Odds changes during races WHAT A JOKE

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

So if past posting is not the problem, why the large odds swings? Why are horses that the rest of the public is dismissing at 9-1, being pounded down to 9/2 by the whales

That 9-1 horse that got pounded down to 9/2, I had that horse at 9/5 on my line. Obviously, I had that one right (for a change), as the horse won like a 9/5 should.

So the public was very wrong on that one...and the smarter whales (plus myself, the blind squirrel) were all over it...that's what happens all the time.

Contrary to popular opinion, there ARE a lot of overlays out there...the public ISN'T that good, IMO. Or else all of us would have given up this game a LONG time ago.

More proof that the public isn't all that good is the very fact these CRW teams exist in the first place.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

That 9-1 horse that got pounded down to 9/2, I had that horse at 9/5 on my line. Obviously, I had that one right (for a change), as the horse won like a 9/5 should.

So the public was very wrong on that one...and the smarter whales (plus myself, the blind squirrel) were all over it...that's what happens all the time.

Contrary to popular opinion, there ARE a lot of overlays out there...the public ISN'T that good, IMO. Or else all of us would have given up this game a LONG time ago.

More proof that the public isn't all that good is the very fact these CRW teams exist in the first place.

My explanation makes the most sense to me, you explanation makes the most sense to you. The interesting thing is that there probably is not a lot I can say that would persuade you otherwise and vice versa. At the end of the day we will all draw our own conclusions (including those who think past-posting is rampant).

[Denny]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

My explanation makes the most sense to me, you explanation makes the most sense to you. The interesting thing is that there probably is not a lot I can say that would persuade you otherwise and vice versa. At the end of the day we will all draw our own conclusions (including those who think past-posting is rampant).

We do all seem to agree that something is wrong, and that something needs to be done.

[Track Phantom]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

What I see is happening far too often and on far too many races every day to be inside betting by connections. It has to be, at least the vast majority, these CRW teams.

As for Runaway Ghost, I've seen some incredible odds drops at Sunland, so it wouldn't surprise me in the least that some CRW team was behind that one as well. Like I said in another thread, Runaway Ghost wasn't some impossible to find horse based on PPs alone. Well, in my opinion anyway.

And sorry for clumping you in...my bad.

In your opinion, do the "computer betting outfits" have software which "handicaps" or "assess toteboard inefficiencies"? Or both?

You claim these guys pick winners at a much higher rate than us with their software but then the conversation settles around dutch betting on horses who are under-played by the public. Which is it?

This is a big answer because if their software identifies overlays and bets these horses, their win% should actually be less than normal and they would win due to the odds they are betting on viable winners (not needing as many winners as it would take if betting favorites) + rebates. That is believable.

On the other hand, if you're saying these outfits have computer programs which "picks winners" at a higher rate than the average public, I call bulllshit. No way!! And if....if....if I was to buy that argument, I would think their margin of heightened success would be extraordinarily marginal.

From what I see, odds dropping during the race are disproportionately dropping on the winners. We should see a proportionate amount of winners whose odds went UP dramatically from the spring of the gate. My instinct is for every one horse the goes up dramatically, 15 go down.

A previous poster said it correctly. Something is wrong. The "something" is open for debate but if a lot of grizzled veterans of the game have issue with it, there is merit to this angst.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

In your opinion, do the "computer betting outfits" have software which "handicaps" or "assess toteboard inefficiencies"? Or both?

You claim these guys pick winners at a much higher rate than us with their software but then the conversation settles around dutch betting on horses who are under-played by the public. Which is it?

This is a big answer because if their software identifies overlays and bets these horses, their win% should actually be less than normal and they would win due to the odds they are betting on viable winners (not needing as many winners as it would take if betting favorites) + rebates. That is believable.

On the other hand, if you're saying these outfits have computer programs which "picks winners" at a higher rate than the average public, I call bulllshit. No way!! And if....if....if I was to buy that argument, I would think their margin of heightened success would be extraordinarily marginal.

From what I see, odds dropping during the race are disproportionately dropping on the winners. We should see a proportionate amount of winners whose odds went UP dramatically from the spring of the gate. My instinct is for every one horse the goes up dramatically, 15 go down.

A previous poster said it correctly. Something is wrong. The "something" is open for debate but if a lot of grizzled veterans of the game have issue with it, there is merit to this angst.

How do you know they are only betting one horse in a race?

I never claimed to know exactly what they are doing. In order to come up with tote board inefficiencies, don't you have to handicap? Otherwise, you don't know if the price is an overlay or not.

