Betting and the Effect of Tote Board

[whodoyoulike]

Given Your selection is initially going off at your acceptable odds. What do you usually do? Thnx

[Dave Schwartz]

How should a guy that bets optimum bet vote here?

[Tape Reader]

As one may imagine by my name, (Tape Reader), I totally bet off the tote board. When I see an "unusual" bet, I want to see the odds skyrocket towards PT.

As always, I never post without giving the angle: <ML at 10 MTP and >ML at Off.

I definitely increase my bet when conditions are favorable for a big score.

[raybo]

I bet the same amount in both cases.

"Very" generally speaking, except for an odds-on favorite, the post time odds tend to go in the direction of the morning line. Odds-on favorites are more likely to go away from the morning line than towards it. Chaos races are probably the most difficult to predict, regarding which way the odds will go after post time, because the public support is so spread out, unlike non-choas races where the public has a good idea of which horse/horses are most likely to win.

Of course, high morning line horses are likely to go higher than the morning line after post time.

There are extenuating circumstances to all the thoughts above, so take them with a grain of sand.

I tend to assume the worst, and expect the odds to drop a little. So, either my own minimum odds are there at post time, in which case I place the bet, or they aren't, in which case I pass.

[Overlay]

I think that your poll options should correlate bet size not just with odds, but with edge (that is the disparity between a horse's odds and what you perceive the horse's actual chance of winning to be).

It wouldn't matter to me how high a horse's actual odds went if it was still an underlay according to my personal odds line, since I wouldn't be betting it. And, by the same reasoning, a horse at low actual odds could very well be a greater proportional overlay in comparison to my line (and thus a better wagering proposition) than any horse in the field with higher actual odds.

If your poll assumes that the horse in question is already an overlay at its current actual odds in comparison to my line, I would increase my bet size as the horse's actual odds went still higher.

[lamboguy]

i gave up looking at odds since the onset of conditional wagering.

[Robert Goren]

generally the higher odds, the more I bet. The exception is the horse that I expect to go off at low odds and isn't. Those horses never run well.

[DeanT]

I bet to win a fixed amount of a percentage of bankroll, a la Stanford Wong, with a bit of a twist.

If my want-win is $200, I will bet $100 to win on an even money shot, or $10 on a horse who is 20-1.

Over time you build a betting array and learn what bets give the most edge and you can tweak accordingly. If my ROI is 0.95 on win bets under 2-1 I know the tote board is not my friend and quantifying an edge at those levels is problematic. I can then choose to be more picky, or eliminate that odds array from my betting.

Conversely if I learn I bet longshots well, I can risk a little bit more on those.

This helps me with losing streaks as well, because if you are risking a number which is closer to your pain threshold on shorter shots, you are cashing more tickets on those and it helps keep my mind in a better place.

[pondman]

I'm not interested unless it's going to fill at least 1/3 of a McDonald's bag for a few hundred bucks. My bets stay the same throughout a meet.

[Robert Fischer]

Decreasing from acceptable odds? Serious long-term players have to pass. Playing for the short term or entertainment = the horse has a good shot.

If you really have a master's understanding of the probability of your wager, and the Tote Board Odds are going to end up slightly higher than acceptable odds, you can bet slightly more than your base amount.

You are starting to get a little bit too exact IMO.

When the Tote Board Odds are much higher, then you also need to have insight into the thinking of the "public".


You fully expected the public to greatly overlay the wager, and you can can bet a bit more(or simply bet with confidence).
You have no idea why the wager appears greatly overlayed, and you have to think about passing.

[therussmeister]

My bet size is based strictly on estimated probability of winning and bankroll size. Tote board has nothing to do with it, except that I have a minimum price, also based on estimated probability.

[myhorse1]

for the sake of accuracy and if you can please change my vote -i voted in decrease bet with decreasing odds --i should have voted for the last option -eliminate selection or change selection.

the poll is not fine grained enough e.g. if my horse went from 5/1 to 4/1 i would bet it --if it went from 9/5 to 4/5 i would be looking for another horse or pass the race.

[thaskalos]

I don't allow the tote board to dictate the amount that I will wager on a given race...because I cannot trust my biggest "overlays" to run according to my expectations.

In fact...I have spotted a particular tote play involving overlays, which is practically infallible, especially at the minor tracks.

A horse figures to be the favorite in the race, exhibiting everything that the horseplayer likes to see in a PP. Decent early speed...sharp form...highest Beyers...flexible running style...proper class level and distance...everything. The horse figures to be no more than 2-1 in today's race.

But with about 7 minutes to post, the horse in sitting there at 9/2 odds, and the bettors are licking their chops...wondering if these juicy odds will stay the same to the end.

2 minutes to post, and the horse is still between 9-2 and 4-1...remaining so until the horses reach the gate.

Sometimes this horse's odds will drop to 3-1 late, and sometimes they won't...but the ultimate result is always the same. The horse always loses...and often even finishes out of the money.

In fact...I don't remember ever seeing a horse of this type actually win.

[myhorse1]

my first order of business is to thank thaskalos for his many thoughtful and illuminating posts.

this message board is much richer because of your posts and i always look forward to reading what you have to say.

