Is racing no match for the best hacker?

[Imriledup]

Imagine this conversation:

You: "so, what do you think about the racing industry wagering security, do you think you can bet races after the start and maybe bet a pick 6 after a few legs have been complete?"

Best Hacker in the World, "absolutely not. The racing industry is the gold standard. I've hacked Nasa, the US Govt, Microsoft but ooh boy, that racing industry i can't do anything with them, they're foolproof"

Do you think BHITW's response would be what i wrote above? Or, do you think he'd laugh :lol: and say the racing industry wagering security is non existant?

The Chris Harn scandal in the BC Pick 6 was only uncovered by flukey longshots. And, not only that, but it was uncovered because they were dumb in their structuring of the tickets. If they had a real savvy bettor guiding them, that person would have told them that this thing, after Domedriver, was going to pay at least 100k no matter what happened later, they could have bought some losing horses early on and made it 'look good'.

It was a total fluke these guys were caught. They basically caught themselves, the racing industry had nothing to do with it.

Steve Crist wrote an interesting article in Sunday's (July 29, 2007) DRF about wagering security.

Every bet i make i wonder if i'm being fleeced with people skimming off the top a little at a time. Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

[fergie]

Not every bet, but we are all aware that the world has changed.
Fergie

[boomman]

Imriledup wrote:It was a total fluke these guys were caught. They basically caught themselves, the racing industry had nothing to do with it.


Riled: They TOTALLY caught themselves! Even after making up a $6 ticket with singles on each longshot to draw attention to themselves, the director of mutuels at the Hub they placed the bet in (by phone) SWORE they had done nothing wrong! Then they got ridiculously short jail sentences after they were convicted! The question of wagering security is always a valid one and we need to be able to convince the public without question that the pools are inheritently safe. It is always suspicious to the public when a horse has a big lead in the stretch and consistently drops in odds...the drop could be legitimate with late money prior to the race, but it's the perception that is the problem. PTC has installed the RCI Integrity software that pinpoints the exact timestamp of every wager that is made that effectively eliminates and chance of past posting. That is certainly a step in the right direction!

Boomer

[Ray]

Imriledup wrote:It was a total fluke these guys were caught. They basically caught themselves, the racing industry had nothing to do with it.


Riled: They TOTALLY caught themselves! Even after making up a $6 ticket with singles on each longshot to draw attention to themselves, the director of mutuels at the Hub they placed the bet in (by phone) SWORE they had done nothing wrong! Then they got ridiculously short jail sentences after they were convicted! The question of wagering security is always a valid one and we need to be able to convince the public without question that the pools are inheritently safe. It is always suspicious to the public when a horse has a big lead in the stretch and consistently drops in odds...the drop could be legitimate with late money prior to the race, but it's the perception that is the problem. PTC has installed the RCI Integrity software that pinpoints the exact timestamp of every wager that is made that effectively eliminates and chance of past posting. That is certainly a step in the right direction!

Boomer




I think the big scandal is not the breeder cup pick fix scndal but the fact that they continue to let this late odd changes to be a problem it infuruiates me to know in that one of the rare times I bet on a fav that the price gets hammered beyond recognition of any value the latest one for me i bet a horse at lone star (yes i know tiny pools) 5/2 i waited till ALL the horses where in the get barely getting the bet in the race goes off he win by 3 and i get a fat 3/5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS SHOULD NEVER EVER EVER HAPPEN. THIS NEEDS TO BE FIXED LIKE 10 YEARS AGO BUT ME SAYING THATIS LIKE :bang:

[betovernetcapper]

Just tried to access the Crist article and screen went blank. Tried with IE and got an error message. Enough to get the paranoia juices to start flowing. :)

I don't know how much past posting actually goes on but the appearance of it is rampant and I haven't heard anything from TrackNet that would inspire confidence.

On a national basis what may be more important is the use of horse racing to launder funds for drug cartels and terrorists. Paranoid maybe but until the industry is a little more transparent the notion is out there.

[point given]

Imriledup wrote:It was a total fluke these guys were caught. They basically caught themselves, the racing industry had nothing to do with it.