Or if you're asking if they analyze all the pools to weed out inefficiencies based on pool info alone...who knows...maybe...that kind of thing has been around since Dr. Z...remember Ziemba? You should have seen the show prices drop on Dr. Z horses back in the day in the last flash...

Oh wait...that's kind of like what's happening now, but on the win end and in a grander scale.

I'd love to see someone chart these happenings for one day...and show that these CRW odds-droppers hit at 90% or whatever the high percentage number is claimed at the moment.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by Denny

We do all seem to agree that something is wrong, and that something needs to be done.

Absolutely, imo what needs to be done is takeout needs to be reduced substantially 8/10/12 % and rebates must be eliminated. The biggest problems this industry faces usually comes back to that. That will not eliminate the problem, but if the Whales have a horse at 4-1 and the public at 6-1, it sure helps that they have to leave themselves at least 9/2 and not the 7/2 or whatever the current system lets them go down to (also the public as a group would lose so much less than they currently do that these late odds changes probably will not be nearly as frustrating for that reason alone) What else can help? The industry denies past posting is even happening. It seems pretty clear that crw isn't going anywhere. Pool manipulation is not preventable unless they get very strict about the cancelling of large wagers(and even so some pool manipulation still can be one). As Dave Schwartz would say, how do you let small bettors cancel wagers and tell the big boys they can't. The other option is a betting exchange, but that will bring with it a new set of issues and problems and controversy.

Remember in this industry's eyes the whales butter their bread and the rest of us are in it for the entertainment(in other words our opinion means squat). I don't think they are overly anxious to crack down on syndicate #10 that bets 200 million dollars a years but is cancelling large wagers 100 times a day.. All we can really do is try as a group to figure out what exactly we agree needs to be fixed and as a group demand that it get's fixed. But if there are 7 different interpretations and opinions on why something bad is happening, how can we demand change? The status quo works for the industry so it is not changing unless we give the industry a major reason to change (having a loud and uniform and reasonable voice and boycotting). Otherwise we are all on our own, drawing our own conclusions, making our own decisions and nothing of substance will change.

[Track Phantom]

Speaking of cancellations, when did the rule change that you can cancel any size bet? It used to be you couldn't. In fact, I remember my dad, back in about 1987, would keep a voucher in his wallet. He started with $100 and every day, when he'd see a horse he was sure couldn't miss the board, bet the whole voucher to show on that horse. He had it up to $400+ and bet it to show on a horse at Canterbury in a 6 horse field. He decided he wanted to cancel it and they wouldn't let him saying they wouldn't cancel a bet over $200. He went nuts and almost got booted from the place.

About 10 years later, I had made some large wins bets at CBY and canceled them near post (maybe 3 races). I was using my players card when making the bets. Later that day I got an email from the track telling me not to do it as it makes them look bad.

Now all of sudden we cancel willy-nilly. Is that because of the large computer betting groups demanding it?

[AlsoEligible]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

As Dave Schwartz would say, how do you let small bettors cancel wagers and tell the big boys they can't.

It's easy. "You can't".

For at least one of the major tote companies, the CRW teams have no ability to cancel wagers once they're placed, for exactly this reason. I've seen guys accidentally pump in $50k worth of bets that were supposed to go to a test system, and had to tell them they were S.O.L. when they asked about canceling them.

Suppose it's possible that they could be making large wagers through other retail outlets to steer the public, then cancelling those in the final seconds and dumping their batch of real bets. But then again, retail ADWs are pretty good about flagging and closing accounts that are obviously manipulating pools.

Call it Occam's razor, but I the models these guys use are good enough at making them money, without having to resort to such elaborate (and risky) schemes. Not that pool manipulation isn't an issue - particularly at smaller tracks - just don't think it's related to CRW.

[Dave Schwartz]

I don't have a problem with wager cancels.

However, IMHO...

1. Wagers over a significant amount (to be determined) should demand a 5-minute process for canceling. "If you want to make large wagers, make them early."

2. At the track, a supervisor must be present to cancel a large wager and all large cancels should be logged and tracked. (This means ask for an ID to cancel.) Among other things, it works against money laundering, IMHO, the primary reason for cash cancels.

3. Exception to the above rules would be during a gate scratch.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

That 9-1 horse that got pounded down to 9/2, I had that horse at 9/5 on my line. Obviously, I had that one right (for a change), as the horse won like a 9/5 should.