THANK YOU

[myhorse1]

[QUOTE=thaskalos



A horse figures to be the favorite in the race, exhibiting everything that the horseplayer likes to see in a PP. Decent early speed...sharp form...highest Beyers...flexible running style...proper class level and distance...everything. The horse figures to be no more than 2-1 in today's race.


In fact...I don't remember ever seeing a horse of this type actually win.[/QUOTE]

if as you say the horse has everything what could it possibly be that the public sees that overrides everything ?

[thaskalos]

my first order of business is to thank thaskalos for his many thoughtful and illuminating posts.

this message board is much richer because of your posts and i always look forward to reading what you have to say.

THANK YOU

And I, in turn, thank you for the kind words.

My journey through this game has been a particularly rocky one, and my objective here is to try to make it a little smoother for those who follow...by offering opinions born from the innumerous mistakes that I have made in my own play.

[thaskalos]

if as you say the horse has everything what could it possibly be that the public sees that overrides everything ?

The "public" is not only who we think it is.

Most of the "public" look at the horses's last race, which probably occurred a month ago, and think that they are studying "recent form"...and "current ability".

But there is another segment of the wagering public which is privy to more recent, more relevant information about the horse...which the rest of us don't possess. And this segment of the wagering public, although small in number, speak loudly with their wagering dollars...and affect the tote board in ways that cannot be understood by the player who regards the DRF as the "bible"...

That's why I say that spotting REAL overlays is a more difficult task then some make it out to be.

Betting at the minor tracks is an eye-opening experience...:)

[myhorse1]

I don't allow the tote board to dictate the amount that I will wager on a given race...because I cannot trust my biggest "overlays" to run according to my expectations.

In fact...I have spotted a particular tote play involving overlays, which is practically infallible, especially at the minor tracks.

A horse figures to be the favorite in the race, exhibiting everything that the horseplayer likes to see in a PP. Decent early speed...sharp form...highest Beyers...flexible running style...proper class level and distance...everything. The horse figures to be no more than 2-1 in today's race.

But with about 7 minutes to post, the horse in sitting there at 9/2 odds, and the bettors are licking their chops...wondering if these juicy odds will stay the same to the end.

2 minutes to post, and the horse is still between 9-2 and 4-1...remaining so until the horses reach the gate.

Sometimes this horse's odds will drop to 3-1 late, and sometimes they won't...but the ultimate result is always the same. The horse always loses...and often even finishes out of the money.

In fact...I don't remember ever seeing a horse of this type actually win.
in your experience how often does the NEW favorite win?

[grant miller]

my bets variy on the win pools (im a w-p-s bettor), a track with small pools like finger lakes or our local harness tracks ,I wont bet more than 20 $ nyra or hawthorne Ill fire away if I think i gotts an edge!

[eurocapper]

At least for multirace exotics it would make sense to use it, since the ROI will go down if one makes a lot of selections and get only chalk. Also can give an idea of when to pass a multirace.

[HUSKER55]

I use the tote board to compare my "pecking order". If the public and I agree then the favs will probably do it. If not, then I have a shot to make money.

Sometimes it works! :)

[Midnight Cruiser]

As one may imagine by my name, (Tape Reader), I totally bet off the tote board. When I see an "unusual" bet, I want to see the odds skyrocket towards PT.

As always, I never post without giving the angle: <ML at 10 MTP and >ML at Off.

I definitely increase my bet when conditions are favorable for a big score.


Tape- is your system of less than 10 min before and greater than at post your main or only ways you play? How do you play during a card? MC

[pondman]

But there is another segment of the wagering public which is privy to more recent, more relevant information about the horse...which the rest of us don't possess.

It might sound a little creepy but there was a time we (yeah a group of us) would follow owners to the big window at SA We learned what owners would wear if they expected a picture. Many of the high.end owners don't bet, especially breeders. But some do. Therefore, you need to try and understand if the odds are floating on the backs of the general public or if there truly is a heavy bet by a connection. I've run with a crowd of medicine men, and they know considerably more about a horse, more than a owner, often more than the trainer. There is an underworld to horse racing that will never show up in print.

[Overlay]

It might sound a little creepy but there was a time we (yeah a group of us) would follow owners to the big window at SA We learned what owners would wear if they expected a picture. Many of the high.end owners don't bet, especially breeders. But some do. Therefore, you need to try and understand if the odds are floating on the backs of the general public or if there truly is a heavy bet by a connection. I've run with a crowd of medicine men, and they know considerably more about a horse, more than a owner, often more than the trainer. There is an underworld to horse racing that will never show up in print.
I agree with you. But to me, the really amazing thing is that, even with everything hidden, unknown, and/or unknowable that goes on behind the scenes, thoroughbred performance still exhibits long-term trends that remain consistent over time, and that can be reliably used (with reference only to generally available, published information) as a basis for determining the likelihood (although not the certainty) of how a horse will run against its competition in today's race.