Riled: They TOTALLY caught themselves! Even after making up a $6 ticket with singles on each longshot to draw attention to themselves, the director of mutuels at the Hub they placed the bet in (by phone) SWORE they had done nothing wrong! Then they got ridiculously short jail sentences after they were convicted! The question of wagering security is always a valid one and we need to be able to convince the public without question that the pools are inheritently safe. It is always suspicious to the public when a horse has a big lead in the stretch and consistently drops in odds...the drop could be legitimate with late money prior to the race, but it's the perception that is the problem. PTC has installed the RCI Integrity software that pinpoints the exact
timestamp of every wager that is made that effectively eliminates and chance of past posting. That is certainly a step in the right direction!

Boomer





I predict that every track will switch to Trakus for one reason. That being, that it shows the correct running positions of the race, which is bettor friendly and also does NOT show the current odds of the horses. Right now the industry is calling attention to themselves by having the odds changing during the race. With Trakus, no odds , but correct horse positions. NOW, even with the strange suspicious drops of odds, the racing industry is doing virtually nothing to correct it or explain it when these instances are pointed out to them. They have rules in place ,but are not enforcing them as long as there is good churn, bettors be damned. They are ruining their own sport by letting the integrity of the game come into question and doing nothing about it.
You can ask the head of the NBA about integrity now after the referee scandal, or ask NY Gov. Spitzer about it after the light was shone on him by his scandal of using NY state police to investigate and log the state senate majority leader Joe Bruno. Spitzers shiny reputation isnot so golden anymore.

[PaceAdvantage]

I was watching Del Mar yesterday and they had the odds right underneath each Trackus horse at the bottom of the screen during the race....another conspiracy theory shot down in flames...

[bigmack]

another conspiracy theory shot down in flames...
Yeah, that was quite the caper. I ran into a couple of media guys from DMR on the course last week and mentioned that some folk wanted off odds. Good thing they added them or we'd be diggin' around a grassy knoll somewhere.

[BillW]

I was watching Del Mar yesterday and they had the odds right underneath each Trackus horse at the bottom of the screen during the race....another conspiracy theory shot down in flames...

I've heard a lot of complaints but no suggested solution. Could the network be faster? yes! but how can it be fixed such that everyones wager is the last one going into the pools such that the odds are guaranteed not to change? :bang: I guess we could switch to a bookie system with fixed odds.

[ponyplayerdotca]

I watched the first 6 races at Del Mar yesterday on the internet, and I didn't see any odds under the Trakus chiclets.

I just watched the rest of the replays at calracing.com, and they don't show any odds under the chiclets for those races either.

So, where oh where did YOU see odds under the chiclets PA?

Perhaps it's one of the ADW services adding them, not Del Mar?

[PaceAdvantage]

I was watching on TVG. It certainly looked like Trackus, as at the bottom of the screen, the numbers of every single horse in the race were listed (with odds), and their orders switched to mirror the action on the track. That's a Trackus thing, not a TVG thing as far as I can tell...

Also, there were NO "chicklets" like at Keeneland or Woodbine (where it also shows you how wide they are going). Perhaps Trackus has MULTIPLE feeds available, and TVG picked up the one that has a single row of horse numbers with their corresponding odds listed underneath....

[cj]

I've heard a lot of complaints but no suggested solution. Could the network be faster? yes! but how can it be fixed such that everyones wager is the last one going into the pools such that the odds are guaranteed not to change? :bang: I guess we could switch to a bookie system with fixed odds.

I think the vast majority of people understand that odds will change after they bet. The problem is when they change after the gate opens. They change after a 1/4 mile, they change after a 1/2 mile, and in a short race, they can even change after the finish.

Crist mentions a solution which is very simple. Close the race at a set time, then load the horses. It will take an adjustment by players, but after a fewing growing pains, it would be business as usual. These horses that burst out of the gate, and drop from 8 to 1 to 5 to 1 and win and pay $8.80 just smell funny. If it walks like a duck...

