2023 handicapping year in review

[BarchCapper]

Originally Posted by andicap

I wonder if smaller tracks are doing better because the CAWs avoid them??

I believe they play them at a decent amount - the cheaper price at which they have to sell their signal means a LOT more room in the takeout for rebating by the CAWs' ADWs.

[Parkview_Pirate]

Originally Posted by andicap

I wonder if smaller tracks are doing better because the CAWs avoid them??

I thought the CAWs wagered at almost all tracks.

What I meant is that I win at a few tracks only, and not just small tracks. A small number of tracks. I do show a profit at some of the dinky tracks in AUS and NZ, but I don't bet much at them because they don't run as often as the bigger venues.

It used to be true some of the smaller tracks could offer bigger rebates here in North America, but the signals have been rehashed many times over now, so I'm not sure if that's true any longer. The trend appeared to be to squeeze the little guy out of decent rebates and give the CAWs a bigger cut.

@denniswilliams - I have not noticed an increase of the late odd plungers (brown lampers, indicating a 50% or more drop) recently. This has been a part of Hong Kong racing for a long time, as in at least a couple of decades. Unlike a track in North America with a late plunge, at Sha Tin these "steam" horses are more often than not nowhere close at the finish. If you look at the Quienella/QP payoffs, you'll often see horses who have combinations that take a 20% (green) hit in the last minute, and they too are often nowhere close.

I have read that some of the players in Hong Kong have complained that the CAWs have had a negative impact on payoffs at the tracks due to rebates and increased efficiencies in the pools. I have not played enough over the years to know if that is true or not for their circuit, but like tracks everywhere, it's not as easy as it once was to show profits in this game.

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by andicap

I wonder if smaller tracks are doing better because the CAWs avoid them??

(As BarchCapper said)...

The Whale money at small tracks is actually a higher percentage of the pool than at large tracks because the rebates are higher.

[denniswilliams]

Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate

@denniswilliams - I have not noticed an increase of the late odd plungers (brown lampers, indicating a 50% or more drop) recently. This has been a part of Hong Kong racing for a long time, as in at least a couple of decades. Unlike a track in North America with a late plunge, at Sha Tin these "steam" horses are more often than not nowhere close at the finish. If you look at the Quienella/QP payoffs, you'll often see horses who have combinations that take a 20% (green) hit in the last minute, and they too are often nowhere close.

I have read that some of the players in Hong Kong have complained that the CAWs have had a negative impact on payoffs at the tracks due to rebates and increased efficiencies in the pools. I have not played enough over the years to know if that is true or not for their circuit, but like tracks everywhere, it's not as easy as it once was to show profits in this game.

I'm with you: in the past, I'd laugh when I saw horses getting hit, as they very rarely won. But it seems that they're winning a lot more frequently. Might be worth scraping the current odds page.

[acorn54]

c w wong a one-time computer modeler for one of the betting syndicates, maybe peter benter's. illustrated in his book, how each year he was working, the efficiency of the pools were getting more accurate in the actual probability of the outcome of the race.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by acorn54

c w wong a one-time computer modeler for one of the betting syndicates, maybe peter benter's. illustrated in his book, how each year he was working, the efficiency of the pools were getting more accurate in the actual probability of the outcome of the race.

[denniswilliams]

Originally Posted by acorn54

c w wong a one-time computer modeler for one of the betting syndicates, maybe peter benter's. illustrated in his book, how each year he was working, the efficiency of the pools were getting more accurate in the actual probability of the outcome of the race.

Do you bet Hong Kong?

[Parkview_Pirate]

Originally Posted by denniswilliams

I'm with you: in the past, I'd laugh when I saw horses getting hit, as they very rarely won. But it seems that they're winning a lot more frequently. Might be worth scraping the current odds page.

I usually, but not always, review the HK Q/Q-P page of the odds after the race to determine which horses "got steamed", if you will. They are normally left up for a day or so after the race card, before the page is reset for the next card.

This morning's 10th race is more typical of what I've been seeing lately, where the 12 horse was brown-lamped for the win at 7.8-1, one Q-P combo with the winner (5 horse) was brown-lamped, and a whole string of Q payoffs were greeen-lamped with the 12. This horse was at least 16-1 with a minute or so to post, before the late steam showed, but finished 5th.

Part of my opinion is based on an older post here at PA, where a gent did track the late odds plunges, and found the majority of them didn't pan out. At the time, I thought that was interesting as it contradicted what goes on with the steam horses in North America, where the late money is more accurate than not. I'll look around to see if I can find that post.

