems all have this level capability even if they are the ancient Digital (Compaq?HP?) VAX systems running the VMS operating system as I have been told that some are.

Finally, setting aside all of the above, the programmer, assuming that all security was turned off and access was not a problem, would have about two seconds to pull this off. When the hub server closes the bet files it sends a signal to the host that says, "My bets are ready". The host responds, "Send them to me" and they're gone.

And finally from Dave:


And there are other, less taxing, scenarios, such as changing the time at the otb so that the clock is off by a few seconds or simply not closing the race. Remember that the tote at an otb is not mechanically ties to a starting gate. Someone is pressing a button SOMEWHERE to close betting.[p]
Comment:
See my post elsewhere regarding what happens to a bet that is timestamped after stop-betting goes out. Also, a stop-betting marker is placed in the bet file at that time. The network servers all use a network time protocol and are being continually synchronized by a network time server vis-a-vis the time.

From cj
Also, I haven't had this happen with home wagering, but when I was betting at an OTB in Cheyenne, WY, several times I was able to place wagers a few seconds after a race started in SoCal. If it can be done by accident, you can do it on purpose.
Comment:
If your stated activity at the WY OTB was after 1997 then the OTB booked your bets. If it was before, it may have been possible, that there was a delay of a few seconds, before betting was stopped. The current protocol and system processes were put into place in 1997.

[Dave Schwartz]

Figman,

Thank you for your detailed response.

Nice to know that we have someone with hands-on otb experience.

Dave

[cj]

Originally posted by rrbauer


From cj
Also, I haven't had this happen with home wagering, but when I was betting at an OTB in Cheyenne, WY, several times I was able to place wagers a few seconds after a race started in SoCal. If it can be done by accident, you can do it on purpose.
Comment:
If your stated activity at the WY OTB was after 1997 then the OTB booked your bets. If it was before, it may have been possible, that there was a delay of a few seconds, before betting was stopped. The current protocol and system processes were put into place in 1997. [/B]

rrbauer,

This was late 90s and early 00s. How would I know if the OTB was booking the bets? I cashed them just like any other ticket. Just curious.

cj

[Dave Schwartz]

Richard,

I like the sound of your explanation, but my experience in the gaming industry tells me that it generally only takes two ( and at most three) levels of corruption to make something work.

I am reminded of a guy I used to know that was a keno shift manager at the old Landmark in Las Vegas. Back then, the casinos felt secure if the could take a snapshot of the selected balls and the clock at the same time. In other words, with the game finishing before the first ball is drawn and the picture being taken at the finish, how could anyone ever past-post a keno game? (And they were smart enough to wire the camera into the ball-selection mechanism, so that the picture is taken at precisely the moment the game finishes.)

Well, this friend of mine figured it out. It was really quite simple. He would massage the timestamp on a ticket written after the game had ended. All he had to do was change the time in the stamping device before the game and set it back afterwards.

Of course, that still leaves HIS boss as a potential fly in the ointment, because he wants to win regularly and regular wins of medium-sized significance would be noticed. So, he cut the boss in and away they went. For a long time.

Of course, the casino's response was to make the time stamp machines only able to be changed by one individual and that person had to log all the changes. So what? It is just one more person to cut in.

Now, this is 25 years ago, so I am not suggesting that security today would not prevent this.

My point is this: If there is someone in the system that has access to the file and someone else that has access to the timing controls, these two people will find each other. There have to be so many elements of security in place here. For example, only a single terminal has access to these files and that terminal is monitored by cameras, and by a physical person logging the comings and goings. And even then, as mentioned above, that is just another person (or two) to cut in. Remember that the stakes are very high here.

I know this sounds ridiculous, but human nature will find a way. All you can do is make the element of risk so great that it no longer becomes a worthwhile risk to take.

I do agree with the theme of your statements generally; that is, the protections are in place. Of course, if it is being so well-protected, how did this pick6 thing happen?

I am just pointing out that there is nothing which is foolproof and the tracks MUST come up with a system that convinces us (the bettors) that things are straight. Just saying it is so, especially in light of the recent crookedness, and even more so by their obvious attempt to deny that there was wrongdoing.

I do not believe that all is well, as Lou M. illustrated by his statement. And I recall other people on this board telling similar stories of tickets being punched after the bell.

I challenge the people who run the system to pay a significant bonus to people on the inside to tell them how to defeat the existing security measures. Make it legally worth their while. Then have those measures fixed and offer the reward again. When the guys on the inside run out of ideas, then you MIGHT have a secure system.

Just my opinion.

Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[karlskorner]

Prior to BC Day, I would have accepted the above as Gospel. If I had written on this Board the day before BC Day how the Pick 6 could be taken down or any of the other schemes that are being revealed, could happen, I would be bombarded about all the safety measures in place.