There is probably nothing going on, but why not just make it a certainty?

[ponyplayerdotca]

So, PA, if what you say is true, then only those with TVG have the privilege of on-screen odds during the running of a Del Mar race.

I guess those Del Mar relations guys are misinformed as the track itself is NOT displaying them on their own simulcast feed.

Why does the horseplayer's life have to be this hard? :D

TO ALL TRACKS WITH VIDEO FEEDS:

PUT THE DAMN ODDS ON THE SCREEN AND CLOSE ALL WAGERING BEFORE ALLOWING ANY HORSE TO LOAD IN THE GATE - STOP THIS LUNACY NOW!!!

(Too much? :p )

[Tom]

I'm sure they are right on it. By the 8th today, no doubt.:rolleyes:

[prank]

Has anyone seen a good reason why the tracks would not stop the wagering X minutes before the race begins? I have a feeling that that option was ruled out because wagering up to and after the race begins benefits them even more.

Then again, that's US tracks. Is it the same in HK and Japan?

[Dave Schwartz]

In HK and Japan the pools are so large as to be stable well-before post time.

I know someone who actaully bet $20k (US) on a horse in Japan that paid $117 (for $5). When he made the wager at 7 minutes to post the payoff was going to be $122.

That is the euqivilent of betting $20k on a 23:1 horse and having him drop only to 22:1.


BTW, I agree that the best thing for American racing would be if all the money had to be in the pool at a fixed post time. Only then should the horses be permitted to load the gate.


Dave

[maxwell]

Agreed. The pools should be closed when the horses reach the starting gate. It would keep the peace.

I think also that most people don't keep track of the odds leading up to a race. If a horse is 10/1 with 10 minutes to post and slowly drops down to 7/1 at post time, don't expect to get 7 or even 6/1 final odds. It helps to keep track of the direction the odds are going. Bettors would receive far fewer kicks in the rear.

[BillW]

Agreed. The pools should be closed when the horses reach the starting gate. It would keep the peace.

I think also that most people don't keep track of the odds leading up to a race. If a horse is 10/1 with 10 minutes to post and slowly drops down to 7/1 at post time, don't expect to get 7 or even 6/1 final odds. It helps to keep track of the direction the odds are going. Bettors would receive far fewer kicks in the rear.

The pools would have to be closed at such a time that the furthest outpost would have time to dump their wagers into the host pool. Which would mean the host track would have the longest wait between pool close and off time (I'm picturing trying to sell this to the highly insightful track management that we have in this country :lol: ). Finer granularity of the data dumps would aleviate some of this, but it would be critical that all entry points close their pools at the same time.

[Dave Schwartz]

Bill,

I could live with the logic that, if you are at the track, the pools stay open a little longer.

The point is that for racing to maintain (return to?) a reasonable level of integrity this must be addressed to the satisfaction of the wagering public.


Just my opinion.

Dave

[BillW]

Bill,

I could live with the logic that, if you are at the track, the pools stay open a little longer.

The point is that for racing to maintain (return to?) a reasonable level of integrity this must be addressed to the satisfaction of the wagering public.


Just my opinion.

Dave

I agree, the reality is that on track action in the last 45 seconds probably wouldn't make a difference. But since we are talking about appearance, appearing to favor one betting sector over another might be problematic.

[betovernetcapper]

I might be missing something here, but why not just cancel any bet that hasn't been tabulated when the bell rings/gates open. If this means that Al Qaeda or some drug lord has to wait till the next race in order to launder cash, I can live with that.

[Dave Schwartz]

BetOver,

What you are missing is that if someone in Lewiston, ME makes a wager on CD at precisely the same time as someone actually on track, it might take 50-60 seconds longer for his money to reach the pool.

This is what creates the perception of a problem. The reality of the problem is that either bettor might have actually wagered as much as 8 seconds after the gate opened.


