Robotic Wagering Rears It's Ugly Head Again

[trigger]

Thought we got rid of the Youbet assisted version of Robo now Xpress Bet gets in the act. Patently unfair for non-robotic wagerers in a pari-mutual system.

"PMG plans to work with computer-robotic wagering players to set up their platforms but Luniewski said care will be taken to ensure integrity from those players. Luniewski said the added transparency of the site should prove attractive to computer-robotic wagering players, who sometimes have faced integrity questions."
http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/national-news/2011/01/29/xpressbet-to-spin-off-rebate-shop.aspx

[Robert Goren]

Internet poker trys to ban robot players because they know in the long run they drive regular players away. I suspect horse racing should do the same for the same reason. If all you have is bunch robots playing against each other, nobody wins.

[PaceAdvantage]

Why are people so paranoid about automated wagering? The robot won't have access to some super-secret pool information...

Yes, the robot will be able to scan pools and make calculations much quicker than a human without a computer...why is that such a big deal?

[classhandicapper]

Why are people so paranoid about automated wagering? The robot won't have access to some super-secret pool information...

Yes, the robot will be able to scan pools and make calculations much quicker than a human without a computer...why is that such a big deal?

People perceive themselves at a disadvantage because they can't do it also. ;)

Seriously I think the worry is that someone might knock the value off one of their wagers in the last few seconds in situations where that would be difficult without the aid of a computer. I know I used to do manual win vs. exacta/double calculations trying to extract extra money out of the pools and doing it by computer surely would have helped.

[GatetoWire]

Sounds like this is an attempt to get back some of the offshore players that are not contributing anything to US racing.

This could be a great program to get their money back into the US and create jobs in the USA for Americans.

This should be applauded as a good step forward. Not a step backward.

[Stillriledup]

Why are people so paranoid about automated wagering? The robot won't have access to some super-secret pool information...

Yes, the robot will be able to scan pools and make calculations much quicker than a human without a computer...why is that such a big deal?

Two reasons.

1) People realize that a robotic wager is more of an advantage than speaking the bet to a live teller on the phone or punching the bet in manually into your online ADW.

2) They realize that the robotic wager could 'see' the amounts of money on each hidden pool combo and thus, water it down to be more efficient. Bettors rely on inefficiency to make long term profits, if every combo is 'paying what it should' its much harder to win.

[thaskalos]

Why are people so paranoid about automated wagering? The robot won't have access to some super-secret pool information...

Yes, the robot will be able to scan pools and make calculations much quicker than a human without a computer...why is that such a big deal?IMO, the worst thing about "roboting" wagering is that, by insisting on doing their betting as close to the start of the race as possible, they make it impossible for us to know what price we are getting on our bets.

It used to be that prices didn't fluctuate much, but now, at some tracks, the amounts of money wagered during the last minute of the race are staggering.

[Stillriledup]

IMO, the worst thing about "roboting" wagering is that, by insisting on doing their betting as close to the start of the race as possible, they make it impossible for us to know what price we are getting on our bets.

It used to be that prices didn't fluctuate much, but now, at some tracks, the amounts of money wagered during the last minute of the race are staggering.

But, dont the robots just bet according to pool size? They're not going to 'overbet' a combo, right?

Then again, if there's more than one robot who sees a 3-1 shot at 1 MTP who deserves to be 8-5, everyone's robot bets the same horse.

[PaceAdvantage]

IMO, the worst thing about "roboting" wagering is that, by insisting on doing their betting as close to the start of the race as possible, they make it impossible for us to know what price we are getting on our bets.Why single robotic wagering out when humans are also very capable of wagering at the last moment?

A big bettor could be watching the video feed, have his bets keyed up and ready to go, and hovering his cursor over the "SUBMIT WAGER" button as soon as the last horse starts to enter the gate....

I dare say humans are MORE ABLE to wager at the very LAST POSSIBLE moment when compared to "robots"...unless there are robots out there that can also effectively watch a live video feed and figure out when the last horse is about to enter the gate....

[DeanT]

Why single robotic wagering out when humans are also very capable of wagering at the last moment?

A big bettor could be watching the video feed, have his bets keyed up and ready to go, and hovering his cursor over the "SUBMIT WAGER" button as soon as the last horse starts to enter the gate....

I dare say humans are MORE ABLE to wager at the very LAST POSSIBLE moment when compared to "robots"...unless there are robots out there that can also effectively watch a live video feed and figure out when the last horse is about to enter the gate....

Didnt you try to do something like this once with some meagre programming? If I remember you werent breaking into Fort Knox or anything. You were just trying to find some overlays based on your betting lines or something? I can't remember.....

[PaceAdvantage]

I'm still doing it...although not nearly as effectively as I could be due to my slacker nature these past few years... :lol:

[thaskalos]

Why single robotic wagering out when humans are also very capable of wagering at the last moment?

