Odds changes during races WHAT A JOKE

[biggestal99]

Originally Posted by cj

The most puzzling part for me about Runaway Ghost is how he suddenly found the ability to rate off the pace and finish. Anybody that handicapped that is a freaking genius.

Well the trainer did state his last workout before the race was slow, picked up really strong at the end and his gallop out was huge

It’s right there in the form for all to read.

Racing on the front end wasn’t working for him, so they switched gears and tried a rate job.

Nice job by the trainer.

Allan

[storyline]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

All good posts on this one.

Let me look at this through another prism.

First off, you have to believe the odds drop was either betting by one entity or multiple entities. Multiple entities is highly improbable due to the timing and precision on that one horse. To me, it's nearly certain that a large wager (maybe in the 15k to 20k variety) came in as they were loading into the gate.
If we all agree, or at least accept, this is the likely situation, then we move on to the next part of the argument.

If this was one wager, it could only be done by three different bettors:
1. Handicapper (like you and I)
2. Computer Program
3. Insider

This wasn't one handicapper just going off of past performances and chunking up 20k on this horse at 1 mn to post. No chance.

Computer Program is also not likely since those programs are designed to take the handicapping portion out of the equation and look for betting anomalies and bet horses who were outside of expected norms. There is no way a computer program identifies Runaway Ghost, from the 11 post, as value when all is said and done at under 4-1. No chance.

Insider. This is where the money came from. I would bet my life on this fact. The only person that could bet a horse like this, for that kind of money, knowing they were likely going to get a difficult trip, is someone who knew the chances of this horse losing were slim. How could someone know this? By knowing something about this horses' physical condition. Could be a breathing procedure that was done to open blocked airways, or, more likely, it could be some other procedure loosely defined under the "medical" umbrella.

Think about this....who would know the best way to circumvent getting caught doing something with this horse? A local.

I'm not saying this was something illegal being done. Although this game puts us in that mindset since we already know it happens daily across the country. My opinion is this horse was overbet by a large margin, that the money came from an insider connected to the horse and that it was due to something the horse had on Sunday that he hadn't had previously. When you combine that with the way he won, traveling dramatically wide the entire race (and the jockey never even considering tucking in, which he was probably told to make sure he doesn't get any traffic and go 7 wide if you have to) and the way he drew off in the lane, I call Bullshit on this race and this horse, and the absurd last minute betting backs me up.

This is what I wrote below shortly after the race. As you Track Phantom I'm extremely wide-eyed and hardly a conspiracy theorist.

Doesn't look like anyone posting this raced actually cashed a ticket but the connections of the 10th and 11th race made out like bandits. The DD paid $146.20

I bet this track once a year and it's this race only because I follow the preps.

So many players streaming the race I needed to wait until the replay to see the race from beginning to end, I swear coverage of racing hasn't improved in decades.

[steveb]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

Computer betting is supposed to identify those horses who were not being bet relative to their chances. If you looked at the rest of this field, there were many horses who were higher than what their chances indicated. Those horses should have been bet, not Runaway Ghost. Unless, of course, you factor in handicapping which I'm told these programs aren't doing. They are strictly looking for anomalies in the pool. 7-1 on Runaway Ghost was not an anomaly in this race.

unless you know what their probs said, then you would have no idea.

of course they're handicapping, and doing it better ovall than the crowd

betting models are useless unless you have probability models too.
and what's more the bigger the price over their assessed price, then the more they attempt to get on, until any more is counter productive.

[Track Phantom]

Originally Posted by steveb

unless you know what their probs said, then you would have no idea.

of course they're handicapping, and doing it better overall than the crowd

betting models are useless unless you have probability models too.
and what's more the bigger the price over their assessed price, then the more they attempt to get on, until any more is counter productive.

I don't believe this statement. Not at all.

[steveb]

Originally Posted by jay68802

What I am seeing is all true. I am just looking at the posts of Denny, Robert, PA, Storyline, Dave W, and TP. 6 solid handicappers, and 6 different takes on the race. Personally I thought the 11 was a contender, but I also posted I was rather lost on the race. There were a lot of ways a person could view this race. Look at the thread for this race, I think 8 different horses were chosen in that thread. To get to 7-2, the last dump odds would be in the range of 3-2 to even money, maybe a little lower. Can any one say that the 11 was that type? Bolsters the argument that the late money is inside money. As for the horse being drugged? Could be. Could not be. The problem is that the person responsible knows what drugs are going to be tested for, so the horse will probably pass the drug test.

if that's happening then you have two problems maybe.
1....computer teams
2....cheats


the computer teams need predictability.
cheats, cheat them as well as the general public.

anybody that thinks the likes of woods, benter, zjeljko,longmuir, dufficy and whoever else is out there now, got there by cheating is on another planet.
they are/were making thousands upon thousands of bets day in day out.
why would they need to cheat on the odd race, and how could they?

having cheats though would be no surprise.
it's epidemic proportions where i live.

