It appears there is pool manipulation in So. Cal.

[Track Phantom]

I've been following a few stories (one about the thread on here regarding the horse Bad Boy at Santa Anita) where big win bets are placed early and pulled off later. I've seen some strange things in the past 3 to 6 weeks in So. Cal. and tonight, at Los Al, I watched closely to the betting patterns in race 9 (feature race).

There was an initial 12k in the win pool on the favorite (#9 The Goodbye Kisser). However, as I watched closely each click of the tote board from about the 7 minute mark to post, the win amount on the #9 actually went from $12,700 at the 6 minute mark to $12,120 at the 5 minute mark. Then, is slowly moved up to around $13k at the 2 min mark and then late money moved it up to around $15k at post. (This is not scientific as I am going off of memory but am certain that money came off during one click when it should be increasing dramatically on a 1-9 favorite). More money came in on the second choice #8 Oatman until they were 2-5 and 7-2 at post. #8 won easily while #9 got up for 2nd.

Not sure what to make of it but it is interesting.

[bigmack]

What is your source for monitoring the pool loot?

[GameTheory]

I've been following a few stories (one about the thread on here regarding the horse Bad Boy at Santa Anita) where big win bets are placed early and pulled off later. I've seen some strange things in the past 3 to 6 weeks in So. Cal. and tonight, at Los Al, I watched closely to the betting patterns in race 9 (feature race).

There was an initial 12k in the win pool on the favorite (#9 The Goodbye Kisser). However, as I watched closely each click of the tote board from about the 7 minute mark to post, the win amount on the #9 actually went from $12,700 at the 6 minute mark to $12,120 at the 5 minute mark. Then, is slowly moved up to around $13k at the 2 min mark and then late money moved it up to around $15k at post. (This is not scientific as I am going off of memory but am certain that money came off during one click when it should be increasing dramatically on a 1-9 favorite). More money came in on the second choice #8 Oatman until they were 2-5 and 7-2 at post. #8 won easily while #9 got up for 2nd.

Not sure what to make of it but it is interesting.Not many people actually want to have much down on a 1/9 that actually stays 1/9. If I make a bet on a horse I expect to be low but not THAT low and it isn't drifting up like it is supposed to as post approaches, I cancel it too.

[Track Phantom]

Not many people actually want to have much down on a 1/9 that actually stays 1/9. If I make a bet on a horse I expect to be low but not THAT low and it isn't drifting up like it is supposed to as post approaches, I cancel it too.

While I understand what you're saying, I don't think it applies here. Otherwise, how do you explain the slow cancelations?

[Tuffmug]

Call me paranoid, but I suspect the pools are being manipulated everywhere by financial arb types armed with Benter probit multilpe regression programs and arb programs. The quick late hammering of some horses, the odd cancellations approaching post time, and the curious nationwide increase in winning favorite percentages suggests they may be effectively increasing the favorites win % and are rebalancing their bets via cancellations to manipulate the pools (based on their superior odds line) to obtain a risk free arbitrage profit.

If the above is true then this game just got a whole lot harder and I may decide to play the slots.

[bigmack]

The entire WPS pool was $45K with a heavy chalko.

I don't mind paranoia, but I do when someone thinks a mosquito is an albatross.

[Stillriledup]

Call me paranoid, but I suspect the pools are being manipulated everywhere by financial arb types armed with Benter probit multilpe regression programs and arb programs. The quick late hammering of some horses, the odd cancellations approaching post time, and the curious nationwide increase in winning favorite percentages suggests they may be effectively increasing the favorites win % and are rebalancing their bets via cancellations to manipulate the pools (based on their superior odds line) to obtain a risk free arbitrage profit.

If the above is true then this game just got a whole lot harder and I may decide to play the slots.

This is a very interesting theory.

I've seen some fascinating things in the pools at Charlestown. This may happen at other tracks, but i know it happens at CT.

Every race, no matter how bad horses look, they never open at really high odds. You can find the worst looking horse on paper, who's 20-1 ML and figures to be 50-1 and somehow, that horse is under 20-1 for the first few minutes of the betting. Now, i know the win pools at CT are under 2,000 until about 10 mins to post, but these desperate 'no shot' horses always seem to have a few drips and drabs of money on them.

