Quote:
Originally Posted by Track Phantom
There is a lot problematic about these dramatic odds changes. Most notably is they are ALWAYS (or almost always) on the winner. And always dramatically down.
One question I have that I can't get my head around. If the 4 was so obvious (i.e. 3-2 in the daily double pools) why is it 4-1 at post time? So the general public is idiotic and only the computer players know? Something isn't right. It feels like pool manipulation (buoying other horses to make it appear they are live) and a combination of late money and cancelled wagers. The 3-2 odds on the favorite should be relative proportionate up to and through the big computer wagers. It NEVER is. Why?
There are a lot of things wrong with this game but this is easily #1 on the list. Finally, if fixed odds were a thing and the tracks were on the hook, I am positive betting anomalies would be stopped immediately. The oversight would be forensic-like.
|
That’s completely clueless about the “number one” problem.
There is approximately zero past-posting ongoing, and you can tell that clearly by how quickly they catch and fully report each new loophole such as that which didn’t get wagering stopped on the recent nationwide gimmick wager until shortly after leg one of a five-race sequence.
Even if everybody but you had the advantage on that day - just how great was that edge?
You ‘approximately’ never read anymore about random clerks at tiny tracks ‘past-posting’ in the way you used to get every last detail as to what combinations and what denominations and at which precise second he/she punched the tickets.
The solution is concise and simple for the visible elements of it all, and that equates to putting the public on the live horses to begin with.
If you are of the belief that “dramatic odds changes” are “almost always on the winner” AND “always dramatically down” then there is probably a lot more which you “can’t get your head around”…
beginning with parimutuel wagering.
.
.
.
