5 things the racing industry doesnt want you to know

[Stillriledup]

I was reading a 'things they won't tell you' article (things car dealers won't tell you, things hotels won't tell you, etc.) and thought about the racing industry. Does the racing industry have a 'things' they won't tell the average racetrack customer list they could compile if asked?

If you were writing this article for a horse racing magazine and were asked to list and explain 5 things the industry 'doesnt want the average customer to know' what would that be?

[BillW]

I've always wanted to know something that someone didn't want me to know. I'll be following this thread. :cool:

[sjk]

I suspect they would not want the on track patron to know the percent of on track wagers that are paid out as on track winnings.

[DJofSD]

How about the entries which are in the race only b/c the racing sec strong armed the trainer.

[wisconsin]

Stuck horses-horses that tried to scratch but were not allowed. With all of the scratches I see these days, maybe this is an old school problem.

[Jeff P]

I suspect they would not want the on track patron to know the percent of on track wagers that are paid out as on track winnings.

Back in June we did a write up about this on the HANA Blog. In the win pool, where the takeout averages 16% to 18%, the new would be racing fan who knows nothing about handicapping experiences long term losses that average 25%.


16% to 18% Takeout Equals 25% Long Term Losses for the New Would be Racing Fan:
http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2012/06/16-to-18-takeout-equals-25-long-term.html



-jp

.

[Steward]

The fact that here in the united states, from Aqueduct to Zia Park, 75% of the "trainers" are neither competent, nor qualified, to train race horses! The scary part is the remaining 25% could have been anything they chose to have been!

[lamboguy]

the amount of money that is lifted out of the payoffs due to breakage, and the type of substances administered to horses that there is no test for.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Most of the people that draw a paycheck out of the purse fund have no working relationship with the notion that the wagering handle (well, should/used to) pays the bills.

[Tom]

That some people really do bet after the race is half over.
And most of them still lose! :D

[sjk]

Back in June we did a write up about this on the HANA Blog. In the win pool, where the takeout averages 16% to 18%, the new would be racing fan who knows nothing about handicapping experiences long term losses that average 25%.


16% to 18% Takeout Equals 25% Long Term Losses for the New Would be Racing Fan:
http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2012/06/16-to-18-takeout-equals-25-long-term.html



-jp

.

Your article makes some good points but I was thinking of it more from the standpoint of negative settlements between the on track crowd and off track players to include whales and other computer assisted players.

[therussmeister]

the amount of money that is lifted out of the payoffs due to breakage.
This is easy enough to calculate using average payouts and assuming an average breakage of 5¢ on the dollar.

[reckless]

That some people really do bet after the race is half over.

Correct Tom, but what the industry does not want us to know is that way too regularly track management insiders are often the gonivs in this crime.

With their high-speed connections, usually linked to their very own off site hub, these gonivs monitor the 'smart' money bets and then place their own wagers accordingly -- mostly after the race begins to be 'safe'.

Sadly, it's much more rampant than the average fan knows or wishes to believe.

This is the 21st century version of the Saul Silbermann Method!

[Saratoga_Mike]

Correct Tom, but what the industry does not want us to know is that way too regularly track management insiders are often the gonivs in this crime.

With their high-speed connections, usually linked to their very own off site hub, these gonivs monitor the 'smart' money bets and then place their own wagers accordingly -- mostly after the race begins to be 'safe'.

Sadly, it's much more rampant than the average fan knows or wishes to believe.

This is the 21st century version of the Saul Silbermann Method!

Really, could you please tell us how you know all of this? And given this knowledge, I assume you do NOT wager. Why would you?

[reckless]

Really, could you please tell us how you know all of this? And given this knowledge, I assume you do NOT wager. Why would you?

Well Mike, first off, I do still wager.... but it is an amount that is a small fraction of what I used to bet.

I also now prefer to bet mostly on the weekend/holiday major stakes races.

This isn't a practice at every or even most racetracks, thankfully, but it is happening way too often than we'd want to know.

[PaceAdvantage]

Well Mike, first off, I do still wager.... but it is an amount that is a small fraction of what I used to bet.

I also now prefer to bet mostly on the weekend/holiday major stakes races.

This isn't a practice at every or even most racetracks, thankfully, but it is happening way too often than we'd want to know.You seem to have avoided the first (and more important) question posed to you.

[reckless]

You seem to have avoided the first (and more important) question posed to you.