Sorry, but a part of my education included "where there is a will, there is a way" if man can build it, he can take it apart.

[rrbauer]

cj
RE: wyoming otb
How a ticket payment with a time-stamp after the stop-betting signal would be paid and settled would depend on what arrangement the wyo otb had with the host track. If you indeed bought such a ticket; and, it won; and, they paid you, then their arrangement must've been to pay late tickets and settle them out of the otb's account, not the race pool.

[rrbauer]

It's really working (I have on my "Yeah, Right!" t-shirt)!

Watched a race from Turfway today while waiting for the 3rd at HOL. They close their pools early at Turfway.

The 2nd fav, #4 was 9/2 when they broke. At the 3/8ths pole it got the lead and the odds went to 4-1. At the 8th pole with it 3 lengths in front the odds went to 7/2.

Are you really warm and fuzzy since they started this early pool closing? It the odds are still going to change, then what's the point?

[cj]

Turfway is doing it different than CD, Crc, and Hoosier. They are closing pools once the first horse loads into the gate. Totally pointless IMHO. If they wait this long, might as well wait until off time.

CJ

[aaron]

Today at Aquduct may have been worse with late money than previous.The midday double went from about $130.00 to $60.00 after betting was closed.The winner of the 7th race went from 16-1 to 11-1 after betting was closed.Nothing has changed,if anything it has become more obvious that some person or syndicate is betting with an advantage.

[Tom]

Originally posted by aaron

The midday double went from about $130.00 to $60.00 after betting was closed.....Nothing has changed,if anything it has become more obvious that some person or syndicate is betting with an advantage.

Anything I would say about most racing being on the up and up and not crooked I would never say about NYRA. I honestly believe that the NYRA races are more crooked than anywhere else. The stewards historically have allowed illegal drug use, illegal shoe use, and who knows what else. The biggest crooks in the trainer hall of shame operated out of NYRA.
To me, it the most minor league circuit in the country. A few big races a year don't make up for the daily drivel and garbage.
JMHO, but NYRA sucks.

[GameTheory]

Originally posted by aaron
Today at Aquduct may have been worse with late money than previous.The midday double went from about $130.00 to $60.00 after betting was closed.The winner of the 7th race went from 16-1 to 11-1 after betting was closed.Nothing has changed,if anything it has become more obvious that some person or syndicate is betting with an advantage.

After *betting* was closed or after the race started? And how long after?

The odds will of course change after betting closes as long as they have a 45-60 second delay to update the pools. That isn't going to change until they upgrade their computer networks, which probably won't be anytime soon (even if they bought the equipment today, it would still take them a while to get it installed, configured, etc.).

Despite the recent developments, I find it distressing how quickly people jump to the "certainty" that past-posting is going on with no evidence.

Don't be so quick to paint yourself a victim -- it just gives you an excuse for losing.

[aaron]

The horse that went off 11-1 was 16-1 0n the screen during the first call of the race.As for the DD I was told by charters that the bet was impossiable to pick before the race started.As for your comment about past posting-I have no idea about whats going on with the money being transferred.All I'm saying is that stopping the betting with the first horse entering the gate does not change anything. Its done just for perception.I would have been satisfied if everything was left as is.
The big bettors will find a way to get their bets in at the last possiable moment,so whats the point of the change?

[PaceAdvantage]

Well, last weekend at AQUEDUCT (aka NYRA), I personally saw TWO winning horses whose odds WENT UP during the running of the race. BUT, you guys didn't post complaining about those horses. Wonder why??


==PA

[aaron]

I'm not complaining,just stating a fact that the moves made by the tracks to change when betting stops has absolutely no effect on the odds.
Also,if you follow NYRA the money that shows after betting is stopped produces much more winners whose price drops than whose price goes up.Just a fact,not a complaint.

[cj]

Originally posted by PaceAdvantage
Well, last weekend at AQUEDUCT (aka NYRA), I personally saw TWO winning horses whose odds WENT UP during the running of the race. BUT, you guys didn't post complaining about those horses. Wonder why??


==PA

On the selections page, I did note that a horse myself and NYRAcapper selected who won went from 7-1 to 8-1 during the race, then almost paid 9-1, only 20 cents short. Noone responded!

CJ

[so.cal.fan]

As long as you have over 25% of the pools coming in electronically, there are going to be changes.
The ONLY way to stop it........no electronic wagering.......all "hard" tickets. I doubt anyone would go for that, either.
So......the tote companies and the tracks have got to upgrade and foolproof their systems, so they can regain trust with the bettors.