Dave

[trigger]

Wagering Transmission Protocol(WTP):

"The product is a communication protocol which supports sending transactional detail information about retail pari-mutuel wagers to the host racetrack, and establishes a “host in control” wagering environment. Use of the protocol will enable the pari-mutuel industry to migrate from the current “store and forward” pool transmission model to systems that verify wagers at the point of sale, and simultaneously record this information at the host racetrack."

http://www.ustrotting.com/absolutenm/anmviewer.asp?a=17366&z=1

In their usual slow moving style, the racing industry has been working on this new protocol for about 5 years now (since P6 scandal). Last I saw , it is supposed to be operational in a year (or two). This process is supposed to eliminate the late odds change phenomenon.

[betovernetcapper]

It just seems that in a digital environment, bets placed at the same moment regardless of location should be entered into the pool at the same moment. I can understand a delay of a second or so but pretty much they should both be entered instantantly.

[point given]

Wagering Transmission Protocol(WTP):

"The product is a communication protocol which supports sending transactional detail information about retail pari-mutuel wagers to the host racetrack, and establishes a “host in control” wagering environment. Use of the protocol will enable the pari-mutuel industry to migrate from the current “store and forward” pool transmission model to systems that verify wagers at the point of sale, and simultaneously record this information at the host racetrack.

http://www.ustrotting.com/absolutenm/anmviewer.asp?a=17366&z=1

In their usual slow moving style, the racing industry has been working on this new protocol for about 5 years now (since P6 scandal). Last I saw , it is supposed to be operational in a year (or two). This process is supposed to eliminate the late odds change phenomenon.

Looks like they got 15 more years to work on it, if they follow the path of the FDA on insuring the safety of the drug supply in the US according to an investigative show I watched tonight. Fake drugs imported looking like the real thing going right thru customs and into your local drug store.

BUT - back to racing problems. A separate cutoff time for offtrack and ontrack while seemingly problematic would insure that the track made out better, if they gave a lower takeout for ontrack handle and a later cutoff time to when the gate opened. Imagine that , a reason to go to the track instead of wagering at home, lower take out and a better chance to get down a late bet. hey, anyone listenin' ? :cool:

[Kelso]

I've heard a lot of complaints but no suggested solution.


Then I'll try again:

Close off ALL wagering BEFORE the first horse goes in the gate.

Countdown ... visible on every tote board, betting machine, OTB and ADW ... synced by whatever server crunches the final odds/payouts. Count gets to zero - computer does its thing (however long that might take) and sends final numbers to the track - track posts them publicly and signals the gate manager to let 'em in.

We will load no horse before its time. :rolleyes:

[SMOO]

TO ALL TRACKS WITH VIDEO FEEDS:

PUT THE DAMN ODDS ON THE SCREEN AND CLOSE ALL WAGERING BEFORE ALLOWING ANY HORSE TO LOAD IN THE GATE - STOP THIS LUNACY NOW!!!

:ThmbUp:

[DJofSD]

Close off ALL wagering BEFORE the first horse goes in the gate.

And how is that going to fix anything?

What are you going to do if a horse is scratched at the gate?

[Dave Schwartz]

What are you going to do if a horse is scratched at the gate?

Back them out, re-open the pools and delay the race 5 minutes.

[DJofSD]

OK, so there's a cut off time for all of the pools to be finalized before the horses are loaded and the race is to be run. What if your selection is bet down. You don't like the final odds you're getting. The pools are closed. What can you do? You can't cancel your wager, you can't add to it, you can't bet your next choice.

I don't like it. It's just trying to turn a pig's ear into a silk purse.

[ryesteve]

OK, so there's a cut off time for all of the pools to be finalized before the horses are loaded and the race is to be run. What if your selection is bet down. You don't like the final odds you're getting. The pools are closed. What can you do? You can't cancel your wager, you can't add to it, you can't bet your next choice.
I agree with what you're saying. Move up the closing time, and the only difference is that when your horse goes from 3-1 to 7/5, it happens while they're loading, rather than when they're at the quarter pole. Sure, if you think there's cheating going on, this would put an end to that, but in terms of being able to use the odds board to make bet decisions, it makes no difference at all when the pool closes. The only thing that would help is if the off-site money is sent into the pools at the time the bets are placed, not dumped in all at once when the bell rings.

