|
|
02-03-2018, 01:24 PM
|
#91
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,803
|
And just to add some spice to the thread (as if it needed anymore) I firmly believe that some are able to cancel wagers withing one or two seconds of the gate opening. Especially on need the lead types who don't break well.
Last edited by Andy Asaro; 02-03-2018 at 01:29 PM.
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 01:31 PM
|
#92
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Asaro
And just to add some spice to the thread (as if it needed anymore) I firmly believe that some are able to cancel wagers withing one or two seconds of the gate opening. Especially on need the lead types who don't break well.
|
yea, to many people have confirmed this, I assume this happens by mistake, but if these CRW players had access to cancel in the seconds after the start....
I assume they could have a secondary cancel CRW submittal loaded and just hit execute that cancels all combos where a poor start for a favored front runner occurs?
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 01:41 PM
|
#93
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,554
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage
And I don't dispute any of what Dave said. I'm sure they do attack every pool at every racetrack they deem worthy to play.
So they must have will-pay info during the first leg of the PICK_X wagers, that is what you're saying, correct?
Could they do similar without this info on PICK_X wagers? Sure they could.
The core of their ability lies at having software that can analyze all the different pool info (even if it is just the pool info YOU AND I have access to). I go back 10 years ago when I was doing this myself...with only my homegrown software and my ADW account.
No, I wasn't doing it like they are doing it...they just took the concept and made it much grander in scope.
It's not an impossible thing to do if you have the programming knowledge and the math background.
Smarter, more resourceful people than you or I tend to be more successful at this game. Should we punish them for this, even if they have access to the same data you and I have? I know it is your belief they have access to data we do not...let's establish that as fact first before we move forward.
|
Yes...I believe that these Whales have access that is denied to the rest of us. If you are more "skilled", or have "better software" than I have...then I have no bone to pick with you. I can't even complain if your betting-volume secures for you the sort of discounts(rebates) that are unavailable to me. In such a case...you have secured for yourself the sort of "advantage" that I too can avail myself to...if I become as "dedicated" to the game as you are.
But if you have a "clandestine" agreement with a betting outfit, which allows you "special" access to the wagering pools, or allows you to cancel wagers after the race starts...then I will scream "bloody murder"...because now there is outright CHEATING going on...at the expense of the unsuspecting player who is kept in the dark about such things.
__________________
"Theory is knowledge that doesn't work. Practice is when everything works and you don't know why."
-- Hermann Hesse
Last edited by thaskalos; 02-03-2018 at 01:43 PM.
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 02:33 PM
|
#94
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston+Ocala
Posts: 23,760
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP
yea, to many people have confirmed this, I assume this happens by mistake, but if these CRW players had access to cancel in the seconds after the start....
I assume they could have a secondary cancel CRW submittal loaded and just hit execute that cancels all combos where a poor start for a favored front runner occurs?
|
there is one 1 problem with your theory on the CRW, they have to have a television set that shows the race in real time. i doubt they have it, but could be wrong.
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 02:39 PM
|
#95
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 342
|
OK, I feel like I have to do this every couple of months now. I guess there are a few that don’t remember or never read my replies because the same stuff keeps coming up again and again re CAW teams.
1. CAW teams are no better than their handicapping algorithms. I’ve read nonsense on this board as well as many others than they have an advantage because they can win even if they lose. Yeah, as long as their percentage loss is less than their rebate rate. Guess what, that’s true for all rebate players. If you’re not playing with a rebate (other than guys in a handful of states than have onerous source market fees), that’s on you. I can name a bunch of reputable ADWs that offer rebates including the one I started, BetPTC. I know a number of non-CAW players that make money because they lose at a rate lower than the rebates they receive.
2. There is no secret tote that CAW teams have access to that show ‘hidden’ will-pays. There’s not enough bandwidth available throughout the tote system to provide this even if someone wanted to. Remember, they need information on every combo bet on every guest site as well. Even if that COULD be made available it would be virtually useless because liquidity is so low at most tracks and such a large percentage of handle comes in in the final flash that information would be useless. Without giving away the secret sauce CAW teams PROJECT what the final dividend will be based upon historical data, current money in the pool, ML odds, exacta odds, etc. The best teams have the best dividend projection models. Accurate dividend projections are very, very hard to make.