[steveb]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

I don't believe this statement. Not at all.

it matters not.
believe what you will.

one thing i would stress though.
if you keep looking for the bad, then you will surely find it.
whether it's there or not.

[storyline]

Originally Posted by steveb

unless you know what their probs said, then you would have no idea.

of course they're handicapping, and doing it better ovall than the crowd

betting models are useless unless you have probability models too.
and what's more the bigger the price over their assessed price, then the more they attempt to get on, until any more is counter productive.

I'll say this as politely as I possibly can.

If a whales computer probabilities were shown to bet this horse without any inside information I guarantee you that they'll be out of business long before years end.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by cj

Even if many here agree the horse was a contender, and even if you think 7-2 makes sense, the horse won like a 2-5 shot. I was at the Thunder game (ugh) and heard which horse won. I was mildly surprised given the post he had. But when I saw the replay, wow. That didn't look anything like the same horse I've seen race several times.

I don't know where that move came from.

He looked like an interesting secondary contender. If someone was doing the A,B,C ranking thing, he's reasonably a 'B' on form and common sense. Then you figure he'll be hurt by the projected normal-hot pace, and he would likely be wide from his wide post.

When I saw his odds in the 7-1 range, I thought the public was being 'suckered'. I didn't give him much chance to hit the board all things considered. I didn't notice the odds drop until the prices were posted. I was busy cancelling a few bets I had made keying the 7, who reared badly in the gate.

Watched the race live, was was watching JV handle the 7 with kid gloves thinking he should have just scratched if that was going to be his level of trust in the horse's health, then thinking for a minute that the long shot 6 was in decent position, and regretting not keying the 6, wasn't even looking for the 11 anymore at that stage in the race, and then my jaw almost dropped watching the 11 make a relatively huge move. I don't think it turned out to be a good race with no one else really running a prep-level effort, but hey it was interesting enough to leave second thoughts about first-pass tossing him in the Derby.

[Track Phantom]

Originally Posted by steveb

it matters not.
believe what you will.

one thing i would stress though.
if you keep looking for the bad, then you will surely find it.
whether it's there or not.

So let me get this right. You're saying there is this Holy Grail that these people have to allow them to print money at the expense of the dolts that play this game traditionally?

[Robert Fischer]

Even if I knew beforehand that the horse was running on epogen / blood-boosters, I wouldn't be eager to bet a large sum.

He still had to overcome pace and ground-loss.

Not a sure thing by any means for a horse who looks like a grade 3/ungraded pace contributor. A 'nice story' local horse.

He ran like someone had swapped a Grade 1 horse in his place.

[steveb]

Originally Posted by storyline

I'll say this as politely as I possibly can.

If a whales computer probabilities were shown to bet this horse without any inside information I guarantee you that they'll be out of business long before years end.

i'll say this as politely as i can.
if you think computer teams bet on anything other that what their probability models tell them is +VE expactaion, then your'e dreaming.

if there was cheating going on(i would not know if there was or was not), then it was probably by connected people or others alluring them.
it won't be computer teams doing the cheating.

[steveb]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

So let me get this right. You're saying there is this Holy Grail that these people have to allow them to print money at the expense of the dolts that play this game traditionally?

maybe i am just dumb.
i have no idea what you are trying to say there.

[Track Phantom]

Originally Posted by steveb

maybe i am just dumb.
i have no idea what you are trying to say there.

You said the computer "teams" are handicapping and "better overall than the general public". I don't believe the edge in winning in this context has to do with handicapping and I don't believe some outfit has perfected the art of handicapping to win consistently and without risk.

Maybe that's not what you were saying, and we're probably off the talk track here.

[storyline]

Originally Posted by steveb

i'll say this as politely as i can.
if you think computer teams bet on anything other that what their probability models tell them is +VE expactaion, then your'e dreaming.

if there was cheating going on(i would not know if there was or was not), then it was probably by connected people or others alluring them.
it won't be computer teams doing the cheating.

I don't know if English is your first language so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, no offense meant.

Track Phantom took great care to identify why this was an inside job vs computer wagering, I'm sure anyone with any amount of wagering sophistication understands how these teams wager.

You have kind of repeated what others have stated previously and most of us understand.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by storyline

I don't know if English is your first language so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, no offense meant.

Track Phantom took great care to identify why this was an inside job vs computer wagering, I'm sure anyone with any amount of wagering sophistication understands how these teams wager.

You have kind of repeated what others have stated previously and most of us understand.

Is it an impossibility that some computer-betting "Whale" might have infiltrated the backstretch in order to complement his software-based wagering?