[Dave Schwartz]

DJ,

OK, so there's a cut off time for all of the pools to be finalized before the horses are loaded and the race is to be run. What if your selection is bet down. You don't like the final odds you're getting. The pools are closed. What can you do? You can't cancel your wager, you can't add to it, you can't bet your next choice.

I don't like it. It's just trying to turn a pig's ear into a silk purse.


The problems you just outlined are there now. That is the nature of parimuteul wagering.

The issue is integrity of the wagers themselves.

But, you are right... it is a "sow's ear" and it will never be a "silk purse."

Perhaps we can make it into a polyester purse? (Or else, give the ears to my dogs. They love 'em.) :D


Dave

[DJofSD]

The only thing that would help is if the off-site money is sent into the pools at the time the bets are placed, not dumped in all at once when the bell rings.

Exacta-mundo. The major complaint is about when the bet downs can be seen not when the bets that cause the drop are actually made.

[Dave Schwartz]

The only thing that would help is if the off-site money is sent into the pools at the time the bets are placed, not dumped in all at once when the bell rings.

Steve,

That is why I suggested the staggered cut-off times. However, addressing the issue geographically would just cause the off-shore players to migrate on shore - to the same place where you wager - solving no problem.

WHat would solve your problem would be to limit wager size after (say) 2 minutes to post. That certainly will not happen.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[trigger]

Steve,

That is why I suggested the staggered cut-off times. However, addressing the issue geographically would just cause the off-shore players to migrate on shore - to the same place where you wager - solving no problem.

WHat would solve your problem would be to limit wager size after (say) 2 minutes to post. That certainly will not happen.
Regards,
Dave Schwartz

Yes, the strict fixing of a cut-off time vs. the current "flexible" off times would also cause other "problems".
One would be that the CRW& batch-betting operations would then know exactly when the pools would close and be able to wait until the last possible seconds before processing their 1000's(100,000's?) of bets thereby probably creating more volatility in last minute odds changes than is now present. (Also, many individual bettors especially large bettors would probably do the same)
On the other hand, any advantage that the CRW/Batch operators now have by having the capability to process a large volume of bets near the "flexible" post time would probably be offset under a fixed cut-off scenario because with the huge magnitude of last second betting, the final odds would be much more difficult to determine.

[Dave Schwartz]

Trigger,

Personally, I have no problem with the fact that the large wagers change the final odds. That is simply enherant to the parimutuel system.

My sole purpose in suggesting this is to restore the integrity of racing that is being damaged by the odds appearing to change as a horse takes the lead.


Dave

[Imriledup]

Trigger,

Personally, I have no problem with the fact that the large wagers change the final odds. That is simply enherant to the parimutuel system.

My sole purpose in suggesting this is to restore the integrity of racing that is being damaged by the odds appearing to change as a horse takes the lead.


Dave

I think people realize that odds will continually change, what the problem is that it 'seems' like whenever they change, the winners always seem to go DOWN in price. You seldom see a speed horse go from 2-1 to 3-1 and go wire to wire, but you'd figure at some point, if it was all on the up and up, you'd see a situation where a winning speed horse went from 2-1 to 3-1 (or 3-1 to 4-1, etc.) and you never see it. Ever.

[PaceAdvantage]

I think people realize that odds will continually change, what the problem is that it 'seems' like whenever they change, the winners always seem to go DOWN in price.

Considering that the crowd as a whole is a pretty good handicapper, this shouldn't surprise you in the least....

[K9Pup]

Trigger,

My sole purpose in suggesting this is to restore the integrity of racing that is being damaged by the odds appearing to change as a horse takes the lead.




So how many of you guys DON'T wager because you think the "integrity" of racing has been damaged?

[Kelso]

So how many of you guys DON'T wager because you think the "integrity" of racing has been damaged?


Better question ... how many non-whales would win more if the system was completely transparent? Don't know the answer. Past time to find out, though.

[trigger]

Trigger,

Personally, I have no problem with the fact that the large wagers change the final odds. That is simply enherant to the parimutuel system.