[thaskalos]

I agree with you. But to me, the really amazing thing is that, even with everything hidden, unknown, and/or unknowable that goes on behind the scenes, thoroughbred performance still exhibits long-term trends that remain consistent over time, and that can be reliably used (with reference only to generally available, published information) as a basis for determining the likelihood (although not the certainty) of how a horse will run against its competition in today's race.

I am not sure about these "long-term trends"...which can supposedly "be reliably used as a basis for determining the likelihood of how the horse will run against its competition in today's race".

I have seen research by William Quirin and others -- which had uncovered certain trends which appeared useful at the time -- but the sample size they relied upon was inadequate...and these trends did not pass the test of time.

Quirin's work has been hailed as monumental by some...but he himself flatly stated that he FAILED in his pursuit of creating an accurate "mechanical" odds line...and even stopped playing this game altogether.

[Overlay]

The increased use of automation has resulted in more extensive statistical studies (in terms of both sample sizes and the period of time over which data was collected) since Quirin's research.

[thaskalos]

The increased use of automation has resulted in more extensive statistical studies (in terms of both sample sizes and the period of time over which data was collected) since Quirin's research.

And these statistical studies can be put to profitable use...in determining the likelihood of what the horse will do in today's race?

Forgive me, Overlay...but I must maintain my skepticism.

[Stillriledup]

I don't allow the tote board to dictate the amount that I will wager on a given race...because I cannot trust my biggest "overlays" to run according to my expectations.

In fact...I have spotted a particular tote play involving overlays, which is practically infallible, especially at the minor tracks.

A horse figures to be the favorite in the race, exhibiting everything that the horseplayer likes to see in a PP. Decent early speed...sharp form...highest Beyers...flexible running style...proper class level and distance...everything. The horse figures to be no more than 2-1 in today's race.

But with about 7 minutes to post, the horse in sitting there at 9/2 odds, and the bettors are licking their chops...wondering if these juicy odds will stay the same to the end.

2 minutes to post, and the horse is still between 9-2 and 4-1...remaining so until the horses reach the gate.

Sometimes this horse's odds will drop to 3-1 late, and sometimes they won't...but the ultimate result is always the same. The horse always loses...and often even finishes out of the money.

In fact...I don't remember ever seeing a horse of this type actually win.

This is a great post and the reason that the Adventurer is one of my favorite posters at PA. I couldnt agree more, horses who are dead on the board for absolutely no reason that you could see on paper almost always lose. Its almost like there is an 'unknown force' at work that a logical person can't figure out.

When i see stuff like this it scares me because it makes me think that im betting against people who somehow have 'inside information' that they KNOW this horse won't be going forward today for one reason or another.

This happened in a race in So Cal recently, a horse who was coming off a layoff and was dropping from a MdSpWt race to a claimer and attracted Bejarano and looked like one of the better horses on paper and was 3-1 or 7-2 ML was sitting there at 6 or 7-1 with 1 MTP. I couldnt believe my eyes and started to ask myself "is this the same horse that i'm seeing on paper"?

The horse actually raced ok finishing 3rd and finished with some run, but the 'deadness' on the board had me alarmed, i still bet the horse but i really shied away from making a large bet simply because while the horse was a ridiculous overlay, i just figured "something is wrong"

In theory, you're supposed to unload your bank account on a horse that is 6 or 7-1 that you figure to be one of the betting favorites, but it just seems to me that these horses rarely if ever win. They seriously never win which is alarming, it alarming to think that there's a much bigger 'force' in racing determining the odds that just what you see on paper.

[eurocapper]

I don't think "whale" syndicates are any secret, they dominate in Hong Kong and probably also the bigger tracks. Pool size may be too small for them elsewhere, since they will also be wanting to hide the effect of their bets.

[raybo]

This happened in a race in So Cal recently, a horse who was coming off a layoff and was dropping from a MdSpWt race to a claimer and attracted Bejarano and looked like one of the better horses on paper and was 3-1 or 7-2 ML was sitting there at 6 or 7-1 with 1 MTP. I couldnt believe my eyes and started to ask myself "is this the same horse that i'm seeing on paper"?



There are 3 things in that scenario that shout at me, the highlighted points in the quote would have made me look for another winner.

[traynor]

...

In theory, you're supposed to unload your bank account on a horse that is 6 or 7-1 that you figure to be one of the betting favorites, but it just seems to me that these horses rarely if ever win. They seriously never win which is alarming, it alarming to think that there's a much bigger 'force' in racing determining the odds that just what you see on paper.

It may be that the method you are using (or the methods that most are using) inadequately compensate for "negative class drops." Nothing more complex (or sinister) than that.

[Tape Reader]

Tape- is your system of less than 10 min before and greater than at post your main or only ways you play? How do you play during a card? MC

No. I have several other angles, and some I use to tweak this one, but they require a computer. The reason that I gave this one is because it could easily be done with a pocket program while at the track.

I run my program on about three tracks per day, but I rarely bet on line. I just do this for the fun/research of technical analysis of the tote board. When at the track, I typically visit Saratoga for several days, I make a win bet on one and box four in a triple.

I know how much I can lose in a day and I accept that. If I hit one I'm usually up for the day as this system produces big prices.