[Tom]

Originally posted by so.cal.fan
As long as you have over 25% of the pools coming in electronically, there are going to be changes.
The ONLY way to stop it........no electronic wagering.......all "hard" tickets. I doubt anyone would go for that, either.
So......the tote companies and the tracks have got to upgrade and foolproof their systems, so they can regain trust with the bettors.

What do mean "regain?"
That assumes that they once had our trust.

[rrbauer]

game theory wrote:
Don't be so quick to paint yourself a victim -- it just gives you an excuse for losing.

Comment:
I agree 100%. Blame the jockey, blame the trainer, blame the owner, blame the assistant starters, blame the post position, blame the track maintenance crew, blame the stewards, blame the crooks who are betting on the winner.....BUT....NEVER blame the guy in the mirror who bought the losing ticket!

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally posted by rrbauer
BUT....NEVER blame the guy in the mirror who bought the losing ticket! [/B]

Well, we can't entirely lay the system blameless, as we all saw in November with the BC Pick 6. There IS/was? cheating going on, we all know that now.

However, I don't readily subscribe to the theory that there are people out there betting WPS after the gates open, or even after the race is over.


==PA

[so.cal.fan]

Richard is right. Look to your own error before you look to crookedness, however, if it is obvious, we must address it.
I like to be a trusting person, but I still lock my car and take my keys with me when I go to a parking lot.

[GameTheory]

Regarding closing betting when horses go into the gate: You're right, that is completely pointless. Either they should do it the old way or close them early enough so that ALL bets will be in and odds will be LOCKED & GUARANTEED when the race starts. Anything in the middle doesn't increase confidence and just annoys people.

About odds drops on winners: any time the odds drop for one horse, they're going up on some other horse(s). They will go down more often on winners than on losers for the same reason favorites win a lot -- the public tends to bet much more on the winners. Nothing suspicious about it. Do a study of odds BEFORE post time and note which horses drop and which horses go up. Droppers win more.

[cj]

One other reason it is bad:

Its not working! I was able to make a bet at Aqu today through BRISBet AFTER the screen was flashing WAGERING CLOSED for a good 15 seconds. I then hit submit, and my bet went in...unfortunately for me, I lost, but someone explain this one to me. If anything, I'm delayed a few seconds watching TVG on satellite.

CJ

[BillW]

Originally posted by cjmilkowski
One other reason it is bad:

Its not working! I was able to make a bet at Aqu today through BRISBet AFTER the screen was flashing WAGERING CLOSED for a good 15 seconds. I then hit submit, and my bet went in...unfortunately for me, I lost, but someone explain this one to me. If anything, I'm delayed a few seconds watching TVG on satellite.

CJ

Remember, this is to give the perception of things being on the up and up. Doesn't mean it has any affect on reality at all. :rolleyes:

Bill

[GameTheory]

Maybe it is only closing in a "advisory" way? If we could just encourage everyone to voluntarily not bet after 3 MTP...

[Tom]

1. The system is flawed - it was bastardized on B-Cup day big
time.
2. It has not been fixed.
3. This is an industry that cannot agree on the same color saddle
cloths. It is run by "great minds"
4. This is the industry that gave us the Florida timers-HoBoy!

What , since B-Cup Day has occurred fix a flawed system?
If scrutiny is now on P4 and P6, then why not win wagers?
I think it is THEM, not us who need to provide proof or evidence.
But then, I am still waiting for NAFTA to do something to help the sport. And waiting, and waiting, and waiting,,,,,,,Zzzzzzzzzzz

(And until I see it, I have scaled back my betting by about 90% )
And NO NYRA betting other than mind bets here.
I figure if it is crooked, it has to be happening in NY.

[aaron]

My point was that this change was basically useless.I also find it interesting that it is not working with Brisbet.I have collected higher odds on longshots after betting was stopped.The problem with the system is on races where you are looking for a certain price you have to guess which way the odds will go at the end.There is nothing worse than seeing your 5/2 shot go off 7/5 and lose.I very really bet anything less than 2/1,so this type of bet relly seems to annoy me.Don't get me wrong it has worked out that I sometimes cash bets I would not have made,but on the whole I'd rather not be put in that position.

[GameTheory]

Originally posted by aaron
My point was that this change was basically useless.I also find it interesting that it is not working with Brisbet.I have collected higher odds on longshots after betting was stopped.The problem with the system is on races where you are looking for a certain price you have to guess which way the odds will go at the end.There is nothing worse than seeing your 5/2 shot go off 7/5 and lose.I very really bet anything less than 2/1,so this type of bet relly seems to annoy me.Don't get me wrong it has worked out that I sometimes cash bets I would not have made,but on the whole I'd rather not be put in that position.