My sole purpose in suggesting this is to restore the integrity of racing that is being damaged by the odds appearing to change as a horse takes the lead.
Dave

I understand, I am just pointing out that a fixed cut off time would create a new dynamic that could create an integrity issue(real or imagined) in the eyes of the betting public. As long as the fixed cut off method did not create an unintended advantage for a specific subset of bettors (like CRW type operators), I am all for it and it would eliminate the odds changing after the race starts.
Perhaps, the long awaited new Wagering Protocol will automatically solve this problem once(and if) it is implemented in a year or so.

[Dave Schwartz]

So how many of you guys DON'T wager because you think the "integrity" of racing has been damaged?

That's like asking, "If you aren't here, please raise your hand."

:lol:

[Kelso]

OK, so there's a cut off time for all of the pools to be finalized before the horses are loaded and the race is to be run.

Yup, a cut-off time ... just as there is now. Only difference is that EVERYONE would be allowed to know, in advance, exactly when that time would be for each race. Problem? :rolleyes:




What if your selection is bet down. You don't like the final odds you're getting. The pools are closed. What can you do? You can't cancel your wager, you can't add to it, you can't bet your next choice.

What happens to your bets now, when the odds change at the top of the damned stretch?!?!? You lose ... or maybe you win. Deal with it. (SHEESH!)




I don't like it. It's just trying to turn a pig's ear into a silk purse.

I like it. It's much more than simply cosmetic. It takes the mystery ... and perhaps the illegality ... out of what is now an unnecessarily suspect system.

[Imriledup]

Considering that the crowd as a whole is a pretty good handicapper, this shouldn't surprise you in the least....

The crowd is good and probably better than any individual bettor. However. If there IS someone betting after the start, its one guy betting 5k to win on the horse who gets the lead, not a 'collective' group of people betting 50 bucks.

I wonder if they can limit bet size after 1 mtp? Make it where you cant bet more than 1,000 to win after the clock says 0 mtp. If you wanna bet 20k, you have to bet it during the betting cycle.

Also, and this is another thing to consider.....big bettors know that if they want to bet 5 or 10 grand to win, they aren't going to wait till the last second to hammer in their money...the smartest bettors stagger their 10 grand so it doesn't come in all at once and gives the public a chance to adjust. If there's a horse who inherently should be 3-1 at post time and a big bettor LOVES this one to bet 10k, he can bet 2k first flash and then stagger his bets throughout the betting cycle. That way, he wont be hammering the horse from 3-1 to 8-5 i the last cycle. He can keep those odds depressed and get his 10k in the pool and let the other people bet on other horses who's odds are inflated b/c of this large player who's taking all the juice out of the one horse.

[K9Pup]

That's like asking, "If you aren't here, please raise your hand."

:lol:

Exactly!! That is my point. We ALL complain about these types of problems but we still come back. WE are sick.

[fergie]

I am, and have always been a long-shot player. Time was (15 or so years ago)
that I could make a bet on a horse that the public has pretty much overlooked and is going off at say 17-1, and be nicely surprised to see him come in at maybe 23-1 sometimes as laong as, say 29-1. This has now eroded to the point that I almost never see a horse going longer odds but instead almost always shorter. As a result I have curtailed my play greatly, and now play rarely, ( Mainly triple crown or BC days when there is a lot of unsophisticated money in the pools). Therefore you could inlude me in the group that has largely quit. Paranoia? Don't think so.Got to go. Will check your responses later.
Fergie

[SMOO]

Considering that the crowd as a whole is a pretty good handicapper, this shouldn't surprise you in the least....

The crowd also provides the early money. Or does the crowd's I.Q. get higher as post time (and the race itself) progresses?

