Any Clue What They Are Talking About?

[Pacingguy]

The NJ Senate Committee in charge of racing has passed several bills to move forward to the full Senate in an effort to save racing. One of the bills is totally confusing to me. To quote the http://www.northjersey.com/news/state/110810_State_Senate_committee_approves_horse_racin g_measures.html, "Another bill would shift all pari-mutuel wagering into one betting pool".

Huh? What the heck are they talking about. Isn't this what is happening already? Regardless of where you wager, if you wager on a race at a track, all the money is already being co-mingled. To explain the legislation, the article goes on to say : "The parimutuel bill could have the effect of attracting the interest of wealthy horse racing bettors because with all wagering pools combined, a large bet wouldn't have as much of an impact on the odds on that horse. Currently a big bettor on a minor race might see the odds drop significantly just from his own bet".

Any clue what they are talking about? This makes no sense to me.

[wilderness]

Pacingguy,
They are suggesting the integration of "exchange wagering" into the standard pari-mutuel pools.

If that ever takes place the NJ product will be diluted even more.

[Pacingguy]

Pacingguy,
They are suggesting the integration of "exchange wagering" into the standard pari-mutuel pools.

If that ever takes place the NJ product will be diluted even more.

I don't doubt what you said, but how do they do that? Are they saying if a large wager is made at the track, they will off load part of that wager into the exchange and try to match it up with offers at or close to the odds at the time of the wager? Similar to a stock broker selling you shares they have in their portfolio and if they don't have it or not enough, they direct the order to the market?

[Pacingguy]

Here is the acutal text of the proposed bill. Ignore the numbers at the beginning of each line.

1. Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law to the
8 contrary, in order to create larger parimutuel pools capable of
9 handling a greater variety of wagers and in order to reduce the
10 adverse effect of large wagers, the New Jersey Racing Commission
11 may authorize permitholders to combine all wagers placed on the
12 results of one or more running or harness horse races into a single
13 parimutuel pool, provided that all take-out percentages for wager
14 types from this combined pool are consistent with the percentages
15 provided for in P.L.1940, c.17 (C.5:5-22 et seq.).
16 The New Jersey Racing Commission shall adopt, pursuant to the
17 "Administrative Procedure Act," P.L.1968, c.410 (C.52:14B-1 et
18 seq.), such rules and regulations as may be necessary to effectuate
19 the purposes of this section.
20
21

So here is the bill. If I am reading this correct, all win, place, show, exacta, trifecta, superfecta, etc. wagers on a particular race may be combined into a single parimutuel pools. Huh? How would combining the pools be helpful?

[Ray2000]

To me it sounds like they're just re-legalizing what all OTBs (3?) are doing now, combining all bets from the OTBs with the Track to include all "permitholders" (potential 12 others?) to take part.

It would be ridiculous to throw all pools into one pot.


.

[Robert Goren]

I stayed in a Holiday Express and I haven't a clue.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Pacingguy,
They are suggesting the integration of "exchange wagering" into the standard pari-mutuel pools.

If that ever takes place the NJ product will be diluted even more.

Huh?

Exchange wagering is fixed odds.

How can they integrate fixed odd bets into a standard pari-mutuel pool?

[wilderness]

Exchange wagering is NOT fixed or set odds, rather excahnge wagering offers a variety of wagering options based upon another person (or more) wagering on the opposite wager.

EX:
The third at Yonkers and 500 on #6 NOT to win.

Of course the bet all hinders upon another person (or more) willing to wager that the horse will win.

Given the advances of computers and their speedy calculations, mixed-pool wagering across continents and different monetary values has allowed these options to become easy.

Expanding the calculations to include other options is relatively simple.

#6 NOT to be in the exotic.

Driver NOT to win or NOT to be in exotic.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Exchange wagering is NOT fixed or set odds, rather excahnge wagering offers a variety of wagering options based upon another person (or more) wagering on the opposite wager.

EX:
The third at Yonkers and 500 on #6 NOT to win.

Of course the bet all hinders upon another person (or more) willing to wager that the horse will win.

Given the advances of computers and their speedy calculations, mixed-pool wagering across continents and different monetary values has allowed these options to become easy.

Expanding the calculations to include other options is relatively simple.

#6 NOT to be in the exotic.

Driver NOT to win or NOT to be in exotic.

Thanks for the explanation. I had no clue how it works.

Someone would probably have to bet millions on Betfair to understand all of that.

[Pacingguy]

Perhaps the article was misleading. Re-reading this legislation slowly leads me to think the bill authorizes parlay wagering, figuring heavy bettors would wager parlays.

Anyone think this may be the case after re-reading the law?

[Ray2000]

Typical "take out" for Exchange betting is 5% paid by the winner of the bet. (see BetFair for current rates and discounts).

How does combining different bet types into some kind of common pool (NJ Bill) help?


and in order to reduce the adverse effect of large wagers...


Or is the muddling of Parimutuel and Exchange betting confusing this topic to no end? :confused:


.

[wilderness]

"Typical "take out" for Exchange betting is 5% paid by the winner"

Isn't it amazing how some things never change ;)

The bookies used to call this "juice".