Take a look at the CT PP's one night and come up with the worst looking horse you've ever seen on paper and that horse won't be 50-1 first flash. It won't even be 25-1.

I say to myself a few times a night there, "how is this horse 14-1 at any point in the betting?"

I wonder if this is the stuff you're talking about, computers betting 13 dollars to win (for example) on some ridiculous horse into a win pool that figures to be, approximately, 10,000 dollars by post time.

[Track Phantom]

The entire WPS pool was $45K with a heavy chalko.

I don't mind paranoia, but I do when someone thinks a mosquito is an albatross.

Huh?

[GameTheory]

Call me paranoid, but I suspect the pools are being manipulated everywhere by financial arb types armed with Benter probit multilpe regression programs and arb programs. The quick late hammering of some horses, the odd cancellations approaching post time, and the curious nationwide increase in winning favorite percentages suggests they may be effectively increasing the favorites win % and are rebalancing their bets via cancellations to manipulate the pools (based on their superior odds line) to obtain a risk free arbitrage profit.How can someone betting into a pari-mutuel pool ever get a risk-free arb? You need to place two opposing bets at fixed odds for that. Someone may try to influence the betting via pool manipulation, but there is no actual arbitrage here, right? There can't be.

[horses4courses]

Are there any other incidents at other tracks?

Coming up in 10 mins is the 3rd at AQU.

There is $20k out of 25k bet on a Pletcher 8-5 ML in a $25k claimer.

Interesting to see how this pool, and race, pan out.

[horses4courses]

Are there any other incidents at other tracks?

Coming up in 10 mins is the 3rd at AQU.

There is $20k out of 25k bet on a Pletcher 8-5 ML in a $25k claimer.

Interesting to see how this pool, and race, pan out.

Off the board....

Horse closed at 3-5, which is reasonable.
Others got bet the right way, except the 6 horse who showed.
Nobody cancelled anything of any size.

Somebody either loved the hell out of this horse, or is laundering money.

It would be nice to think that there's a fish at the table with more money than sense, but I doubt that.........

[lamboguy]

this is a shocking revelation

[Stillriledup]

Off the board....

Horse closed at 3-5, which is reasonable.
Others got bet the right way, except the 6 horse who showed.
Nobody cancelled anything of any size.

Somebody either loved the hell out of this horse, or is laundering money.

It would be nice to think that there's a fish at the table with more money than sense, but I doubt that.........

People make large bets on the horses they like to put value seeking bettors onto other horses.

[redshift1]

So what's theory on manipulating ? A bettor makes a large odds changing wager then later cancels the wager with the hope that other bettors modify their bets based on the odds fluctuations giving him a better price?

[Stillriledup]

So what's theory on manipulating ? A bettor makes a large odds changing wager then later cancels the wager with the hope that other bettors modify their bets based on the odds fluctuations giving him a better price?

The cancelling part is the manipulation. Its ok to bet a ton first flash, but if you start refunding that bet in small increments throughout the wagering cycles, that's manipulation.

Of course, certain tracks permit this type of stuff, Santa Anita is one that comes to mind.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

I don't follow SA to know if this is really happening, but it makes sense that a profit could be had by "steering" the money flow and affecting the wagers placed by those who use the pool amounts for primary guidance. SA and Southern Cal circuit probably has the most accurate M/L and final odds of any circuit in the country. That's assuming the "manipulators" can actually cancel and balance their wagers in a timely fashion.

I like to play Austrailia, and I see early bets that often seem out of whack with how the real numbers should be, and compared to the odds live online directly from down-under. I don't see any pattern of cancellations though, as I think most ADW's limit that.....

[Stillriledup]

I don't follow SA to know if this is really happening, but it makes sense that a profit could be had by "steering" the money flow and affecting the wagers placed by those who use the pool amounts for primary guidance. SA and Southern Cal circuit probably has the most accurate M/L and final odds of any circuit in the country. That's assuming the "manipulators" can actually cancel and balance their wagers in a timely fashion.

I like to play Austrailia, and I see early bets that often seem out of whack with how the real numbers should be, and compared to the odds live online directly from down-under. I don't see any pattern of cancellations though, as I think most ADW's limit that.....

I guess that if you don't really know horse racing and just follow what others are betting....well, caveat emptor.