I know this because up to two years ago I spent most of my adult life in the game. Starting as a hot-walker and groom at Belmont and yada yada yada.... it's 30 years later. Anyone in this business -- owner, trainer, jockey, stable employe, you name it, are able to share horror stories on the comings and goings at today's racetrack and business if they wished.

The corrupt nature of this 'sport/business' is the underlying reason why the game is on death's door, IMHO. Some of these 'reasons' have been discussed here on a regular basis, as you know, but not all.

For god's sake, the Daily Racing Form and other racing press outlets won't even touch the circumstances of what happened at Twin Spires with a 10-foot pole, that's how bad the 'industry' would rather circle the wagons to protect themselves first -- all at the expense of the paying customer.

If you want me to specifically name names, or even hint at places and things, you're out of luck, I won't.

That said, if you want to delete my original post, of course, feel free to do so.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I know this because up to two years ago I spent most of my adult life in the game. Starting as a hot-walker and groom at Belmont and yada yada yada.... it's 30 years later. Anyone in this business -- owner, trainer, jockey, stable employe, you name it, are able to share horror stories on the comings and goings at today's racetrack and business if they wished.



I thought you were going to follow that sentence by saying, "I worked most of that time in the IT department." How would a groom, hotwalker, trainer, jockey or owner know about the things you asserted? Don't you mean you heard rumors about such things? I wouldn't believe every rumor you hear on the backstretch.

[PaceAdvantage]

For god's sake, the Daily Racing Form and other racing press outlets won't even touch the circumstances of what happened at Twin Spires with a 10-foot pole, that's how bad the 'industry' would rather circle the wagons to protect themselves first -- all at the expense of the paying customer.It was reported at BloodHorse:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/72753/twinspirescom-says-breach-remediated

If you want me to specifically name names, or even hint at places and things, you're out of luck, I won't.I would definitely NOT want you to specify names...but you could easily provide a little more info to give substance to your claim.

After all, you are named "reckless."

We just want to make sure you aren't living up to your moniker...

[reckless]

I thought you were going to follow that sentence by saying, "I worked most of that time in the IT department." How would a groom, hotwalker, trainer, jockey or owner know about the things you asserted? Don't you mean you heard rumors about such things? I wouldn't believe every rumor you hear on the backstretch.

I just brought up that stuff so you'd know that I have some history in the business, starting as a hot-walker oh so many years ago.

Yes there are a lot of rumors, innuendo and accusations made on the backside. And while I didn't believe in each and every one of them, it might surprise you that some of those wild rumors actually turned out to be true!

Have you ever wondered why a horse, usually three in front at the eighth pole, regularly seemed to have it's odds drop by the time he returned to the winners' circle? A coincidence? Maybe so at times but I have too much insider cynicism from all those years in this industry to blindly buy the 'coincidence' factor each and every time.

[PaceAdvantage]

Have you ever wondered why a horse, usually three in front at the eighth pole, regularly seemed to have it's odds drop by the time he returned to the winners' circle? A coincidence? Maybe so at times but I have too much insider cynicism from all those years in this industry to blindly buy the 'coincidence' factor each and every time.Lots of horse's odds drop between start and finish, not just the winner. And there are plenty of instances where odds go up on winners. You just don't notice them because to you, they don't trigger any "conspiratorial" notions in your head.

But I invite anyone with hard stats on the matter (and there must be some people out there with this info) to provide stats on the percentage of winners whose odds drop vs. rise after the start.

[Shemp Howard]

That the blonde named Trixie hanging around the Club House bar comes to the track every day because she loves to watch the horses?;)

[aaron]

Lots of horse's odds drop between start and finish, not just the winner. And there are plenty of instances where odds go up on winners. You just don't notice them because to you, they don't trigger any "conspiratorial" notions in your head.