It is the delay in reporting that is getting you -- it has nothing to do with when they stop the betting. They could stop it ten minutes before the race and the odds would still be dropping at nine minutes before the race because of the delay to update the odds/pool totals. Even if they lock in the odds before the race starts, you'll never ever be guaranteed that the odds will be what they were when you placed your bet -- that's just the nature of the pari-mutuel system. You could better estimate those odds if the delay was shorter and you bet at the very last second, but there will always be a big influx of money at the last minute, and therefore odds changes.

Making that guess as to where the odds will go is not part of the problem -- it is part of the puzzle of handicapping a race and turning that analysis into profit via betting. You've got to get good at guessing...

[aaron]

Game Theory, Good point guessing what the odds will be is part of the puzzle.From experience,I would say I guess right about 95% of the time on which way the board will go and also agree there very little that can be done about the odds changing after the pools are closed.
I guess what really bothers me is why they are changing things that mean nothing,and improve nothing.
Odds have always changed radically from my early days at Yonkers Raceway till the present.In the days before simulcasting it was easier to watch the board for changes.
If the tracks really wanted to control the changing of odds to some extent they would have to stop off track betting with about 2 minutes to post,thus giving an advantage to on track bettors.

[Derek2U]

In Todays 9th, I keyed #4 on top, #11 & 10 under, and #1,
for the Super in slots 3 & 4. Now I am not complaining, but to my amazement, when they were in the gate, #11 was 5:1; coming down the stretch he became 5:2. I suppose this lack of modern
computers -- or modern connections -- is getting me annoyed.

[rrbauer]

I'm not sure when this started. I just noticed it on Sunday. Hollywood has changed the superimposed graphic that shows the program numbers & saddle-cloth colors on their live TV feed and has stopped showing the odds during the race.

[Dave Schwartz]

And once again we have the tracks trying to solve THEIR problem instead of the REAL problem.

The real problem (IMHO) is that there MIGHT be a past-post problem.

The track is addressing that the public PERCEIVES a past-post problem. If they can remove their perception by not letting the public see it until it is way too late, the problem will go away.

What is wrong with these people? Do they not understand that the integrity of the wagering matters beyond public relations?

Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[LOU M.]

Simple solution,add 5 minutes between races and close the pools 5 minutes before post to have all wagers recorded.People are just in the habit of waiting till the last minute. Put a clock on the screen like they have in the NFL,NBA so everyone is informed of the closure.The odds will still change after betting has closed but prior to the race being run.ALL TRACKS MUST AGREE TO DO THIS.It wouldn't cost anyone anything( except the past posters).

[highnote]

This whole thing about NYRA stopping simulcast betting when the first horse enters the gate makes no sense to me. And then to let on-track bettors bet until the gates open makes even less sense.

Why not just have a countdown clock and then stop betting at one minute before the first horse enters the gate? I don't see what the big deal is. If all U.S. tracks could agree on the same standard everyone would be better served.

What if every NBA team changed the rules to suit their venue? (Although, I think various MLB teams can have different rules because of the configuration of the stadium - not sure if that's true, though?) But in general the rules are standard. It would be chaos otherwise - which is what horse racing is in, right now.

[highnote]

Making my last post got me to thinking that perhaps the NTRA should have powers similar to a league office. Any track that is a member should follow certain standards -- saddle cloths, betting cutoff times, takeout & breakage, etc.

Things have gotten better over the last few years, but there is room for much improvement.

I'm sure that "takeout" would be difficult to regulate because each state regulates the pari-mutuel industry. But perhaps NTRA should be lobbying states to bring the industry to more uniformity.

I've read about Hong Kong and it's seems like they're light years ahead in many respects. They will soon have devices in saddle cloths that will help accurately record the time of each horse at certain intervals -- a pace handicappers dream.

[MikeDee]

s_john
Well now there are 2 of us that know what the NTRA should really be doing. They should be setting standards, that all member tracks and OTB outlets must follow or you are cut off from sending or receiving any simulcasting signals.

What if golf was like horseracing. Then everyone would make up their own rules as they go and the USGA would just be a bunch of cheerleaders on the side lines running commercials on TV.

They should set all the standards especially on wagering. There is no need for any cut off time except when the gate opens. All they need to do is to set standards that all bets are processcesed in real time, Shorten the cycle time and this whole issue of odds changing after the start will go away.

http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=13153

The following is from the above link:

In conjunction with the NTRA, officials from the Thoroughbred Racing Associations' 2020 Committee also announced the Committee's recommendation that the cancel delay time for pari-mutuel tickets be moved to zero seconds prior to post, so that late-cancelled tickets cannot delay the reporting of final pools and the posting of final odds. The Committee also advocated odds data transmissions cycle in 45 seconds or less and that odds cycles for each track -- including Standardbred, Quarter Horse, Greyhound, and Thoroughbred -- be posted at the TRA and NTRA Web sites.