3. CAW teams sink millions of dollars into developing their models and will labor for YEARS spending money collecting and analyzing data before they make even one bet. I’m not going to call out anyone specifically but there are guys on this board and others like it (including Twitter) that bitch if they have to pay for PPs and you believe that you’re going to be on a level playing field with guys that spend $50,000+ a year on back data? Last year alone I made $75,000 of data purchases on behalf of U.S. & International CAW clients.
4. I’m not trying to sound harsh; the guys that make up CAW teams are a lot smarter than you are. They’re a lot smarter than I am too and I’m a well-educated guy. These guys are rocket scientists, literally. One guy I know on a start-up team I’m working with has a dual PHD in Nuclear Physics and Aeronautical Engineering. Don’t you think that is some kind of advantage when you’re working with numerical data? Dave Schwartz is a brilliant guy, smarter than I am and has worked with teams in the past. I know he can attest to how hard this is.
5. If anyone believes that they are capable of the same level of performance and have the money to try this but lack an access point into the pools, contact me privately. Seriously, if you’re real I can get you the wagering resources and rebates you need. That’s what I do these days.
6. Finally, no, I don’t have a CAW model myself. I’ve played around with them before but I have never been able to develop a profitable one. It’s not an easy thing to do.
__________________
Please Support Our Troops http://www.forgottensoldiers.org/
Last edited by Ian Meyers; 02-03-2018 at 02:49 PM.
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 03:00 PM
|
#96
|
PA Steward
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,626
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Meyers
5. If anyone believes that they are capable of the same level of performance and have the money to try this but lack an access point into the pools, contact me privately. Seriously, if you’re real I can get you the wagering resources and rebates you need. That’s what I do these days.
|
Thanks Ian. Everything you wrote pretty much gibes with what I have been writing here...but people are going to latch onto point #5 as proof of something insidious.
What exactly do you mean by "access point into the pools" and "wagering resources?"
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 03:12 PM
|
#97
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,993
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Meyers
OK, I feel like I have to do this every couple of months now. I guess there are a few that don’t remember or never read my replies because the same stuff keeps coming up again and again re CAW teams.
1. CAW teams are no better than their handicapping algorithms. I’ve read nonsense on this board as well as many others than they have an advantage because they can win even if they lose. Yeah, as long as their percentage loss is less than their rebate rate. Guess what, that’s true for all rebate players. If you’re not playing with a rebate (other than guys in a handful of states than have onerous source market fees), that’s on you. I can name a bunch of reputable ADWs that offer rebates including the one I started, BetPTC. I know a number of non-CAW players that make money because they lose at a rate lower than the rebates they receive.
2. There is no secret tote that CAW teams have access to that show ‘hidden’ will-pays. There’s not enough bandwidth available throughout the tote system to provide this even if someone wanted to. Remember, they need information on every combo bet on every guest site as well. Even if that COULD be made available it would be virtually useless because liquidity is so low at most tracks and such a large percentage of handle comes in in the final flash that information would be useless. Without giving away the secret sauce CAW teams PROJECT what the final dividend will be based upon historical data, current money in the pool, ML odds, exacta odds, etc. The best teams have the best dividend projection models. Accurate dividend projections are very, very hard to make.
3. CAW teams sink millions of dollars into developing their models and will labor for YEARS spending money collecting and analyzing data before they make even one bet. I’m not going to call out anyone specifically but there are guys on this board and others like it (including Twitter) that bitch if they have to pay for PPs and you believe that you’re going to be on a level playing field with guys that spend $50,000+ a year on back data? Last year alone I made $75,000 of data purchases on behalf of U.S. & International CAW clients.
4. I’m not trying to sound harsh; the guys that make up CAW teams are a lot smarter than you are. They’re a lot smarter than I am too and I’m a well-educated guy. These guys are rocket scientists, literally. One guy I know on a start-up team I’m working with has a dual PHD in Nuclear Physics and Aeronautical Engineering. Don’t you think that is some kind of advantage when you’re working with numerical data? Dave Schwartz is a brilliant guy, smarter than I am and has worked with teams in the past. I know he can attest to how hard this is.
