NTRA Suspends Three Players from the NTRA National Horseplayers Championship

[Andy Asaro]

Originally Posted by PalaceOfFortLarned

Pen and paper players have won 3 of the last 4 NHC contests.

Computers and colluders aren't winning. This year's pen and paper champ had 2 entries that finished in the top 10. Obviously he colluded with himself for all those winners.

Results from prior year (2022) are in question as well. I know the guy that finished third isn't too happy

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by PalaceOfFortLarned

Pen and paper players have won 3 of the last 4 NHC contests.

Computers and colluders aren't winning. This year's pen and paper champ had 2 entries that finished in the top 10. Obviously he colluded with himself for all those winners.

An individual with 5 entries could "collude" just as good as 3 people with 5 collective entries.

[burnsy]

A. This is not a team competition. The spirit of the thing is an individual contest . If you want to allow collusive picks . Make people have their “teams” public and be done with it . Otherwise you have to punish this sort of thing .

B. It’s impossible to “collude “ with yourself . The very definition of collusion involves a conspiracy factor . You can talk to yourself but I don’t think that’s a conspiracy. It takes at least two .

C. You may not come in first but doing what these people do . They are basically hedging . People doing this are somewhat chicken “shit”. It’s a weak attempt at getting a profit no matter what . You’re almost admitting you don’t want to go it alone .

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by burnsy

A. This is not a team competition. The spirit of the thing is an individual contest . If you want to allow collusive picks . Make people have their “teams” public and be done with it . Otherwise you have to punish this sort of thing .

B. It’s impossible to “collude “ with yourself . The very definition of collusion involves a conspiracy factor . You can talk to yourself but I don’t think that’s a conspiracy. It takes at least two .

C. You may not come in first but doing what these people do . They are basically hedging . People doing this are somewhat chicken “shit”. It’s a weak attempt at getting a profit no matter what . You’re almost admitting you don’t want to go it alone .

On point B. The point I was making earlier in the thread is that if there is a strategic advantage to 3 people forming a team, the same strategic advantage can be attained by a single person with 3 entries. I suspect that if there is any real long term advantage, it’s not as large as people think, but I’m not a game theory guy. So let’s assume there is a significant advantage, then IMO the tournaments should probably not allow multiple entries by a single person or at least get just as pissed off about that.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

On point B. The point I was making earlier in the thread is that if there is a strategic advantage to 3 people forming a team, the same strategic advantage can be attained by a single person with 3 entries. I suspect that if there is any real long term advantage, it’s not as large as people think, but I’m not a game theory guy. So let’s assume there is a significant advantage, then IMO the tournaments should probably not allow multiple entries by a single person or at least get just as pissed off about that.

Your theory that a colluding team is essentially equivalent to a single individual might be valid but your example is moot. Any single person can have no more than 2 entries.

So the underlying question for this case becomes: is having 5 entries more advantageous than having 2?

[PaceAdvantage]

multiple posts deleted...

[Andy Asaro]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

multiple posts deleted...

[castaway01]

Okay, I was a jerk. You were a jerk. You don't remember being a jerk? Hmm, I can't help that. But let's sort it out.

Asaro, let's have a drink together. You mean well, I mean nothing but laughing at you, a major comedy figure (wait, three people retweeted me! Elon!), we can work it out.

Okay I'm sorry, you have to have 10 drinks for my one. Since I'm a horseplayer, I can't afford that, but maybe if Nitro gives me the eight-horse exacta box. He's watching the $12 in the tote with 10 minutes to post and says I have to box the 1,2 with the 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. That should work.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Your theory that a colluding team is essentially equivalent to a single individual might be valid but your example is moot. Any single person can have no more than 2 entries.

So the underlying question for this case becomes: is having 5 entries more advantageous than having 2?

I asked about multiple entries. I don't play tournaments. As to whether 5 is greater than 2, there could be some theoretical "game theory" advantage in some situations, but I suspect it's much smaller and occurs less frequently than people think. Maybe someone can explain the advantage better.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Your theory that a colluding team is essentially equivalent to a single individual might be valid but your example is moot. Any single person can have no more than 2 entries.

So the underlying question for this case becomes: is having 5 entries more advantageous than having 2?

I believe that 5 is certainly better than 2 but wouldn't 2 also be better than 1? Allowing 2 entries creates more entry fees to be collected but also creates a level of unfairness.

[JohnGalt1]

Have any of these alleged cheaters ever complained about trainers suspected of cheating?

[VeryOldMan]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I asked about multiple entries. I don't play tournaments. As to whether 5 is greater than 2, there could be some theoretical "game theory" advantage in some situations, but I suspect it's much smaller and occurs less frequently than people think. Maybe someone can explain the advantage better.

I'll tread carefully because there are people here who know a lot more about each aspect than I do. I know the legal side of "collusion" quite well, so let's not go there.

I don't play these tournaments but it looks like the prize structure is like a poker tournament - a hugely disproportionate amount of the prize pool is paid to those who finish at the very highest end of the probability distribution (let's call it 2-3 standard deviations). The more entries you have, the more likely you are to have 1 that gets into that upper percentile. So 5 is necessarily is better than 2, all else being equal. 10 would be better.

But that's perhaps the rub you're alluding to - you need your partners to be equally skilled. If you're the legitimate top dog and best handicapper among the group, aren't you giving up EV to reduce variance?

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by VeryOldMan

But that's perhaps the rub you're alluding to - you need your partners to be equally skilled. If you're the legitimate top dog and best handicapper among the group, aren't you giving up EV to reduce variance?

Not sure of the setup of how selections are made, but isn't it possible that the top dog is calling all the shots & the others for all intents & purposes are "beards"?

On the other hand, if all the colluding participants are top contenders then you've also eliminated the factor of worrying about the competition & what choices they are making because you have a stake in their action.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by VeryOldMan

The more entries you have, the more likely you are to have 1 that gets into that upper percentile. So 5 is necessarily is better than 2, all else being equal. 10 would be better.

The more entries you have the more money you are putting up.

It's also likely the quality of your selections will decline with each entry because you aren't including just your very best ideas on some entries. It's kind of like betting multiple horses to win. Sure, you'll win that race, but you may not make money long term.

Where I think it helps is with blocking.

Imagine I share a solid lead with several of my entries that all had the same picks.

I'm in a great spot.

If I bet every longshot in the next race (one with each of my entries) no matter who wins and what the people beneath me selected, I'll have at least one entry with that winner and stay above them. A few of my others entries may also stay in contention because some people near me will also lose.

First, you have to get yourself in that position to begin with.

Second, you can't keep blocking like that race after race. Eventually it's going to catch up with you.

I think that's a strong strategy at the very end. There may be others, but this is not my area.

[Robert Fischer]

can't be the only one reading this thread as a dark comedy