[Tom]

Why not jsut make it a rule no cancels after you leave the window? And stop ALL betting 2 minutes to post. Once gate opens,. pools are frozen, no money can be added from anywhere. Put the onus of getting the money mingled and reported to the public on the tracks and simo outlets. Those that can't do it, too bad- go out of business. Or upgrade your equipment.
this is multi-million (billion?) dollar industry - it is time for them to start acting like it, not the pathetic ignorance we have had so far.

And,, please!!!! NO new power to NTRA - would you give a two-year old a shot gun to watch the house while you were out shopping?

[MikeDee]

Tom, sorry but you need a governing body to set the same rules for everyone. A single authority, with teeth, that can pull the plug on the life blood of the guys that won't conform, the simulcast signal.

Without a single authority you have just what you have now every track and OTB doing just want they want to do with no consistency on when the machines close how frequently they cycle the bets, when they close the pools and on and on. Every time you want to change something you have to form a committee and water the rules down to the lowest common denominator to get consensus. Time for a change.

[highnote]

Mike,
I agree with you. The biggest problem is that individual tracks or associations don't want to give up their power.

There's an old saying: "Power isn't given. It's taken." If NTRA want to have more control then they may to resort to using some strong arm tactics. Or else they must prove so damn useful that by not joining tracks would feel they are making a mistake.

js

[hurrikane]

Friday I was at the simulcast and had some interesting experiences

7th at Aqu.. #7 Grisham was 9-1 entering the gate..won paying at 12-1

3rd at the FG. #9 Warren Classic entered the gate at 10-1. finished paying 13-1.

Outside of that I did'nt really notice any big changes at the tracks I played.

I did see odds drop on 2 races at CRC after post but what got me was poor payouts on the triples. I don't think one paid over 300 and that's pretty low for CRC.

Maybe it's just the way I play that I don't see the odds dropping all that much. You would'nt find me on at 9/5 shot unless he was in a triple.

I guess what get me is this has been happening for years. Most people I know that play don't really care because in the long run they get as many going up as going down.

The real issue for me is security. They need to lock this up and have several eyes on it 24/7.
Unfortunately I think what they are doing is waiting to see if we will go away so they can get back to 'business as usual'.

[rrbauer]

Except for the Triple Crown and the Breeders' Cup there's not a lot of "National" interest in horse racing. It's a regional thing. Because of that it's easy to understand why the NTRA has been ineffective; and, also because of that it's easy to understand why many tracks either don't join; or, do so reluctantly.

What can the NTRA do for the tracks in Louisiana or Iowa or Arizona? Those people know their market better than some guys from Madison Avenue and Maryland do. And if the NTRA starts getting pushy with member tracks, it runs the risk of getting told to kiss-off when membership renewal time rolls around.

When the NTRA first came into being it was being touted as a "commissioner's" office, like the NFL or NBA or Major League Baseball. Those models aren't appropriate for the horse racing industry. Some tracks can't do things that others do because of state laws. Look at the medication issue for example. Look at the California Workmen's Comp issue. Racing makes no money from television, in fact it has to get corporate sponsors or some other subsidy to pay for air time. What's the average price these days of a Yankee or Red Sox ticket? $25? How many tracks can get $25 for their "best" seats let alone their "average" seat? 80% of the horse owners lose money in racing so that's another subsidy in operation just to put on the show.

And, if you recall, when the BC fix-six came to light the original impetus for tote reform came as a result of a joint initiative from Magna, NYRA and CDSN; not, the NTRA. How many horseplayers are on the NTRA board? (Or, for that matter, on any race-track ownership board?)

The NTRA is a failed concept. IMHO....

[ranchwest]

Richard Bauer,

This is a little off topic, but you compared horse racing to other sports.

I think one of the problems that horse racing has is that people are accustomed to watching teams or individuals over a long term and are unable to readily identify with the constant state of change in competitors in horse racing.

When I start talking with people who are not into horse racing, almost invariably their first conclusion is that I follow particular horses. Most people I know do not follow a particular horse, especially not beyond one or two races, so this concept is something the general public doesn't identify with.

Maybe that's one area the NTRA might better address, fan education. "Go, baby, go" is cute, but pretty shallow.

[rrbauer]

At the Seabiscuit thing at Santa Anita a couple weeks ago, a lady asked me who my favorite horse was. I answered, "Kelso, although he was a gelding." Her reply, "What's a gelding?"

(I won't take this any farther!)



:)

[MikeDee]

I don't think that the people in racing understand their product. It is no longer just a track or a group of tracks that can make their own rules and do their own thing and thumb their noses at everyone else. It has become, like or not, a international racing network, where people from anywhere can bet any race any time.