5. If anyone believes that they are capable of the same level of performance and have the money to try this but lack an access point into the pools, contact me privately. Seriously, if you’re real I can get you the wagering resources and rebates you need. That’s what I do these days.
6. Finally, no, I don’t have a CAW model myself. I’ve played around with them before but I have never been able to develop a profitable one. It’s not an easy thing to do.
|
These are the guys that racing gives huge rebates to and gives last second access to the pools......and then they go on to blame competitiion as the reason their sport is failing. I just have one reaction:
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 03:24 PM
|
#98
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 151
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Asaro
And just to add some spice to the thread (as if it needed anymore) I firmly believe that some are able to cancel wagers withing one or two seconds of the gate opening. Especially on need the lead types who don't break well.
|
imagine that for QH's?
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 03:28 PM
|
#99
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,554
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Meyers
OK, I feel like I have to do this every couple of months now. I guess there are a few that don’t remember or never read my replies because the same stuff keeps coming up again and again re CAW teams.
1. CAW teams are no better than their handicapping algorithms. I’ve read nonsense on this board as well as many others than they have an advantage because they can win even if they lose. Yeah, as long as their percentage loss is less than their rebate rate. Guess what, that’s true for all rebate players. If you’re not playing with a rebate (other than guys in a handful of states than have onerous source market fees), that’s on you. I can name a bunch of reputable ADWs that offer rebates including the one I started, BetPTC. I know a number of non-CAW players that make money because they lose at a rate lower than the rebates they receive.
2. There is no secret tote that CAW teams have access to that show ‘hidden’ will-pays. There’s not enough bandwidth available throughout the tote system to provide this even if someone wanted to. Remember, they need information on every combo bet on every guest site as well. Even if that COULD be made available it would be virtually useless because liquidity is so low at most tracks and such a large percentage of handle comes in in the final flash that information would be useless. Without giving away the secret sauce CAW teams PROJECT what the final dividend will be based upon historical data, current money in the pool, ML odds, exacta odds, etc. The best teams have the best dividend projection models. Accurate dividend projections are very, very hard to make.
3. CAW teams sink millions of dollars into developing their models and will labor for YEARS spending money collecting and analyzing data before they make even one bet. I’m not going to call out anyone specifically but there are guys on this board and others like it (including Twitter) that bitch if they have to pay for PPs and you believe that you’re going to be on a level playing field with guys that spend $50,000+ a year on back data? Last year alone I made $75,000 of data purchases on behalf of U.S. & International CAW clients.
4. I’m not trying to sound harsh; the guys that make up CAW teams are a lot smarter than you are. They’re a lot smarter than I am too and I’m a well-educated guy. These guys are rocket scientists, literally. One guy I know on a start-up team I’m working with has a dual PHD in Nuclear Physics and Aeronautical Engineering. Don’t you think that is some kind of advantage when you’re working with numerical data? Dave Schwartz is a brilliant guy, smarter than I am and has worked with teams in the past. I know he can attest to how hard this is.
5. If anyone believes that they are capable of the same level of performance and have the money to try this but lack an access point into the pools, contact me privately. Seriously, if you’re real I can get you the wagering resources and rebates you need. That’s what I do these days.
6. Finally, no, I don’t have a CAW model myself. I’ve played around with them before but I have never been able to develop a profitable one. It’s not an easy thing to do.
|
At the risk of "sounding harsh"...it doesn't exactly take an "astrophysicist" to realize that a "well-connected" person, who posts publicly under his real name...would be reluctant to post damning declarations about a topic such as this in a public online forum.
__________________
"Theory is knowledge that doesn't work. Practice is when everything works and you don't know why."
-- Hermann Hesse
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 04:17 PM
|
#100
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
Wasnt the point of the discussion if this was good for the sport versus is it happening.