But I invite anyone with hard stats on the matter (and there must be some people out there with this info) to provide stats on the percentage of winners whose odds drop vs. rise after the start.
If you have been paying attention at Belmont and Saratoga there are some large swings in odds after the race has started.
For instance at Saratoga a 12-1 horse was bet to 5-1 after the race started. The last week at Saratoga a$53 exacta with o minutes on the clock came back $29.00. This Wednesday a horse was 3-1 or 7/2 with 0 time and came back 9/5. The double with this horse was $23.00 with 2 minutes on the clock came back $14.00. The 12-1 shot who went off 5-1 ran 2nd. They don't all win,but don't you think the bettor is entitled to know his odds. I don't think the races are tampered with,but if you are rational person,its hard to believe its always a failure to transmit odds correctly from the simulcast outlets.
If you believe Barry Bonds didn't take steroids, then this must all be a coincidence. These are only a few instances,and I don't watch the board for this every race.Another one at the end of Belmont,before Saratoga was a favorite double,in the 8th and 9th race paying $13 or $14 and coming back $8.00. When NYRA was taking off-shore money,I remember many horses getting bet late who broke well. They didn't all win,but they all broke well. I understand as a bettor there have been times,I have benefitted from this,but this is not good for racing and it doesn't seem to be addressed by the powers that be.NYRA did shut down bets from some of the off shore shops and the problem was somewhat better for a while,but it seems to have cropped up again.I know many big bettors who seem to be aware of this.As,with most problems with racing,people are aware,but they don't have any answers.

[PaceAdvantage]

If you have been paying attention at Belmont and Saratoga there are some large swings in odds after the race has started.
For instance at Saratoga a 12-1 horse was bet to 5-1 after the race started. The last week at Saratoga a$53 exacta with o minutes on the clock came back $29.00. This Wednesday a horse was 3-1 or 7/2 with 0 time and came back 9/5. The double with this horse was $23.00 with 2 minutes on the clock came back $14.00. The 12-1 shot who went off 5-1 ran 2nd. They don't all win,but don't you think the bettor is entitled to know his odds. I don't think the races are tampered with,but if you are rational person,its hard to believe its always a failure to transmit odds correctly from the simulcast outlets.
If you believe Barry Bonds didn't take steroids, then this must all be a coincidence. These are only a few instances,and I don't watch the board for this every race.Another one at the end of Belmont,before Saratoga was a favorite double,in the 8th and 9th race paying $13 or $14 and coming back $8.00. When NYRA was taking off-shore money,I remember many horses getting bet late who broke well. They didn't all win,but they all broke well. I understand as a bettor there have been times,I have benefitted from this,but this is not good for racing and it doesn't seem to be addressed by the powers that be.NYRA did shut down bets from some of the off shore shops and the problem was somewhat better for a while,but it seems to have cropped up again.I know many big bettors who seem to be aware of this.As,with most problems with racing,people are aware,but they don't have any answers.Thanks for the anecdotal reply, but this is not hard data, and doesn't provide a comparison between the number of winners whose odds RISE versus FALL after the gate opens.

Plus the number of horses whose odds FALL and LOSE versus WIN.

[Tom]

I posted a joke. They still lose.....get it?
Tough crowd tonight!

What happens is, the odds on the video do not change until the positions of the horses change. So, if they run 1-2-3-4 until deep stretch, the odds on the video will stay the same until then.

[Jeff P]

Lots of horse's odds drop between start and finish, not just the winner. And there are plenty of instances where odds go up on winners. You just don't notice them because to you, they don't trigger any "conspiratorial" notions in your head.

But I invite anyone with hard stats on the matter (and there must be some people out there with this info) to provide stats on the percentage of winners whose odds drop vs. rise after the start.

This thread:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=91165

Post #29:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1227650&postcount=29

Well I'm not supremely confident that no one is cheating.

If a customer walks up to a teller window in a bank and makes a deposit, the bank has internal controls in place designed to create an audit trail. In the event the customer later contacts the bank and says "My deposit was never credited to my account." the bank's auditors can use the audit trail created by their internal controls to determine where the customer's money was last seen (and with a high degree of precision.) Most banks have enough confidence in their internal controls that their policy is to accept the customer's deposit slip at face value and credit the customer's account for the deposit in question - and then let their auditors figure things out shortly afterwards.

Up until a little less than 3 years ago, racing's internal controls were so weak that the accuracy of race off time could only be determined to the nearest minute (not minutes and seconds.) The weakness resided in the fact that track video feeds were not being synched daily to an accurate time feed and therefore did not record race off time accurately. In some instances the video time feeds were off by as much as several minutes. At the same time the official chart recorded race off time to the nearest minute only (not minutes and seconds.)

Add to this the fact that every once in a while (there are 7 or 8 documented instances of this that I have been made aware of over the past 3 years) betting was unintentionally allowed to take place after the gate had sprung due to a technical glitch (router or other equipment failure.) - These equipment failures made it possible for people to place bets on a handful of races even though the horses were already running (or in some instances) had already crossed the wire.