They have to accept the fact that in order to make this work and grow they need to have an overall ruling body, for their own good and the growth of the sport they have to give up local rules.

All tracks, big and small have to have simulcast money to survive. Every time you see a news item with the meet results the story is the same, on site attendance is down, but revenues are up due to increases in simulcast wagering.

All it will take is for Magna, NYRA, CSDN and NTRA to sign an agreement. No one will get signals from these tracks unless, first join the NTRA and abide by all the NTRA rules and agree to NTRA audits. This would apply to OTB sites as well as tracks. If you do not join the club and abide by the rules, no NTRA track will accept your signal and you cannot get signals from NTRA tracks. The only exceptions is that tracks must abide by the commission rules in their state, just like they do now.

All tracks will have to join and follow the rules or they will go out of business. How long would a NFL team be in business if they refused to follow the NFL rules? If they want to really make a change, the gang of four (magna, NYRA, NTRA and CDSN) can make this happen.

[Tom]

What is needed is something akin to ISO9000 or QS9000 - a set of buiness operating standards with third party auditing twice a year. But I don't think NYRA is the body to take on anything. Perhaps the few knowledgeable horse people need to set the standards and then lest professional audting firms take the ball.
I agree we need consitency, but consitenly good not consistently bad.

[hdcper]

Hurricane,

Glad to see you are experiencing improved payoffs in some of your wagers. I noticed two yesterday that are on the opposite side of the scale.

The 7th race at Fairgrounds was won by the 8 horse, as they ran the race all the way around to entering the stretch the monitor reflected odds of 5/1 (and I had several other players watch the replay to verify I was correct). The final odds were 5/2 and the horse returned $7.80 to win.

At Aqueduct the winner of the 9th was 5. Just before the race started both a friend and myself bet this horse to win which reflected 6/1 on the monitor. However, as the gate opened the moniter indicated the horse was at 2/1 and returned $6.70. In this case, the odds didn't change during the race on the monitor. But New York pools are large and a major share of the pool must have been input very close to the pools closing for this to occur.

I feel just for integrity, the odds must be finalized and reflected on the screen prior to opening the gate. Whether late betting is going on after the gate opens is the issue and the racing industry must take the publics perspective serously. Whether the game is on the up and up is one thing, but to make their customer wonder when it can easily be fixed is just ignorance.

Hdcper

[so.cal.fan]

I can think of several thoughtful men on this forum who would be excellent in heading something like NTRA.
Richard Bauer immediately comes to mind.
Why is it that most of us get it and THEY do not?????:confused: :confused: :confused:

[hdcper]

Another thing I forgot to mention. Several of us spoke with the management of Tup about the perception of odds changing as the horses ran around the track.

So their solution was simple, they stopped showing the odds on the monitor as the race ran. Guess they think we basically are stupid. Now we have to review the tote board to see the changes after the race starts. Guess their next solution will be to remove the dollars and odds from the track odds board, rather than address the issue (By the way, they see no reason to change the late money situation).

Well maybe if enough of us stop betting into the 20% take on win tickets, they won't have any reason to worry about late money or any money for that matter.

Hdcper

[MikeDee]

The TUP management response is typical, their view always seems to be "what is the cheapest cosmetic fix that we can get away with to get these people to stop complaining" ?

[LOU M.]

What would be an appropriate amount of time to post all of the wagers from around the country. It would be impossible to not have some lag time.Phone lines, lasers ,whatever. We all know a 6f sprint is over in less than 72 secs.If 30 secs. was the norm ,the race is still almost half over. Is there tech. out there that could be any faster?As long as the owners derive their income from how much is wagered, nothing that hindrers that will happen. They don't care about anything else.

[LOU M.]

What would be an appropriate amount of time to post all of the wagers from around the country. It would be impossible to not have some lag time.Phone lines, lasers ,whatever. We all know a 6f sprint is over in less than 72 secs.If 30 secs. was the norm ,the race is still almost half over. Is there tech. out there that could be any faster?As long as the owners derive their income from how much is wagered, nothing that hindrers that will happen. They don't care about anything else.

[Zaf]

They are not very motivated to make changes. They know that not one single degenerate is going to boycott their product. Handle may be slightly down, but it will be back.

Most industries have customers that will leave if lack of good service and perception of fraud exist. Not this one. They got us by the balls. Degenerates will show up every day.

This one won't boycott, love my action.

ZAFONIC

[CapperLou]

hdcpr:

I played the #5 in the 9th at Aqueduct Sunday too. I thought I was getting 6-1 and I dutched Harley Quinn with #10 Honorifico, which was a longshot.

Yes, I made money on the race, but how do you think I felt when after watching the lousy a/v on bris; after I was able to see the odds again--I was shocked to see the 2-1. Darn; all of this stinks as I have mentioned before.