A big bettor could be watching the video feed, have his bets keyed up and ready to go, and hovering his cursor over the "SUBMIT WAGER" button as soon as the last horse starts to enter the gate....

I dare say humans are MORE ABLE to wager at the very LAST POSSIBLE moment when compared to "robots"...unless there are robots out there that can also effectively watch a live video feed and figure out when the last horse is about to enter the gate....PA...these "robots" do more than just place wagers at the last minute. They are tied up to sophisticated computer software, whose job it is to spot overlaid prices in various pools. Once these prices are found, wagers are calculated, and programmed to be placed at the last possible second.

I don't mind competing against "whales" or "mini-whales"...but when their bets are made as the horses are entering the gate, and 5-1 shots pay $6.80 to win...or when exactas, which at the last flash showed that they should pay $36.00, now pay $23.00...that is an unacceptable state of affairs.

ALL the players are entitled to have a somewhat accurate idea of what their bets will pay, when they place them.

[PaceAdvantage]

PA...these "robots" do more than just place wagers at the last minute. They are tied up to sophisticated computer software, whose job it is to spot overlaid prices in various pools. Once these prices are found, wagers are calculated, and programmed to be placed at the last possible second.

I don't mind competing against "whales" or "mini-whales"...but when their bets are made as the horses are entering the gate, and 5-1 shots pay $6.80 to win...or when exactas, which at the last flash showed that they should pay $36.00, now pay $23.00...that is an unacceptable state of affairs.

ALL the players are entitled to have a somewhat accurate idea of what their bets will pay, when they place them.I know these robots do more than just place wagers at the last minute.

All I'm saying is, humans are more capable of placing wagers closer to the last possible moment than robots ever will be, given the current pool data available. When the tote system tells the robot there is "0mtp," the race might go off anywhere from 30 seconds to any number of minutes afterwards. Only a human watching the live video feed would be able to get a bet off at the very last possible moment.

[Charlie D]

If you are playing numerous tracks that are running at the same time a bot is rather a handy thing to have.

Boys toys :)

[Canarsie]

I've had this discussion with numerous people and one thing we are in agreement with is nobody complains when they reverse happens and you get a bigger payout. Happened at the Meadowlands a few nights ago horse was 4/1 at the gate, others dropped, he went up to 9/2 and won for fun. That's a minor example but how many times have you hit a gimmick and after the payout said "that was a gift"?

Plus the robot can't see how the horse looks on the track which to me is a huge deciding factor.

Still in the long run the huge odds drop will drive bettors away (to other tracks) imo.

[ranchwest]

I've had this discussion with numerous people and one thing we are in agreement with is nobody complains when they reverse happens and you get a bigger payout. Happened at the Meadowlands a few nights ago horse was 4/1 at the gate, others dropped, he went up to 9/2 and won for fun. That's a minor example but how many times have you hit a gimmick and after the payout said "that was a gift"?

Plus the robot can't see how the horse looks on the track which to me is a huge deciding factor.

Still in the long run the huge odds drop will drive bettors away (to other tracks) imo.

Excellent.

[Robert Goren]

It is the perception by the regular better that they are at a huge disadvantage to robots that is the problem. Whether they actually are is not question.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

A handful of tracks will not allow robotic betting or limit robotic betting.

[ManeMediaMogul]

Why are people so paranoid about automated wagering? The robot won't have access to some super-secret pool information...

Yes, the robot will be able to scan pools and make calculations much quicker than a human without a computer...why is that such a big deal?

You and I have had our disagreements over the years but we are on the same page here.

There is no computer that knows as much about horses and horseracing as I do. I want that money in the pools. I'll beat the machine seven days a week and twice on Sunday.

[Robert Goren]

You and I have had our disagreements over the years but we are on the same page here.

There is no computer that knows as much about horses and horseracing as I do. I want that money in the pools. I'll beat the machine seven days a week and twice on Sunday. Good for you, but not all gamblers feel the same. It is hard enough to get new people involved with the sport with takeouts being what they are, without them thinking they have to beat a computer too. Like I said before, it is all about perception. I, myself, could care less whether or not you use a robot, but we need to talk about the long term health of the sport. Internet Poker operators have decided they are not good their sport because most poker players don't want to play against them even though a very good player could beat them.

[PaceAdvantage]

A handful of tracks will not allow robotic betting or limit robotic betting.There is not one track out there that can stop me from using my automated program.

[thaskalos]

There is no computer that knows as much about horses and horseracing as I do. Gary Kasparov, the world's best chess player, used to say the same thing about chess...but he soon changed his mind...