Before anyone goes into a panic fit, I need to point out that these weaknesses have been largely corrected. But up until the time that they were corrected, because of ill designed internal controls: it was impossible for auditors to determine with 100% certainty that past posting had not taken place.

I also need to point out that the audit trails that currently exist for bets made on track, at otbs, and through US and Canadian ADWs are very good. The location, amount, type of bet, and timestamp for bets made at these locations are all recorded as part of the audit trail - making it possible for auditors to trace each bet all the way through the system in the event the bet needs to be investigated.

However, there IS one area where I remain unconvinced that the industry's audit trails are adequate. There are a handful of offshore sites where the site legally acts as the player, the ADW, and the tote company (all three entities wrapped up as one.) The industry's audit trail for bets made through this type of site begins when a batch of bets shows up at a US based hub.

From what I can see it would be possible for somebody unscrupulous to use a computer to do the following:

1. Generate a batch of bets.

2. Not have the computer submit that batch right away.

3. Have a human operator watch the gate open (and perhaps as much as the first quarter mile of that race.)

4. Have a pre-written routine that would allow deletion of horses from that last batch before submitting that batch.

The routine could be as simple as enabling a human operator to notice that the #3 horse broke slowly or lost the rider at the start - immediately followed by the human operator hitting the #3 key and the Delete Key - with the result being that all wagers involving the #3 horse are instantly deleted from that batch.

From there the batch would be submitted - with 0 transactions involving the #3 horse included - and no indication of any kind that wagers involving the #3 horse were canceled - and certainly no timestamp indicating when wagers involving the #3 horse were canceled. So long as the batch shows up at a US based hub in a timely manner - all wagers included in that batch go into the pools (with no one being the wiser.)

Please understand that I am not saying this type of activity is taking place.

But I am saying that I don't believe the internal controls currently in place are strong enough to prevent someone unscrupulous from pulling something like this off.


-jp

.


I don't have stats Mike. But I believe there are weaknesses in the tote system's internal controls for wagers generated at a handful of locations outside the US. I really hope that I am wrong here - but if there have been improvements to the tote system's internal controls for wagers generated at these locations since I made the quoted post back in February, I am unaware of it.


-jp

.

[cj]

Thanks for the anecdotal reply, but this is not hard data, and doesn't provide a comparison between the number of winners whose odds RISE versus FALL after the gate opens.

Plus the number of horses whose odds FALL and LOSE versus WIN.

I'm not sure how anyone could have this data. That said, if I had to bet, I would say there are people that have an edge after the break. It may be getting bets in late, but more likely it is people having the ability to cancel bets, even big ones, after the bell.

Personally, I don't need the stats. I've followed the game for over 30 years as close as anyone can follow it. I've seen way too many head scratchers the past few years to think it is mere coincidence.

[Milkshaker]

The unfortunate truth of the matter is that horse racing would require decades of grand poohbah committees, pompous blue-ribbon panels, various self-important symposiums, acrimonious politicized internal debate, incessant backbiting, and relentlessly selfish fiefdom-protecting before it ever came close to consent or agreement on a "5 things the racing industry doesn't want you to know" list.

[therussmeister]

I did a study 4 or 5 years ago recording odds starting at 5mtp until the final update and found that in most races with 7 or more betting interests, 3 horses odds dropped after the start of the race, and those three horses were almost always three of the top four favorites. Given that late money was bet predominantly on three favorites nearly every race, it was not that accurate. An after-the-fact bet on every dropper would have been a losing proposition in my study.

I don't think I still have the data unfortunately.

[aaron]

Thanks for the anecdotal reply, but this is not hard data, and doesn't provide a comparison between the number of winners whose odds RISE versus FALL after the gate opens.

Plus the number of horses whose odds FALL and LOSE versus WIN.
I don't know if anyone could do a comparison,that would mean anything. I am not saying any race is fixed. My guess is that races won by horses who are a price generally go up. What I would like to see is a study of horses who broke well and were figure horses and how their odds were reflected after the break.It seems to me that closing horses don't get bet the same as horses with speed in these situations. This is just my observation. The main thing I am saying is that a player deserves to know what the odds on his is when the race goes off and not be surprised at the finish of the race.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I'm not sure how anyone could have this data. That said, if I had to bet, I would say there are people that have an edge after the break. It may be getting bets in late, but more likely it is people having the ability to cancel bets, even big ones, after the bell.
Personally, I don't need the stats. I've followed the game for over 30 years as close as anyone can follow it. I've seen way too many head scratchers the past few years to think it is mere coincidence.

