Imriledup
01-01-2008, 06:08 AM
In recent times, lots of racing fans have been very concerned that there's money coming in after the races start, mostly on frontrunning horses who seem to drop precipitously. But, i haven't heard much discussion of THESE theories. Please, join me in discussing this stuff as i haven't heard much of this mentioned anywhere.
1) Very few if anyone has mentioned that whoever is doing this is pretty smart (and crooked obviously). Now, if we assume that the person or persons who are finding ways to bet after the start are very smart, why then would these people bet into the win pools? Think about this...if any of you had the ability to wager 15 seconds into any race, would you bet thousands to win on a horse so the whole world can see the frontrunners drop from 10-1 to 7-1? Of course not. As a smart human being, you'd bet into the exacta pools, so no one would really notice. The last thing you'd want is the entire racing community yelling and screaming because some front runner went way down in price halfway thru the race. You'd punch a large exacta part wheel, that way, the horse would stay at 10-1, everyone would be happy...(even though the exacta went from 80 to 60 after the race started)
How come if a front runner goes from 10-1 to 7-1 and wins people go crazy, but if that same horse gets pounded in exactas and his exacta pays 60 dollars instead of 80, no one yells and screams and no one notices?
Tell me why you think the 'geniuses' who are getting bets in after the start keep pounding thousands of dollars to win when they know that they can be way more discreet by betting into other pools?
2) Whoever is betting after the start probably has the ability to do this every single race. If this is true, than shouldn't every single frontrunner in every single race go way down in price? After all, whoever has been taking advantage of betting after the start must have a HUGE bankroll right about now and with that huge bankroll, he could just bet a few grand on the front runner. Unless, of course, we think that the person or group of people who have this incredible advantage of being able to bet after the start are skipping races. If i told you i'll let you watch 15 seconds of any race in the country, would you NOT make a wager? Would you say, "i think i'm going to sit out this dance". No, you'd be lined up ready to blast away. You wouldn't skip ONE race, the advantage is too great, why skip? But, it seems that not every frontrunner in every race at every track on every day goes way down in price.
Are the people who bet after the start picking and choosing which races they bet? Because its obvious they don't do this every race because not every front runner goes way down in price once the lead has been established.
3) Another question we need answered is this. Its wonderful to be able to make blanket statements such as, "They are betting after the start, its obvious". Lets think about who THEY are. If there is a way to bet after the races have started, don't you think that dozens of individuals would know how to do it? If there are a dozen individuals betting thousands of dollars into the win pool after an obvious contender gets an easy lead, how come we haven't had a situation where everyone got the same idea at once and each person put 2 or 3 grand to win on the leader down the backstretch? Some horses go down in price a tick or 2, they don't go down 10 ticks. Have you ever seen a 4-1 shot (for example) go off 4-5? You'd think that at some point, all these people who don't know each other would all be on the same horse for thousands of dollars, right? But, it hardly ever happens. These horses go down a tick or two, not 5 or 10 ticks.
Unless there's only ONE person in the entire USA who has the ability to bet after the race starts.
4) Racetracks have constantly maintained that no one is betting after the start. If a frontrunner goes from 10-1 to 7-1 and wins, don't you think the GM of that particular track would get bombarded with e mails from good folks like yourselves pointing out to him the day and the race and the horse that the 'late bets' took place? Don't you think that the GM of that particular track would be able to find out if there was a 2 or 3k bet that came in at the end of the betting cycle and WHERE the bet came from? If every single time a front runner went way down in price, the last big bet came in from such and such downs, don't you think they'd be able to figure out exactly where that bet was originated from?
I don't mind the conspiracy theorists because to tell you the truth, if i bet on a 10-1 shot and i wire the field, i want 10-1 not 7-1.
Its responsible of all of us to ask these questions as opposed to just making blanket statements.
1) Very few if anyone has mentioned that whoever is doing this is pretty smart (and crooked obviously). Now, if we assume that the person or persons who are finding ways to bet after the start are very smart, why then would these people bet into the win pools? Think about this...if any of you had the ability to wager 15 seconds into any race, would you bet thousands to win on a horse so the whole world can see the frontrunners drop from 10-1 to 7-1? Of course not. As a smart human being, you'd bet into the exacta pools, so no one would really notice. The last thing you'd want is the entire racing community yelling and screaming because some front runner went way down in price halfway thru the race. You'd punch a large exacta part wheel, that way, the horse would stay at 10-1, everyone would be happy...(even though the exacta went from 80 to 60 after the race started)
How come if a front runner goes from 10-1 to 7-1 and wins people go crazy, but if that same horse gets pounded in exactas and his exacta pays 60 dollars instead of 80, no one yells and screams and no one notices?
Tell me why you think the 'geniuses' who are getting bets in after the start keep pounding thousands of dollars to win when they know that they can be way more discreet by betting into other pools?
2) Whoever is betting after the start probably has the ability to do this every single race. If this is true, than shouldn't every single frontrunner in every single race go way down in price? After all, whoever has been taking advantage of betting after the start must have a HUGE bankroll right about now and with that huge bankroll, he could just bet a few grand on the front runner. Unless, of course, we think that the person or group of people who have this incredible advantage of being able to bet after the start are skipping races. If i told you i'll let you watch 15 seconds of any race in the country, would you NOT make a wager? Would you say, "i think i'm going to sit out this dance". No, you'd be lined up ready to blast away. You wouldn't skip ONE race, the advantage is too great, why skip? But, it seems that not every frontrunner in every race at every track on every day goes way down in price.
Are the people who bet after the start picking and choosing which races they bet? Because its obvious they don't do this every race because not every front runner goes way down in price once the lead has been established.
3) Another question we need answered is this. Its wonderful to be able to make blanket statements such as, "They are betting after the start, its obvious". Lets think about who THEY are. If there is a way to bet after the races have started, don't you think that dozens of individuals would know how to do it? If there are a dozen individuals betting thousands of dollars into the win pool after an obvious contender gets an easy lead, how come we haven't had a situation where everyone got the same idea at once and each person put 2 or 3 grand to win on the leader down the backstretch? Some horses go down in price a tick or 2, they don't go down 10 ticks. Have you ever seen a 4-1 shot (for example) go off 4-5? You'd think that at some point, all these people who don't know each other would all be on the same horse for thousands of dollars, right? But, it hardly ever happens. These horses go down a tick or two, not 5 or 10 ticks.
Unless there's only ONE person in the entire USA who has the ability to bet after the race starts.
4) Racetracks have constantly maintained that no one is betting after the start. If a frontrunner goes from 10-1 to 7-1 and wins, don't you think the GM of that particular track would get bombarded with e mails from good folks like yourselves pointing out to him the day and the race and the horse that the 'late bets' took place? Don't you think that the GM of that particular track would be able to find out if there was a 2 or 3k bet that came in at the end of the betting cycle and WHERE the bet came from? If every single time a front runner went way down in price, the last big bet came in from such and such downs, don't you think they'd be able to figure out exactly where that bet was originated from?
I don't mind the conspiracy theorists because to tell you the truth, if i bet on a 10-1 shot and i wire the field, i want 10-1 not 7-1.
Its responsible of all of us to ask these questions as opposed to just making blanket statements.