Sidebar

[AlsoEligible]

Originally Posted by BCOURTNEY

Account Wagering Fraud. Fraud includes fixing the winner in a race, taking advantage of hidden data to cash in on parimutuel pools, using insiders (who are prohibited from wagering or making certain types of wagers), using
trainers or jockeys, or associates on their behalf, wagering against a horse they ride. Technology can assist in analysis, require/force ADW's to submit wagering logs (transaction level) to a CENTRAL regional or national authority for auditing. Not an odds display issue.

Already happens. The TRPB receives transaction-level logs at the close of every race; not just from ADWs, but every wagering site in the country - and some international locations. These logs are sent in real-time, and aside from being used to detect odds manipulation, can also immediately flag instances of past-posting.

Past Posting. Past posting is a situation where wagers are placed after a race has started. Past posting may be due to a technical issue where a stop wagering signal fails to be initiated or fails to be registered, to a failure to activate the prescribed stop wagering procedure in a timely manner, or
to a failure to communicate a stop wagering command to a guest wagering location. This can be technically addressed, invert the advertisement of a stop command to a request to participate command from the remote sites, or "grant" pool availability for a certain seconds per cycle in sliding windows, two-way handshake, implement true transaction acknowledgement instead of pool total updates (the same source of the security issues) the list goes on and on and on. This does cause an odds display issue. These incidents should be publicly reported by the tote companies.

Agreed that a transactional protocol makes more sense in today's industry than one based on pool totals. There were reasons for that when ITSP was developed in the 90s, but those limitations have long been eliminated. Other countries like UK, France, HK, etc all use transactional protocols, and North America should also move that way.

Also agree that more transparency is needed. Whether it's the totes, tracks, TRPB....when technical failures do lead to past-posting, it should be made public. Including the track affected, the remote site, and the underlying cause. Over time, if issues keep being reported at the same site, then a pattern can be seen and further action can be taken.

Cancel Delay. A Cancel Delay is a wager that is allowed to be cancelled more than a reasonable time after purchase and/or after wagering on a race has ended. Cancel Delay fraud is associated with odds manipulation. It
results in gaining an unfair advantage by observing the beginning of a race before deciding whether to hold or cancel bets. This does cause an odds display issue. These incidents should be publicly reported by the tote companies and investigated with published findings.

Cancel delays have been almost entirely eliminated over the past 10-15 years. There's only a single facility in the US - Oaklawn - which still allows wagers to be cancelled after a race closes (within 5 seconds, if I recall correctly).

Odds Manipulation. One betting strategy is to monitor betting “action” – the increase in the number of wagers which lead to the dynamic changing of odds. One way action increases is with a contestant that has excessive
money wagered on it by other bettors (a “bet down” contestant). Other players looking for value or overlays will bet against a “bet down” contestant and will instead bet on an alternative. This bettor will react to the win odds
and base a selection from readily available public information about contestants. In addition, an odds manipulator may even cancel the manipulating wagers – thus recovering the very funds used for the purpose of odds manipulation! The removal of those wagers in turn could contribute to a late drop in odds and payoffs. Obviously, this scenario could generate
adverse reaction from law-abiding fans, ranging from a perception of a “fixed race” to a perception of “past posting” -- making a bet after the official time when no more bets are to be taken. When combined with robotic wagering – which provides an instantaneous view of the odds for all other pools – odds
manipulation can be achieved by placing a large wager or set of wagers just before the wagers of traditional slower patrons. This is another type of “front running” – where one player takes unfair advantage of other players using
advance knowledge of pending wagers. This is similar to the front-running situations associated with high frequency trading, “naked access,” and flickering quotes associated with today’s financial markets. This is the same technique used by the Flash Boys of Wall Street fame, horse racing pools have the same problem with some receiving signal before others. It effects the odds displayed, it can be technically solved, everything to the contrary is excuse making.

100% incorrect. Tote companies in North America have one method for generating odds, and those odds are sent to everyone the same way - and at the same time - regardless of whether you're a robo-better, an ADW, a TV trailer generating displays, or an infield board at Santa Anita.

Of course when updated odds and pool totals are sent across the network every 30-60 seconds (depending on the track), the computer teams are able to process that information quicker than someone standing trackside, and there is an advantage there. But they're not seeing anything updating in "real time". The current protocol simply doesn't support it...which is yet another reason to move to transaction-level instead of pool totals.

Even if the tote companies had somehow managed to develop a real-time feed, it wouldn't be kept exclusive to ~20 syndicates. They'd sell it to every ADW who wanted to use it. And every track and regulatory body who are getting pelted with complaints about late odds changes would be demanding that the totes turn it on for them. But again, such a feed doesn't exist.

Source: Over a decade working for tote, several years working with whale teams, and several years sitting on the TRA2020 technical committee.

Performance Fraud. When a horse wins at long odds -- contrary to expectations based on past performances -- or conversely, is bet down to a level inconsistent with its past performances, there is good reason to open a formal investigation. In the past, investigations were only occasionally pursued, based on anecdotal and fortuitous information sources. This is because of the complexity, cost, and tedium associated with obtaining and evaluating complex wagering and other data relating to a suspect race. Needs an investigatory solution. In this spirit there is the Dead Contender Scenario. The easiest way to illegally fix a race (and cash in on parimutuel pools) is to illegally arrange a favorite or second favorite win. Fixing a race, by having a so-called “Dead Contender” lose, requires only a very small number of people – maybe only one. Exotic pool bets based on the outcome of one event, with high payoffs when the favorites are off the board, are most vulnerable. Investigatory body needed, do we have one?

Not really my area of the game, so I'm not sure what the best way is to address this. Getting a central authoritative body to investigate (if we don't already have one) would be a good first step.

I'd say a couple of the issues you're listing have been addressed, such transaction logs for auditing, and cancel delays. There are others where more work is needed. Namely past-posting, where the industry needs to be much more transparent in order to combat public perception.

As for your longest paragraphs about robotic wagering, there are some fundamental misunderstandings about what tools the whales have access to. Aside from this thread, most of the things I see them accused of all over this board (past-posting, "spoofing" wagers, real time odds, trifecta and superfecta probables, etc) are all wrong.

I do think there are steps that can be taken to bring the public back onto a more level playing field, and it's a conversation that should be had. But it's not going to be a productive one until all sides can at least agree/understand what tools the whales actually have....and I think the CHRB is going to run into this same problem when they talk about it on Thursday.