This is very different (still not right), imo, than the assertions made by Reckless. If he's aware of racing officials making bets during races, I'd highly recommend he contact the appropriate racing commission in writing. Oh I'm sure they're in on it, too.

[sjk]

Pool sizes have gotten a lot smaller and it doesnt take much of a bet to move the price at the small and mid size tracks.

Since historical charts are available now I looked at a handful of medium sized tracks and compared exacta pools from now and 10 years ago. For the most part they are less than half of what they were; Turfway and Calder are way below half.

People who are scaling their bets to pool size must be acutely aware of this and are possibly seeing less opportunity to get money in play.

[Stillriledup]

I would say one of the things that tracks don't want their patrons to know is that they do everything in their power to create carryovers. Hopefully tracks arent breaking any real life laws or racing rules, but they can legally do things to give longshots a fair and fighting chance.

Some might suggest that tracks don't do anything to help create carryovers and you could certainly argue this to be the case, but the one thing i would have to imagine to be true is that when a ridiculous longshot wins in one of the pick 6 races, some track executive somewhere is pumping his fist. While they might not technically do anything different to try and 'create' carryovers, at the very least they're rooting for certain horses to win and that is a conflict of interest that they don't want bettors to know exists.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I would say one of the things that tracks don't want their patrons to know is that they do everything in their power to create carryovers. Hopefully tracks arent breaking any real life laws or racing rules, but they can legally do things to give longshots a fair and fighting chance.

Some might suggest that tracks don't do anything to help create carryovers and you could certainly argue this to be the case, but the one thing i would have to imagine to be true is that when a ridiculous longshot wins in one of the pick 6 races, some track executive somewhere is pumping his fist. While they might not technically do anything different to try and 'create' carryovers, at the very least they're rooting for certain horses to win and that is a conflict of interest that they don't want bettors to know exists.

Yeah, that isn't creating anything.

I'll help you out here SRU. If track mgt wants to increase the odds of a carryover, they would simply always place MSWs loaded with first-time starters in any of the legs 3 to 6. That way, Pick Six players have no chance to see what firsters are taking action. But they don't do this too much because Pick Six players (e.g. Steve Crist) hate it and complain.

[Stillriledup]

Yeah, that isn't creating anything.

I'll help you out here SRU. If track mgt wants to increase the odds of a carryover, they would simply always place MSWs loaded with first-time starters in legs 3 to 6. That way, Pick Six players have no chance to see what firsters are taking action. But they don't do this too much because Pick Six players (e.g. Steve Crist) hate it and complain.



I think another way that they can help create carryovers is by carding 6.5 furlong races instead of 6F races. I believe that jocks, for the most part, ride a 6.5 race in much the same way as they ride a 6F race and the extra 1/2 furlong gives the longshot a little more time to catch the favorite. More times than not, a favorite will be a speed horse or pace presser and won't be 'rated' any differently than if it was a 6F race. At least that's the thinking.

[Stillriledup]

Yeah, that isn't creating anything.

I'll help you out here SRU. If track mgt wants to increase the odds of a carryover, they would simply always place MSWs loaded with first-time starters in any of the legs 3 to 6. That way, Pick Six players have no chance to see what firsters are taking action. But they don't do this too much because Pick Six players (e.g. Steve Crist) hate it and complain.

You're right, its not creating anything, but if they're secretly pumping their fists, it makes you wonder if they havent at least thought about ways to make favorites run slower or make lonshots run faster. I know if i was in charge of a major track, creating carryovers would be the first thing i think about in the morning and the last thing i think about before going to bed.

Is there a way that you can actually create situations that favor longshots and hinder favorites? If they can, its anyone's guess, but i have to imagine that they've at least THOUGHT about it.