[wilderness]

Ray,
It's the belief of most that the only thing that will help NJ racing is slots at the tracks.

We've heard all these ramblings, new ideas and much more submitted to votes (not just in NJ) and in the end, hardly anything gets written in actual law.

Christie may have the power to veto these items, even if a vote is ever tallied?

Some years back there was a non-US website offering exchange wagering.
It was basically an eBay type of thing (auction), where you submitted your wager and waited for others to participate.
The site didn't last long.

[wilderness]

Perhaps the article was misleading. Re-reading this legislation slowly leads me to think the bill authorizes parlay wagering, figuring heavy bettors would wager parlays.

Anyone think this may be the case after re-reading the law?

Pacingguy,
Exchange wagering offers anybody to bet on anything, and in which another person will wager against.

1) How about how many mis-calls Ken Warkentin might make in one night?
2) How many races will be delayed by equipment changes?
3) How many races will Herve drive in?
4) How many disqualifications will there be?
5) All the failed exotics of the past;
a) odd-even
b) over-under
6) How many horses will use the Harmer bike?


etc., etc.

[Ray2000]

Isn't it amazing how some things never change ;)

The bookies used to call this "juice".


Also called "the vig" if you're from

Southside, Pittsburgh, Pencil-Vane-I-A :)


.

[Pacingguy]

This is an extract from a http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/state/nj-senate-committee-approves-bills-that-attempt-to-reinvigorate-horse-racing-and-gambling (hthttp://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/state/nj-senate-committee-approves-bills-that-attempt-to-reinvigorate-horse-racing-and-gambling).

The third bill, S-2229, also sponsored by Codey, would allow racetracks to combine all wagers placed on the results of one or more runnings or harness horse races into a single pari-mutuel pool. By creating larger pari-mutuel pools, racetracks can handle a greater variety of wagers and reduce the adverse effect of large pay-outs to the racetrack's bottom line.

"This bill essentially gives racetracks the ability to insulate themselves from going broke," Codey said. "If a single bettor has a bad night at the races, they're hopefully not betting with their life savings and can continue to make ends meet. However, if a racetrack has a bad night at the races, it can have a domino effect, destabilizing the racetrack's finances and eating into their economic well-being."

I don't know if this makes things clearer or not. I would almost think that this has more to do with minus pools. Perhaps by being able to combine pools, they can take the breakage on all the bets and use it to for any minus pool which may occur in a race.

[Ray2000]

Pacingguy

I think you (and lowertakeouts in PA t-bred thread)
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=77138

are on to it.

If Lowertakeouts is right, it could help with wild last second odds changes.

[Pacingguy]

I was finally able to get the information as to what this is all about.


Single pool wagering was developed by a company called Longitude, LLC. and is a a modification of a product used for trading options. From what I can tell, this may bring parimutuel racing to a brave new world. Apparently, adoption of single pool wagering would result in "larger, deeper, and more liquid" wagering pools which would be able to display accurate odds for all wager types. The company claims it provides accurate recordkeeping and audit trails and allows for new wagering types, such as betting for a horse to come in second and only second; not to be confused with a traditional place or show wager.

Odds supposedly would be more accurate by looking how a horse was being supported in Win, Place, Show and exotic pools. Since this is propriety software, the specifics on how the odds would be calculated is not known at this time, but payouts would be calculated the same way as they are done now.

Here is where it gets a little murky. The following is conjecture based on what they are saying.

If payouts are going to be calculated the same way as they are now, but as some stories indicate it will allow large bettors to wager without crushing the odds, my guess is the odds shown must be forecasting the odds based on how the horse is being supported in other pools, changing the weight given to alternate pools as time goes on.

Let's try a simple example. Let's say track New Era Downs only offers win and exacta wagering. Under the old system, the win odds would be calculated based only on how the money is bet in the win pool. So lets say the horse The Crusher has only $10 bet to win yet there is $1000 bet in the exacta pool with The Crusher on top. Their system must forecast a lot more win money will be coming in on The Crusher to Win. Initially under the single pool model, there is more weight given to the exacta pool than the win pool when calculating win odds. As time goes on, more weight is given to the money wagered in the win pool than the exacta pool on each cycle until at the end, the odds for the win pool are determinded exclusively by the actual money in the win pool.

The big bettor benefits because this new model more accurately predicts what the odds will be at off time because the model anticipates the late money coming in so they can wager with more confidence. Odds will change, but you should not see the situation where the 6-1 at 1 minute to post time goes off at 2-1. The last minute change would probably be more like a 6-1 going off at 5.70-1. The small bettor benefits because they don't see the odds get crushed either.

Here is a link for more http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20101108006720/en/Longitude-LLC-Announces-Exploring-Business-Opportunities-Patented.

[Robert Goren]

So basically they found a way to screw the place and show betters to accommodate the the large win pool betters. It is not clear from what I read, but they may also be getting the Exotic betters in to act too. No more cherry picking pools looking for bargains.

[Ray2000]

To me it looks like a way to get the players to pay for negative pools caused by bridge jumpers.