[PhantomOnTour]

Gary Kasparov, the world's best chess player, used to say the same thing about chess...but he soon changed his mind...
Chess ain't horseracing

[thaskalos]

Chess ain't horseracingLosing gamblers suffer because of their incompetence, impatience, and greed...and as such, they are ideal opponents for the more competent player.

The computer, on the other hand, has none of those shortcomings...and, therefore, proves to be a much more formidable opponent.

A player who meticulously, and unemotionally, always makes the best play possible, is not my first choice for an opponent...regardless of what the game might be.

[Kelso]

Any significant differences?

[cj]

With conditional you are at the mercy of the restrictions set by the provider.

[Pace Cap'n]

Just to be clear...

What is being discussed here does not involve real-time access to the tote system.

Is that a true statement?

[ronsmac]

Sounds like this is an attempt to get back some of the offshore players that are not contributing anything to US racing.

This could be a great program to get their money back into the US and create jobs in the USA for Americans.

This should be applauded as a good step forward. Not a step backward.
They are trying to get off shore money but from the adw's that contribute big time to racing with high rates. They're also after the big rebate bettors that bet here also. I think it's contradictory on Stronach's part.

[Kelso]

With conditional you are at the mercy of the restrictions set by the provider.

CJ,

Would you please expand that? Do you mean restrictions as to which pools may be conditionally bet, or are ther others?

Thank you.

[cj]

There are restrictions with some of the formats. For example, with both TwinSpires and PTC, you can only have the program attempt to place the bet one time. The condition is either met or it fails, and that is it.

If you write your own program, you can have it keep checking if the race went off yet, and if not, check the condition again. This is just one example.

Another would be you can only make the bet one size. With your own program, you could have the bet size vary according to the odds. There are many others, including some I've never thought of as well.

[Kelso]

There are restrictions with some of the formats. For example, with both TwinSpires and PTC, you can only have the program attempt to place the bet one time. The condition is either met or it fails, and that is it.

If you write your own program, you can have it keep checking if the race went off yet, and if not, check the condition again. This is just one example.

Another would be you can only make the bet one size. With your own program, you could have the bet size vary according to the odds. There are many others, including some I've never thought of as well.

Understood ... and way beyond my pay grade. (Do you think I should retire my PC with the 5.25" floppy drive and get one of those newer ones that take the 3.5" discs?)

Thanks, CJ.

[cj]

Understood ... and way beyond my pay grade. (Do you think I should retire my PC with the 5.25" floppy drive and get one of those newer ones that take the 3.5" discs?)

Thanks, CJ.

I've never been one to upgrade just to have the latest. If it works, it works. :)

[JustRalph]

I've never been one to upgrade just to have the latest. If it works, it works. :)

Don't tell my first wife that.................

[green80]

are any of these robots made available for sale to the public?

[Robert Goren]

are any of these robots made available for sale to the public?I figured this question would have been in first 10 post.

[GameTheory]

I figured this question would have been in first 10 post.It is fairly easy to make one for personal use using the available on-line toteboards, but what the original poster was getting it I think is of another kind altogether. There was a dust-up a few years ago about a group making 1000s of bets at the very last second with the help of an ADW or track -- I forget, I think it involved Gulfstream? -- and possibly even having access to the trifecta matrix. They were eventually denied such access (or it was somehow hushed up) because there was such a backlash. There are threads about it archived somewhere here...

[classhandicapper]

I've never been one to upgrade just to have the latest. If it works, it works. :)

I spent 25 years in data processing and I never upgrade anything unless I HAVE TO. I live by the motto "If it isn't broke don't fix it". ;)

[CBedo]

I spent 25 years in data processing and I never upgrade anything unless I HAVE TO. I live by the motto "If it isn't broke don't fix it". ;)You need to crank it up a notch then. My motto when it comes to technology, is that if you don't break it, you aren't pushing it hard enough! ;)

With regards to automated betting, it's really not hard for anyone to do; the question is can you do it effectively. If you have something as simple as a list of rule based angles, why not program it to do it automatically so you don't miss an opportunity?

Some have tried to liken this to bots playing poker, as online poker houses try their best to keep these bots out, interestingly, more for the integrity of the game than for the real financial damage they do. I have consulted with one online shop, and results of their studies showed that players were more afraid of the bots than the reality said they should be. In fact, the bots are OK playing limit poker, but when you institute more "fuzzy" rules of playing no limit, the bots don't do very well at all. I think horse racing is at least as complicated (probably way more) than no limit hold'em, and noone should be too worried; in fact, I think we should welcome the liquidity.

If I look at my own experiences in automated handicapping/betting (and I'm sure there are many more experienced at this than me), I have yet to be able to get the computer to be able to handicap any one race as well as I can do it without the computer, but it can obviously handicap exponentially more races than I can by hand. The goal is handicap "only somewhat less optimally" and then make up for it with asset turnover. If other computer programs are similar, they could possibly alter what factors are weighed most in the betting pools, but it is doubtful that they will take the profitability out of the game for any good handicapper.