[racingfan378]

If you have been paying attention at Belmont and Saratoga there are some large swings in odds after the race has started.
For instance at Saratoga a 12-1 horse was bet to 5-1 after the race started. The last week at Saratoga a$53 exacta with o minutes on the clock came back $29.00. This Wednesday a horse was 3-1 or 7/2 with 0 time and came back 9/5. The double with this horse was $23.00 with 2 minutes on the clock came back $14.00. The 12-1 shot who went off 5-1 ran 2nd. They don't all win,but don't you think the bettor is entitled to know his odds. I don't think the races are tampered with,but if you are rational person,its hard to believe its always a failure to transmit odds correctly from the simulcast outlets.
If you believe Barry Bonds didn't take steroids, then this must all be a coincidence. These are only a few instances,and I don't watch the board for this every race.Another one at the end of Belmont,before Saratoga was a favorite double,in the 8th and 9th race paying $13 or $14 and coming back $8.00. When NYRA was taking off-shore money,I remember many horses getting bet late who broke well. They didn't all win,but they all broke well. I understand as a bettor there have been times,I have benefitted from this,but this is not good for racing and it doesn't seem to be addressed by the powers that be.NYRA did shut down bets from some of the off shore shops and the problem was somewhat better for a while,but it seems to have cropped up again.I know many big bettors who seem to be aware of this.As,with most problems with racing,people are aware,but they don't have any answers.

Here is my concern. What happens during a tote delay? The tracks say that they are waiting for money to come into the system from other outlets. So the question becomes, how do we know that money wasnt bet AFTER betting closed?? After a tote delay, those odds ARE changing. If the money isnt reflected in the pool during the race, they shouldnt add it in 5 mins after the race ran!

Do you close betting right at zero? When the first horse goes into the gate? We have seen this chat before and there is no real answer but to upgrade the tote systems we use today. You never hear of the Hong Kong Jockey Club having tote issues and they wager 10x - 20x times more on any given day of live racing.

But I will say this, if I think for one minute there is something going on that I dont like, then I wouldnt play the game. Some of you guys think that and I can easily see where you are coming from and agree on some points. But dont play the races if you see something you dont like.

Carryovers? Well the racing dept. writes the race, trainers enter the horses and they put the hardest 6 races with the most horses into the pick six sequence. Nothing wrong with that. Why would a track toss in two 5 horse fields into a pick 6 while a field of 12 starts off the first race of the day. That doesnt make sense to produce carryovers. I dont see how a racetrack can "fix" races to make sure no one hits the pick 6 and to make sure the longshot wins, thats silly talk to me.

I also think that if the trainer knows the horse doesnt stand a chance when on paper he/she looks like it does, then the horse shouldnt be in the damn race! We have all seen even money horses choke and the trainer comes back saying "the horse needed that race"

[Stillriledup]

Here is my concern. What happens during a tote delay? The tracks say that they are waiting for money to come into the system from other outlets. So the question becomes, how do we know that money wasnt bet AFTER betting closed?? After a tote delay, those odds ARE changing. If the money isnt reflected in the pool during the race, they shouldnt all it 5 mins after the race ran!

Do you close betting right at zero? When the first horse goes into the gate? We have seen this chat before and there is no real answer but to upgrade the tote systems we use today. You never hear of the Hong Kong Jockey Club having tote issues and they wager 10x - 20x times more on a given day of live racing.

But I will say this, if I think for one minute there is something going on that I dont like, then I wouldnt play the game. Some of you guys think that and I can easily see where you are coming from and agree on some points. But dont play the races if you see something you dont like. :confused: IMHO

The one thing that concerns me the most is the lack of 'news' about the tote. We had the pick 6 scandal about 10 years ago and there was a lot of 'talk' about tote security. They arrested the perps and toss them in the can, but after this scandal, i havent heard one peep about any more 'breeches' of security. Not only have i not heard a peep about it, but i havent heard individual tracks or tote companies talk about how they 'upgraded' the tote system and now they now have safeguards in place to prevent this from ever happening again.

When i'm sitting at Barnes and Noble sipping a latte and reading Wired magazine and i stumble onto an article about hackers and how sophisticated they are these days, the thought that always creeps into my head is how easy it might be for the genius 2012 hacker to bet a few bucks after the start into some of these blind pools. If these guys can hack Nasa, or the US Govt or Fort Knox or Scotland Yard, i have to imagine it would be a piece of cake to hack into some B track and 'skim' some money off the blind tri or super pools.

When a price from an exotic bet comes back 'low' and someone complains about it, there always seems to be someone else to jump right on the complainer and say "stop complaining, the price is legit, there's nothing to see, keep moving" but it makes you wonder if these 'short' prices are ever investigated fully.

Unless there's an investigation, how is anyone to know that a skimmer didnt stick 1 dollar on a trifecta that pays 201.20 and without the guys bet it would have paid 201.80? Is anyone going to really notice that the price is '60 cents short' because of 1 dollar that was snuck into the pools the split second the race ended?