I could live with the late plunges from the CAW groups, but I can't support the rebates they enjoy. It's one of many things that's contributed to the decline of racing, and the rebates IMHO have turned many smaller bettors that made modest profits or broke even into losers. Many of them have voted with their wallets and moved on to spending discretionary funds on other hobbies.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by acorn54

c w wong a one-time computer modeler for one of the betting syndicates, maybe peter benter's. illustrated in his book, how each year he was working, the efficiency of the pools were getting more accurate in the actual probability of the outcome of the race.

Bloomberg | By Kit Chellel | May 3, 2018 at 2:00 AM PDT
The Gambler Who Cracked the Horse-Racing Code:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...se-racing-code

Bill Benter did the impossible: He wrote an algorithm that couldn’t lose at the track. Close to a billion dollars later, he tells his story for the first time.

Imo, Wong's book Precision provides relevant background info if you're looking to get started.

Once you get past a certain point you'll find yourself referring to it less and less.

Eventually you'll transition from handicapping to data science and creating your own factors and models.

Similar in concept to what Bill Benter and Alan Woods did back in the day.

But your own factors and models.

And betting on a much smaller scale.



-jp
.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by acorn54

c w wong a one-time computer modeler for one of the betting syndicates, maybe peter benter's. illustrated in his book, how each year he was working, the efficiency of the pools were getting more accurate in the actual probability of the outcome of the race.

Fyi, fully agree with your point about the R² of the pools with each passing year.


-jp
.

[denniswilliams]

Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate

I usually, but not always, review the HK Q/Q-P page of the odds after the race to determine which horses "got steamed", if you will. They are normally left up for a day or so after the race card, before the page is reset for the next card.

This morning's 10th race is more typical of what I've been seeing lately, where the 12 horse was brown-lamped for the win at 7.8-1, one Q-P combo with the winner (5 horse) was brown-lamped, and a whole string of Q payoffs were greeen-lamped with the 12. This horse was at least 16-1 with a minute or so to post, before the late steam showed, but finished 5th.

Part of my opinion is based on an older post here at PA, where a gent did track the late odds plunges, and found the majority of them didn't pan out. At the time, I thought that was interesting as it contradicted what goes on with the steam horses in North America, where the late money is more accurate than not. I'll look around to see if I can find that post.

I could live with the late plunges from the CAW groups, but I can't support the rebates they enjoy. It's one of many things that's contributed to the decline of racing, and the rebates IMHO have turned many smaller bettors that made modest profits or broke even into losers. Many of them have voted with their wallets and moved on to spending discretionary funds on other hobbies.

I remember 1/04 ST had at least 2 last hit winners:
Miracles winner of race 1 goes from 9.1 to 4.9 LAST FLASH
Race 4, firster Super Gold got hit late and won

Haven't really noticed it since.

[acorn54]

Originally Posted by denniswilliams

Do you bet Hong Kong?

no hong betting for me. just used wong's book as a starting point for my own modeling on american-canadian t-breds.

[andicap]

Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate

I could live with the late plunges from the CAW groups, but I can't support the rebates they enjoy. It's one of many things that's contributed to the decline of racing, and the rebates IMHO have turned many smaller bettors that made modest profits or broke even into losers. Many of them have voted with their wallets and moved on to spending discretionary funds on other hobbies.

100% that is me to a tee.

[acorn54]

i predominantly bet australian tracks now. what i find strikingly different in australia is how the people who run the racing industry there are more fan friendly in the racing product they offer. with very large fields of horses in each race, and it makes for more often having big payoffs.
in american racing with the very small fields, the industry pushes string bets and a pipe dream of a huge score. the people that run the racing industry in america have a "like it or lump it", arrogance, which is a big turn off.

[denniswilliams]

Originally Posted by acorn54

i predominantly bet australian tracks now. what i find strikingly different in australia is how the people who run the racing industry there are more fan friendly in the racing product they offer. with very large fields of horses in each race, and it makes for more often having big payoffs.
in american racing with the very small fields, the industry pushes string bets and a pipe dream of a huge score. the people that run the racing industry in america have a "like it or lump it", arrogance, which is a big turn off.

I'm under the assumption that AUS does not have comprehensive results charts: beaten lengths and fractions. I seem to recall reading about teams down there that use AI to pull that information from race videos. Of course, US racing doesn't have FREE, ACCESSIBLE results data either.


Now, scraping and then parsing PDF files is relatively simple (though tedious) BUT why would anyone want to do it for 3 horse fields? Same goes for paying for data. Obviously not as simple for AUS.


Why would anyone deal with this NONSENSE when HKG offers MORE DATA than one could ever use and LARGE FIELDS with plenty of LONGSHOTS?



And maybe JAPAN will offer BIG BOY TRACK DATA in the near future.


No thanks to 3 horse fields and off-the-turfers