[Robert Goren]

You need to crank it up a notch then. My motto when it comes to technology, is that if you don't break it, you aren't pushing it hard enough! ;)

With regards to automated betting, it's really not hard for anyone to do; the question is can you do it effectively. If you have something as simple as a list of rule based angles, why not program it to do it automatically so you don't miss an opportunity?

Some have tried to liken this to bots playing poker, as online poker houses try their best to keep these bots out, interestingly, more for the integrity of the game than for the real financial damage they do. I have consulted with one online shop, and results of their studies showed that players were more afraid of the bots than the reality said they should be. In fact, the bots are OK playing limit poker, but when you institute more "fuzzy" rules of playing no limit, the bots don't do very well at all. I think horse racing is at least as complicated (probably way more) than no limit hold'em, and noone should be too worried; in fact, I think we should welcome the liquidity.

If I look at my own experiences in automated handicapping/betting (and I'm sure there are many more experienced at this than me), I have yet to be able to get the computer to be able to handicap any one race as well as I can do it without the computer, but it can obviously handicap exponentially more races than I can by hand. The goal is handicap "only somewhat less optimally" and then make up for it with asset turnover. If other computer programs are similar, they could possibly alter what factors are weighed most in the betting pools, but it is doubtful that they will take the profitability out of the game for any good handicapper.It is not hard only if you are a programer. I take the answer is that no one has one for sale. Not that at this stage of my life I would be interested, but I think some posters might be.

[GameTheory]

It is not hard only if you are a programer. I take the answer is that no one has one for sale. Not that at this stage of my life I would be interested, but I think some posters might be.You pretty much need a custom solution to tie up all the threads that you personally use or have access to. I do this kind of custom work for people sometimes, I'm working on an automated system for someone on this board right now. The first toteboard monitor I made (for someone else) was actually for Richard Bauer.

[CBedo]

It is not hard only if you are a programer. I take the answer is that no one has one for sale. Not that at this stage of my life I would be interested, but I think some posters might be.It's always for sale; it's just also always a matter of price, lol.

You really don't have to be a programmer to move towards a solution somewhat. Take some of what the excel guys are doing here on the baord, and tie it into some of the past posts on using excel to get tote odds. Then for a crude automated system, just have it generate the needed csv/text file to upload to TS, PTC or other. It's not a perfect solution, but it's a beginning for someone who doesn't want to pay for it.

[Que]

The concerns about Robotic wagering is akin to the concerns about high-frequency trading, i.e. price manipulation, colocation, volatility, rogue trading, and other risks. It is estimated that 70% of all stock/option trading is now attributed to high-frequency trading. However, these systems are just as fallible as the humans that create them.

But if I were to create a robo-wagering system I would utilize the same lessons learned from today's high frequency traders where time is measured in milliseconds.

First, I would write separate interacting programs, i.e. thinkers, pricers, listeners, bettors, and managers. The thinkers take my directions (strategies) and convert it into instructions for the other components. The pricers would calculate in real-time the theoretical value of every possible wager. The listeners would take-in pari-mutuel data directly from the data centers and make it available to the other components. The bettors would interface via a native API directly with the data centers or ADWs for the purpose of submitting wagers. The managers would control the work of all the other components, principally the bettors, based on betting activity and other meaningful events (i.e. scratches, jockey changes, etc.) And all of these actions would be accomplished very, very quickly.

Next, to further reduce latency, I would colocate my computer servers in Sacramento, CA and Mount Laurel, NJ where wagers are processed from all the tracks, simulcast and off-track sites, and ADW wagering platforms. I would then, for a fee, negotiate to place my server on-site at each data center.

Finally, I would negotiate the highest rebate schedule possible--rates only available to the highest of the high-end players.

To maximize my profits I would then instruct my robo-bettor to begin placing as many wagers as possible (i.e. as theoretical values allow), in order to collect the rebate from the ADW.

Sound like a level playing field?

[Tom]

Hey Que!
Welcome back - been a while.

[CBedo]

Co-loing might help your bet submission times, but when noone has real-time pool information (old batch wagering submission technology), then it won't help you "get" better information than anyone else.

[mountainman]

Ho Hum. Any handicapper that can't see most tote corrections coming almost certainly lacks the acumen to beat the game to begin with. Moreover, since the majority of players just aren't disposed- or in a position- to bet with two horses left to load, an ability to forecast closing odds becomes crucial. It's a much overlooked aspect of handicapping. The whole world can't wager at zero to post.

Concerning robots: A seasoned human handicapper carries quite a computer between his own ears and can reprogram it on the fly. His prime advantage, though, lies in detecting and exploiting intangibles that the machine has no grasp of.