So the public was very wrong on that one...and the smarter whales (plus myself, the blind squirrel) were all over it...that's what happens all the time.

Contrary to popular opinion, there ARE a lot of overlays out there...the public ISN'T that good, IMO. Or else all of us would have given up this game a LONG time ago.

More proof that the public isn't all that good is the very fact these CRW teams exist in the first place.

If "the public isn't that good"...then how come the winning horseplayers have always been so few and far between? IMO...the public is good enough.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

If "the public isn't that good"...then how come the winning horseplayers have always been so few and far between? IMO...the public is good enough.

I should have written THAT good, instead of just that good.

[cj]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I should have written THAT good, instead of just that good.

Andy says it a lot on Twitter..."they knew"...and more often than not "they knew" that one of the contenders wasn't going to run well. Is that handicapping or inside info? Because often times there is nothing on paper to tip this off.

What makes me skeptical is that with today's smaller fields, it should be much tougher to find inefficiencies. They aren't running 4, 5, and 6 horse fields in Hong Kong like we do here.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by AlsoEligible

It's easy. "You can't".

For at least one of the major tote companies, the CRW teams have no ability to cancel wagers once they're placed, for exactly this reason. I've seen guys accidentally pump in $50k worth of bets that were supposed to go to a test system, and had to tell them they were S.O.L. when they asked about canceling them.

Suppose it's possible that they could be making large wagers through other retail outlets to steer the public, then cancelling those in the final seconds and dumping their batch of real bets. But then again, retail ADWs are pretty good about flagging and closing accounts that are obviously manipulating pools.

Call it Occam's razor, but I the models these guys use are good enough at making them money, without having to resort to such elaborate (and risky) schemes. Not that pool manipulation isn't an issue - particularly at smaller tracks - just don't think it's related to CRW.

I am going to retract my statement regarding pool manipulation. I am sure some pool manipulation goes on by some players but what you post makes sense to me.

[Track Phantom]

Found this interesting:

EVD Race 3:
Start loading into the gate:
#7: 3-2
#8: 1-1

Last horse is loading into the gate:
7: 2-1
8: 3-5

Rider replacement called for and they back out of the gate.
7: 2-1
8: 3-5

10 minutes go by and the odds remain:
7: 2-1
8: 3-5

* If it is computer betting, the odds should be as they are.

#7 wins

Final odds:
7: 9-5
8: 4-5

[DGroundhog]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

If "the public isn't that good"...then how come the winning horseplayers have always been so few and far between? IMO...the public is good enough.

IMO - the 'public' has little ability to refrain from betting. How many races a day would you really consider to be playable? Most bettors select a few tracks to focus on and play nearly every race. That sort of puts them on the level of slot players pushing a button and hoping for the best.

Many bettors who have success are dependent on big payoffs to have a successful year. They might place thousands of bets during the year - but success is dependent on hitting that $10,000 or $100,000+ payoff (depending on your style and wagering level).

I find few people who can make much consistent success at all grinding out victory by placing thousands of bets of the WPS EXA type of wagers per year. If you can do that, then you probably have a shot at selling your selections.

Another significant factor is inside information or 'tips' you might receive from people who actually work with the horses. Much of the public has little access to that info.

I don't have much in the way of those connections, but occasionally I do hear a tip. Some of them are from proven sources and have led to some pretty decent payouts that really come from nowhere as far as my own ability to handicap a race is concerned. I increase my plays on those tips. They don't always pay off, but overall they have generated profit by a significant margin.

If I were a smarter, less vain and more disciplined man, I would refrain from wagering completely until one of those tips came around (maybe one a month at best). If I were a more social person, I would seek to expand on those sources.

Whales have plenty of connections, however, and they take advantage of those tips. Sometimes they are paying for those tips - and that is discounting any nefarious fixing going on (IMO this happens infrequently, probably more often at the end of a meet or when bills are due - and longshot players probably increase their chances of winning when it does occur, but there is always the chance to profit even if you don't know jack about it).

If you (or I) are playing horses based on the PPs and your perception that you are smarter than everybody else, then I would be wagering against you (or I) having any sort of consistent success. That isn't a knock, it is an acknowledgement of wagering against the takeout. I would also wager on you (or I) losing less than a lottery or pull tab player (much higher takeout).

In addition, I would say that some people are just 'self defeating'. They think everything and everybody is against them. They are being conspired against. Races are fixed, there is past post wagering frequently occurring and the late money always screws them over. These folks generally have lost their money before they have even placed a wager.