[johnhannibalsmith]

...

When i'm sitting at Barnes and Noble sipping a latte and reading Wired magazine ...

:lol: :lol:

Sorry, that just made me laugh for some reason. :D

[baconswitchfarm]

I love when I hear the tote system is safe. Twin Spires- hacked, Apple Headquarters - hacked, Pentagon - Hacked. Then I walk down to the tote room at my track. Here sits a guy who couldn't get a job at a toll booth. In front of him appears to be a Commodore 64 keyboard. He has the monitor with the black screen and green writing like in the 80 's movie War Games. Steve Jobs couldn't keep his stuff safe, but this guy can . Nice story.

[lamboguy]

Pool sizes have gotten a lot smaller and it doesnt take much of a bet to move the price at the small and mid size tracks.

Since historical charts are available now I looked at a handful of medium sized tracks and compared exacta pools from now and 10 years ago. For the most part they are less than half of what they were; Turfway and Calder are way below half.

People who are scaling their bets to pool size must be acutely aware of this and are possibly seeing less opportunity to get money in play.very true.......if you are going to make money betting races, you are going to have to bet much smaller amounts unless you bet minus pools, then you can bet whatever you want and know what your return is going to be prior to making the bet. its the only bet where late money or breakage doesn't effect your payoff. but you have to be real good at this type of wagering, one mistake puts you in a bad spot.

[Stillriledup]

:lol: :lol:

Sorry, that just made me laugh for some reason. :D

It is pretty funny now that i think about it. :D

[Mr G]

things the industry 'doesnt want the average customer to know' what would that be?

That the industry doesn't give a rats arse for the average customer.

[Stillriledup]

That the industry doesn't give a rats arse for the average customer.

I think that's something they DO want you to know! They want to flaunt it in your face because they know that even if they treat you like garbage, you will still come back and bet their races. Or, at least that's what they think.

[WoxFan]

Also, entries that are placed in as a favor to another trainer to ensure the race fills.

[burnsy]

I thought you were going to follow that sentence by saying, "I worked most of that time in the IT department." How would a groom, hotwalker, trainer, jockey or owner know about the things you asserted? Don't you mean you heard rumors about such things? I wouldn't believe every rumor you hear on the backstretch.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2003-03-25/sports/0303250205_1_breeders-cup-chris-harn-pick-six
I don't know the guy posting or why stable people would know about this but it does happen. Do you think the guys that got caught only did it once? I think they were caught for doing a few times, but it kind of got plea bargained....the track (and OTB) keeps things quiet this way. Anyone that knows about "shady" street things in life knows people mostly get away with it many times BEFORE they get caught....like booking bets and all of the vice. Other people were and are probably doing it if these clowns did....common sense...again you just have to have a little street smarts to figure this out. The only reason these guys got caught was because it was Breeders Cup day and the pool was huge and even still the odds of hitting the thing were even higher.......red flags right away....they are checking whether the ticket is legit or not. I still bet, but to think there is not scams going on,,,,,rarely....... is naive in this day and age......its everywhere!

[proximity]

probably the one thing the industry doesn't want you to know (if they know it themselves) is that there is a lot of variance in the game. same thing with poker.

[burnsy]

The example i gave was a big pick 6, which is a bet that gets alot of attention when hit..........imagine people fixing win tickets? Show tickets? Doubles? If these people were doing Pick 6'es.......how many get away with single bets? With the computer, people are scamming every industry...its just part of the life we live now. I don't need to hear "backstretch rumors" to figure this out!

[Stillriledup]

The example i gave was a big pick 6, which is a bet that gets alot of attention when hit..........imagine people fixing win tickets? Show tickets? Doubles? If these people were doing Pick 6'es.......how many get away with single bets? With the computer, people are scamming every industry...its just part of the life we live now. I don't need to hear "backstretch rumors" to figure this out!

I was reading a book about hackers last night at Barnes and Noble (while sippling a latte....that's for you JHS!) and i was reading how good these hackers are and then asked myself "well, are no hackers interested in the 'easy money' that could be gained if they opened up an ADW account and just bet after the race was over?"

According to the racing industry, they havent had one problem with past posting or hacking since the Pick6-gate about a decade ago.

[tzipi]

That Rudy Rodriquez is actually Dutrow :D