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 04:37 PM
|
#101
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 342
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
At the risk of "sounding harsh"...it doesn't exactly take an "astrophysicist" to realize that a "well-connected" person, who posts publicly under his real name...would be reluctant to post damning declarations about a topic such as this in a public online forum.
|
In my corporate career, I was an asset securitization (a way to move/fund assets off of a company's balance sheet) specialist for money center banks and investment banks. When counseling senior treasury execs about the pros/cons I'd point out that once you start securitization you can't stop because the (accounting) gains you recognize up front turn into losses as the bonds pay down. I believe CAW is similar. Racing got hooked on the gains (as a way to stabilize falling handle) and now can't quit it because handle would fall to $6 billion.
And I use my real name because I'm not afraid to. I never hide behind fake names. Ever. I'm not saying that's always been wise but I'm not afraid to say something and have everyone know I said it.
__________________
Please Support Our Troops http://www.forgottensoldiers.org/
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 04:41 PM
|
#102
|
@TimeformUSfigs
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,828
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Meyers
In my corporate career, I was an asset securitization (a way to move/fund assets off of a company's balance sheet) specialist for money center banks and investment banks. When counseling senior treasury execs about the pros/cons I'd point out that once you start securitization you can't stop because the (accounting) gains you recognize up front turn into losses as the bonds pay down. I believe CAW is similar. Racing got hooked on the gains (as a way to stabilize falling handle) and now can't quit it because handle would fall to $6 billion.
And I use my real name because I'm not afraid to. I never hide behind fake names. Ever. I'm not saying that's always been wise but I'm not afraid to say something and have everyone know I said it.
|
I think this is it in a nutshell. Racing did everything it could to stem the tide of declining handle. What is the saying, something about digging a grave and having to lie in it?
Ian is as stand up a guy as you will find in the industry IMO.
Last edited by cj; 02-03-2018 at 04:51 PM.
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 04:43 PM
|
#103
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Meyers
In my corporate career, I was an asset securitization (a way to move/fund assets off of a company's balance sheet) specialist for money center banks and investment banks. When counseling senior treasury execs about the pros/cons I'd point out that once you start securitization you can't stop because the (accounting) gains you recognize up front turn into losses as the bonds pay down. I believe CAW is similar. Racing got hooked on the gains (as a way to stabilize falling handle) and now can't quit it because handle would fall to $6 billion.
And I use my real name because I'm not afraid to. I never hide behind fake names. Ever. I'm not saying that's always been wise but I'm not afraid to say something and have everyone know I said it.
|
So what your saying is basically racing is screwed if this ever goes awa...lmao
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 04:52 PM
|
#104
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 342
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP
So what your saying is basically racing is screwed if this ever goes awa...lmao
|
If it went away overnight, yes. There are ways to manage a wind down the same way there are ways to phase out off-balance sheet financings. It's not easily done though and not done without some pain.
Thanks very much to CJ for the kind words.
__________________
Please Support Our Troops http://www.forgottensoldiers.org/
|
|
|
02-03-2018, 05:08 PM
|
#105
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,554
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Meyers
In my corporate career, I was an asset securitization (a way to move/fund assets off of a company's balance sheet) specialist for money center banks and investment banks. When counseling senior treasury execs about the pros/cons I'd point out that once you start securitization you can't stop because the (accounting) gains you recognize up front turn into losses as the bonds pay down. I believe CAW is similar. Racing got hooked on the gains (as a way to stabilize falling handle) and now can't quit it because handle would fall to $6 billion.
And I use my real name because I'm not afraid to. I never hide behind fake names. Ever. I'm not saying that's always been wise but I'm not afraid to say something and have everyone know I said it.
|
I meant no disrespect by my retort, Ian, I just felt that your post here had an unnecessary (and atypical) hint of "anger" in it...especially when you stated that..." the guys who make up CAW teams are a lot smarter than you are. They're a lot smarter than I am too and I'm a well-educated guy". As you can plainly see...the clear implication made by the way you crafted these sentences is that the rest of us here aren't "well-educated"...which may, or may NOT be true. If you got angry because your prior posts of this type had gone "ignored" by us, causing you to have to "repeat" yourself...then I, for one, assure you that it wasn't done INTENTIONALLY. I can't even remember what I ate yesterday.
__________________
"Theory is knowledge that doesn't work. Practice is when everything works and you don't know why."
-- Hermann Hesse
Last edited by thaskalos; 02-03-2018 at 05:13 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|