I'll repeat what I posted near the beginning of this thread--the people at IBM were shocked at what they saw when they tried to bid/put a system together for the industry. The industry is archaic where systems are concerned because it has a good ole boys network of providers and--as Zafonic indicated--they probably don't give a darn and don't want to spend the money necessary to correct all of this.

In plain words: It Is SHOCKING---what other business could be run like this and get away with it---nuff said--I'm getting a headache.

CapperLou

[ranchwest]

One of the problems is that everyone wants to be the last to bet. Well, I'm sorry, someone has to bet before someone else before someone else.... Maybe the track should sell everyone who wants one a $100 coin and you could use it one time a day to bet after everyone else has been cut off. Would that make everyone happy?

[formula_2002]

I have done the following thousands of times and find it quite effective.

With 2 min to post, calculate your picks exacta pool odds.
It will generally indicate a truer picture of the final odds.

Try it with 1 min to post and it gets closer to the final odds.
Your pick could be 1-1 in the win pool with 2 min to post, and 3/5 in the exacta pool....the final odds will be closer to 3/5...

exacta pool odds are calculated by summing 2/ex odds for each exacta combination. That will give you the win % in the exacta pool. then (1/%)-1 will give you the dollar odds.

[MikeDee]

LouM
I spent my work life in the telephone industry. By comparison telephone switching equipment is simply a big computer keeping track of all the connections. It runs a program that it must cycle through over and over. These programs run through their cycle in nano seconds. A minute is an very long time in real time telephone switching. by comparison the racing industry cycles bet in minute intervals.

I think 15 or 30 second interval would be good enough. If 15 seconds were used for example then the bets made in the last 15 seconds before the close of betting would not be reflected in the pools so the final odds could change, but hopefully they wouldn't change that much since almost all wagers would be in the pool.

The other thing that has to be done is the odds board must change more often then it does. It does no good to update the pools more often if you are not going to display the information to the public. Some racing suits have said that if the tote board changing to often would be to confusing to us bettors.

Probably the real truth is that if they displayed these changing odds during the last min of wagering, more and more people would try to wait to place their wagers, thereby increasing the number of people who get shut out or decide to pass the race due to odds dropping. They don't want that to happen, they want your money in the pools. I know myself that if I liked a horse at 5 or 6 to 1, and I saw it drooping to 3-1 or 5-2 in the last minute I would pass the race.

[formula_2002]

CORRECTION TO MY POST.

CALCULATING THE EXACTA POOL WIN ODDS FOR THE PICK IS;

SUM ALL PICK COMBINATIONS 2/(PROBABLE EXACTA PAY OFF FOR A $2 EXACTA )='A'
THEN (1/A)-1= EXACTA POOL "WIN ODDS"

[tanda]

Formula:

Is is not easier to add all the money wagered on exacta combinations with a particular horse in the one hole and divide by the total exacta pool?

So, if the #2 entry has $11,000 bet on the combinations with it in the win hole and the total pools is $100,000, then 11% of the exacta pool is wagered on that horse to win.

[formula_2002]

Tanda, two things.
first, you are correct it would be easier. However I would suggest that the $100,000 exacta pool total be diminished by the take-out, say 20%. so the $11,000/$80,000= .1375% or 6-1.

Then it can better be compared to the win pool odds which also reflect the track take-out.

Second, I have never seen an exacta board indicating $$ wagered on each combination...

I scan in the exacta matrix on the bris tote board and then run
it through some programs i wrote. That board, as any other board I have seen, indicates probable payout to $2.00

Regards
Joe M

[rrbauer]

Mike Dee wrote:
...All it will take is for Magna, NYRA, CSDN and NTRA to sign an agreement....

That's all it would take? Heck we can get this done this morning and still make the first race. :)

[andicap]

Originally posted by formula_2002
CORRECTION TO MY POST.

CALCULATING THE EXACTA POOL WIN ODDS FOR THE PICK IS;

SUM ALL PICK COMBINATIONS 2/(PROBABLE EXACTA PAY OFF FOR A $2 EXACTA )='A'
THEN (1/A)-1= EXACTA POOL "WIN ODDS"

I flunked math. Can you run through an actual example for me.

thanks:confused:

[formula_2002]

Andy

Laurel, todays 3rd race
the 3 horse is 6/5 in the win pool (4 min. to post)

exacta probables divided into 2 as follows

2/171 = .0116
2/15 =.1333
2/96 =.0208
2/53 =.0377
2/12 =.1666
2/140 =.0142
2/190 = .0105

sum = .3942

1/.3942 = 2.50

2.50-1 = dollar odds of 1.50
So the 3 horse is 1.20-1 in the win pool and 1.50 in the exacta pool.

final win odds turned out to be 1.30-1 and, as it would happen. won.
Regards
Joe M

[andicap]

Thanks,
you wouldn't be Joe M. from the old Prodigy board would you?