There would have to be a single takeout rate on the mega-pool and I'd bet :) the minimum 5% payoff will be distributed before the remaining profit is proportionally divided among the various types of winning tickets.


.

[Pacingguy]

So basically they found a way to screw the place and show betters to accommodate the the large win pool betters. It is not clear from what I read, but they may also be getting the Exotic betters in to act too. No more cherry picking pools looking for bargains.

No, from what I understand, the wagers will pay off like they do now. They just projects what the odds will be in the win pool based on wagers in the other pools; big bettors will know what their odds will be when they make the bet preventing the huge drop once the race is off. You can still bet place and show and get your bargains there.

[LowerTakeout]

Apparently this was already tried in 1934 in the UK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tote

"1934 Unsuccessful experiment with Single Pools (Win and Place bets in the same pool)"

[Pacingguy]

Apparently this was already tried in 1934 in the UK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tote

"1934 Unsuccessful experiment with Single Pools (Win and Place bets in the same pool)"

I suspect this was a totally different animal. First of all they didn't have computers back then so they would not have been able to forecast the odds like this system appears to be doing. My guess is they will introduce this slowly, perhaps one race per card once they approve it.

[Robert Goren]

No, from what I understand, the wagers will pay off like they do now. They just projects what the odds will be in the win pool based on wagers in the other pools; big bettors will know what their odds will be when they make the bet preventing the huge drop once the race is off. You can still bet place and show and get your bargains there.So it is merely a new way to estimate what the final odds will be based on the action in other pools. I have watched place and show pools looking for bargains. There no shortage of very late money in those pools either. When a horse takes a hit in the win pool it generally gets hit in those pools too. None of this makes any sense. It seems like more hot air to get around doing what they got to do to survive, cut the takeout.

[Charles54]

So it is merely a new way to estimate what the final odds will be based on the action in other pools. I have watched place and show pools looking for bargains. There no shortage of very late money in those pools either. When a horse takes a hit in the win pool it generally gets hit in those pools too. None of this makes any sense. It seems like more hot air to get around doing what they got to do to survive, cut the takeout.

I understand your objection, in that choosing the best pool to bet into adds a layer of skill to the game. However, that seems a relatively trivial concern.

I have been in favor of a single pool structure for a long time. It has far-reaching advantages, in that deeper betting pools increase both the possibilty of huge pay-offs for pure gamblers (potentially million dollar payoffs) and also the potential bet size who prefer to "invest" rather than "gamble."

This is one of the moves racing really must make if it wants to compete with on-line poker and similar games which attract both "gamblers" and "investors." Hopefully this bill indicates that some pregressive thinking is finally sifting through the appalling conservatism that has almost destroyed racing.

[TeaTrick]

You seem to have some knowledge as to the workings of a single pool entity. I must confess total ignorance here, and with that ignorance in play I have concluded that this concept is nothing more than putting lipstick on a pig. It seems Pacingguy has it about right, that it simply involves a newer method of calculating probable win payoffs (the lipstick) by forecasting using the ongoing betting in all other pools (the pig). How does this in any way add a dollar to the total handle on a given race?

The biggest whaler I know of is Dana Parham from Odds On Racing and his computer software has been doing this for many years. His operation does very little handicapping, they search for value and wager accordingly. How does making his work effort public enhance his return? The notion is absurd. Whaling is only successful if the ROI is attractive. Dana really isn't looking for company when he places a wager on a given race. Single pool or not, it is still parimutuel betting and friends are not welcome.

While I have readily admitted to my ignorance on how this concept can possibly be whale-pleasing, or enhance the health of horse racing, I will not apologize for my ignorance in the light of the total ignorance of this legislation's sponsor, Codey, who believes this concept will "insulate" the race tracks from having a bad night. This man actually believes the race tracks book these wagers ala gambling casinos. My word!!! Again, Charles54, I would be greatly appreciative if you, or anyone else, could shed some light on single pool wagering if I, as may be the case, have missed the mark on its usefulness.

Exchange wagering is a totally different animal. No pig here. This is a predator-in-waiting. Imagine a stinking filthy colony of harness drivers being allowed to bet totally in the dark on horses they and their fellow stinking filthy harness drivers are driving in a given race. They're driving at Podunk Downs for purses of two to three thousand dollars. They have the 2 to 1 favorite in the race and go into the exchange market and offer 2 to 1 or better on their horse using their username on the exchange, or more likely a third-party beard. A person (you) betting on that horse at Podunk Downs knows that if they bet in the parimutuel pool the 2 to 1 odds won't hold but if you take the exchange bet at 2 to 1 that's what you will get as a probable payoff (minus the vig). Except the stinking filthy harness driver is going to run second, pocketing your bet (and others) as opposed to the $50 bucks in purse money he would make by winning. Ya, this will work!

[ALostTexan]

Longitude also claims that their system will allow bettors to bet a horse to finish exactly 2nd or exactly 3rd. It also is supposed to have better ways of allowing bettors to place limit wagers for guaranteed odds. Supposedly would pull the wagers out of the pool if the odds drop below a certain level, but some how it is different than just a situation of waiting to see if the odds are good enough to place the wager like some ADW's.