[Millpond68]

My father worked a major track for 35 years at the $50.00 window and would always have bell ringers wanting to pay him to work with them. He had a choice of a flat daily tip or 10% of the winnings. He always chose the 10%because they usually had winning days. They worked in pairs, one would watch the start with binoculars and would signal the other, what horse to call. He would not stop for their bet if someone was in line. They would never complain if they were shut out and would also pay for all mistakes. They always were honest on their counts. In later years at a local harness track the mutuel manager removed all the TV monitors by the $50 section to discourage bell ringing. I do not go the track anymore as I bet on the internet but wonder if the bell ringing still goes on.

[PaceAdvantage]

The crowd also provides the early money. Or does the crowd's I.Q. get higher as post time (and the race itself) progresses?

The crowd is the crowd is the crowd. They are the best collective group of handicappers around. The lower the odds, the better the chance a horse has of winning, so it stands to matter that often times, the eventually winner of any particular race will see his odds go down by the end of betting.

Also, when you consider that at some tracks, a MAJORITY of the pool is coming into the tote later rather than sooner, then this phenomenon makes even MORE sense when approached from an objective rather than conspiratorial angle.

[K9Pup]

I am, and have always been a long-shot player. Time was (15 or so years ago)
that I could make a bet on a horse that the public has pretty much overlooked and is going off at say 17-1, and be nicely surprised to see him come in at maybe 23-1 sometimes as laong as, say 29-1. This has now eroded to the point that I almost never see a horse going longer odds but instead almost always shorter. As a result I have curtailed my play greatly, and now play rarely, ( Mainly triple crown or BC days when there is a lot of unsophisticated money in the pools). Therefore you could inlude me in the group that has largely quit. Paranoia? Don't think so.Got to go. Will check your responses later.
Fergie

I think the diminishing size of the pools could be a reason for this. There are always guys standing around looking at the odds board who run up at post time and bet the high odds horses. Back in the old days their money probably didn't have much of an impact on the payouts, but today ..........

[Imriledup]

The crowd is the crowd is the crowd. They are the best collective group of handicappers around. The lower the odds, the better the chance a horse has of winning, so it stands to matter that often times, the eventually winner of any particular race will see his odds go down by the end of betting.

Also, when you consider that at some tracks, a MAJORITY of the pool is coming into the tote later rather than sooner, then this phenomenon makes even MORE sense when approached from an objective rather than conspiratorial angle.

A lot of horses get washy or unsettled from the time they leave the paddock right up until they load the gate. Sharp players can wait till the last possible second and bet. I'm sure the largest players wait as long as they can....after all, you don't get any extra credit for betting early, you may as well see the complete odds cycle and make a smarter decision.

[prank]

Regarding the wisdom of the crowd, it's important to recall that you're not seeing the wisdom of N people, just the allocations of X dollars. The so-called whales who place large, smart bets are also aware that they need to place them close to post time, so they can have the best understanding of the potential odds. So, I suspect they do the most to drive the efficiency of the market.

Regarding other "equitable" betting methods: if there is a certain dollar value or proportion of the pool that can be bet in a given minute, then that would smooth out how much is bet per minute. But, that is punishing the whales. If there's anything the tracks know, it's how much is bet and when. If they find, say, that 50% of the pool is bet in the last 2 minutes, what would be the point of punishing these bettors? It's also a market where these bettors can move to another track.

An alternative to this would be to introduce newer complexity for the bets available. Options, for instance. :) But there's already a very small pool to begin with, diversifying would seem to be more likely to dilute the amount and make the pools that much more unstable.

Prank

[DJofSD]

prank, taking your "options" stock market wrinkle a little bit farther, I think there should be an "inverse" commission for cancelled bets to prevent pool manipulations. For any straight bet that is cancelled for a horse still slated to go to the post, charge 0.5% commission for the size of the bet. So that if a $200 win bet is cancelled, the bettor gets $199 back.

[Pace Cap'n]

Regarding the wisdom of the crowd, it's important to recall that you're not seeing the wisdom of N people, just the allocations of X dollars.

Prank

It would be as interesting to see the number of tickets sold as the total $ in the pool. It might be enlightening to see how these two stats correlate to the late odds changes.

And, remember how they closed the pool at, what, one or two minutes to post after the fix-six thing? Didn't go over very well then, and probably wouldn't now.