[hdcper]

Formula 2002,

I find a slight concern in your means of calculating the win odds based on the exacta pool. Without applying the take in your formula the sum figure is somewhat inflated and results in an error in the true probability of the horse's win expectation. Thus the odds calculation is also inaccurate.

I will try to explain my concern with an example.

Consider the race has only four horses entered to make it as simple as possible. Say horse A is the favorite, B the second favorite, C the third favorite and D the longshot. Looking at the exacta pool we find the following payoffs on each combo:

AB 7.50
AC 15.00
AD 30.00
BA 10.00
BC 15.00
BD 30.00
CA 15.00
CB 30.00
CD 30.00
DA 30.00
DB 30.00
DC 30.00

This is based on a $1000 exacta pool and a take of 25%, or $750 being returned to the public. So for example, AB has $200 wagered on it of the $1000 pool, but because of take the payoff is $750/100(# of tickets) = $7.50 for each $2 ticket.

Anyway, if we calculate the exacta probabilities like you suggested for say horse A we get the following:

2/7.5 + 2/15 + 2/30 which is equivalent to

.2667 + .1333 + .0667 = .4667 which coverts to odds of

(1/.4667) - 1 =1.14

Further, if we calculate the other three horses the same way the exacta probabilities are as follows:

Horse B .4000
Horse C .2667
Horse D .2000

If we add all four together the probability = 1.3334 rather than 1.00(or 100%)

Problem lies in the factor that the take reduces the return from $1000(the pool) to $750(based on a 25% exacta take).

Obviously, this can be corrected and for ease of calculation a excel spreadsheet can be easily built to calculate the probabilities and odds.

Hopefully this makes sense,

Hdcper

[formula_2002]

Per your reply

"Horse B .4000
Horse C .2667
Horse D .2000

If we add all four together the probability = 1.3334 rather than 1.00(or 100%)"

Don't forget that we are comparing the exacta pool odds to the win pool odds. Depending on the track take the sum of
1/(odds+1) in the win pool which could equal 1.20.

If the exacta pool and win pool takes are the same, what I pose is closer to the truth.
As the spreads betweet the two pool take-outs increase, the compariason between the win and exacta pool win % becomes less accurate.
However, emperically speaking, I find what I'm saying works well if you are interested in seeing if your 3-1 shot at 2 min to post will become 2-1 final , or will it go to 4-1.

Thanks for your comments.
They were well written and very clear. I only hope I have done as well.

[andicap]

Whoa, all this math -- this place is starting to look like the Derby List. :D :confused: :eek:

[hdcper]

PA or whomever,

I was trying to attach a zipped spreadsheet that would calculate Formula 2002's figures. I used the attachment box below in the reply section but it does not appear once I submit my reply to the board.

I know I must be doing something wrong, but have no idea what it is. Thus, I deleted the post and thought maybe someone could put the directions for providing access to this attachment in laymens terms and I will try again tonight.

Hdcper

[hurrikane]

actually I think PA has to physically approve all attachments. If you attached it it should go to him and he will add it later.
I think that is how it works here.

[cj]

If anything, New York is worse than ever. The 5 went in the gate in the first today at 6-1, and then dropped to 2-1 as he took the lead on the backstretch. He dropped out of the race soon after. 6-1 to 2-1 is a HUGE drop for a large track.

CJ

[formula_2002]

WERE YOU ABLE TO CALCULATE HIS EXACTA POOL WIN ODDS.?
TRY IT AT 2 MIN TO POST AND AGAIN AT 1 MIN TO POST

[cj]

I did not, but I do know the 5-6 actually would have paid only $25, even less than a 6-5 which was $28. These also dropped quite a bit after the bell.

CJ

[formula_2002]

my 3 horse in the 5th at lrl is 5/2 in the exacta pool and 6/5 in the win pool.

2 min to post

horse should drift up to 2-1 in the win pool, else everone is pounding my pick in the win pool (lol)

Joe M

[formula_2002]

the beast wins as the 3/2 favorite after being 5-1 on the morning line.

Unfortunately , at this time I eliminate favorites from my pick list.

[hdcper]

Thanks Hurrricane, I will attach it and see if PA puts it up for the taking.

Hdcper

[PaceAdvantage]

Yes...I've been slow this week....whole vacation thing going on...LOL

I haven't been on vacation in about 3 years.....LOLBT



==PA

[Tom]

Originally posted by so.cal.fan
Why is it that most of us get it and THEY do not?????:confused: :confused: :confused:

Because "they" are too busy counting "our" money.