18/1 in the gate 7/1 in the winners circle.

[Tom]

Isn't figuring out how to juice horses and avoid detection by being ahead of current testing proceedures innovation?

Racing sells itself as a "game", a family affair, buy a picnic table, watch the whales eat each other while you feed them?

[Bustin Stones]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

So...punish innovation and technological advancements....interesting

What's next? Ban high frequency trading in the equity markets?

I get your point and I'm a pro tech guy as well, but the equity market comparison isn't valid. There, you have a strike price as your fixed point. Parimutuel systems do not provide any fixed point (other than will pays). We're putting up money into odds we can only try to estimate.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by Bustin Stones

I get your point and I'm a pro tech guy as well, but the equity market comparison isn't valid. There, you have a strike price as your fixed point. Parimutuel systems do not provide any fixed point (other than will pays). We're putting up money into odds we can only try to estimate.

Disagree that the equity market comparison isn't valid.

In horse race betting you absolutely do have the ability to name your strike price.

Specifically, you have the ability to name your wager type, wager size, AND STRIKE PRICE in terms of odds as of the most recent tote refresh at a specified point in time relative to post time.

This can even take the form of a list similar to the one reported in the article.

The ability to do this isn't limited to the handful of whales betting signiicant amounts of money through rebate shops like Elite Turf Club and elsewhere.

Right now as I type this the everyday player has the ability to do this via text file upload at many if not most ADWs.

For example:

$3.00 WIN horse #3, min odds 2.70 to one, at 45 seconds to post time.

$5.00 WIN horse #3, min odds 2.40 to one, at 30 seconds to post time.

$8.00 WIN horse #3, min odds 2.10 to one, at 0 seconds to post time.

$11.00 WIN horse #3, min odds 2.00 to one, at 30 seconds after post time (provided the race is still open.)

$2.00 EXA 3-1, min $2.00 EXA payoff $28.20, at 0 seconds to post time, etc.

And of course every single player who does this is fully aware that win pool odds and exacta payoffs are subject to change with each subsequent tote refresh until such time as the pools are closed when the stop wagering signal is sent out by the host track.

Just as every single stock market investor who has ever submitted a limit order knows that current price quotes on AAPL, MSFT, NVDA, etc. are subject to change as the market reacts to new orders being submitted.

Imo, horse race betting via text file upload and buying shares of AAPL, MSFT, NVDA, etc. with limit orders aren't all that different from each other.

Both activities can involve strike prices and time constraints if you want them to.

That said, the ONE THING that sticks out to me here is that the timestamps of the individual bets listed in the article suggest the player who placed those wagers might be getting tote refreshes every second or so.

If that's the case then I DEFINITELY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

Because the rest of us are getting much SLOWER tote refreshes in the final few minutes of betting (at best) every 15-45 seconds or so.

Other than that I don't have a problem with a player recognizing +EV and betting it as the field is being loaded.

My attitude is if I want to do the same:

Then Step Up.



-jp

.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

So...punish innovation and technological advancements....interesting

What's next? Ban high frequency trading in the equity markets?

I get your point. I don’t think there’s a perfect solution. The tracks don’t want to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs in the short term, but they may kill the goose in the long term anyway if the people that feed the goose quit because they never get any eggs.

In my mind, the rebates are the bigger issue. The computer guys face the same issue of having very late money overshoot their price. If we got rid of rebates altogether and lowered the take by an equal dollar amount instead, most horse players would be way happier, the game would be more attractive, more players would tip into the black, and the very best whales would survive. That might be a better outcome even if they lose some of the weaker whales and the best whales cut back a bit.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

That said, the ONE THING that sticks out to me here is that the timestamps of the individual bets listed in the article suggest the player who placed those wagers might be getting tote refreshes every second or so.

If that's the case then I DEFINITELY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

Me too...agree completely with this.

The industry isn't set up for this kind of refresh rate...do you even know of any individual track that is capable of delivering data at that rate? So, what exactly changes second to second to warrant additional wagers, as is suggested by the timestamps?

Are they reading their ADW's internal refresh rate of people betting through that PARTICULAR ADW and projecting that data out? If it is Elite, that's a pretty small sample size (although it is a big dollar size).

[Bustin Stones]

something else to consider.
Just as in other sports arenas, the people who own the team, or in this case, the betting systems, the only interest is in satisfying the shareholders of the franchise or casino.
So, at MVR, it's the casino shareholders. Nothing would convince these people to do anything for horsemen or bettors that they don't have to do. If people stop betting on horses there, they'll be happy to host the slots. There is zero incentive to take less money from whales. A % of every dollar goes to the bottom line. And if they are no longer required to subsidize horse racing, that's even more money for them.
How do we preserve horse racing with very little control over the incentives?

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

...In my mind, the rebates are the bigger issue. The computer guys face the same issue of having late money overshoot their price. If we got rid of rebates altogether and lowered the take by an equal dollar amount instead, most horse players would be way happier, the game would be more attractive, more players would tip into the black, and the very best whales would survive. That might be a better outcome even if they lose some of the weaker whales and the best whales cut back a bit.

I'm with you on this.

Fyi, several years ago I had this same conversation about rebates and takeout with one of the biggest whales in North America (if not the biggest) in terms of betting volume.

He told me he would be ok with giving up his rebates provided takeout were reduced so as to make the pools end up having the same net effective takeout he enjoys now because of rebates.

Not just for him but for everybody.

He emphasized the for everybody part because he thought putting everybody on the same level playing field would make the game better off as a whole going forward.


-jp

.

[Bustin Stones]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Me too...agree completely with this.

The industry isn't set up for this kind of refresh rate...do you even know of any individual track that is capable of delivering data at that rate? So, what exactly changes second to second to warrant additional wagers, as is suggested by the timestamps?

Are they reading their ADW's internal refresh rate of people betting through that PARTICULAR ADW and projecting that data out? If it is Elite, that's a pretty small sample size (although it is a big dollar size).

there's always the possibility that this has nothing to do with odds changing and everything to do with income tax avoidance/evasion or IRS audit avoidance
I imagine IRS programs trip when they see the same number appear multiple times or when they see a large number

[lamboguy]

i don't believe this horse was bet before the race started no matter what the time stamp says. everyone knows the MORARCHOS story. naturally, i don't understand the crazy amounts in question. the explanations on this thread do make sense for the rapid run of bets reading the pools so fast.

i have a friend that was a general manager at one of the big tracks that told me if i ever knew what the CAW can do, i would never make another bet on another horse race ever.
https://pastthewire.com/no-caws-or-c...-as-it-sounds/
here's the good news:

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by Bustin Stones

there's always the possibility that this has nothing to do with odds changing and everything to do with income tax avoidance/evasion or IRS audit avoidance
I imagine IRS programs trip when they see the same number appear multiple times or when they see a large number

The IRS doesn't see that level of detail unless you're being audited.

If you are a professional horseplayer you'll probably have an entry on Schedule C line 1 which is labeled by the IRS on the form itself as "1. Gross Receipts or Sales"

You might have a spreadsheet or accounting software package that contains detail for how the amt reported on Line 1 was calculated that looks something like this:

Parimutuel Payoffs Collected:    5.25M
Amount Wagered:                 -5.43M
--------------------------------------
Profit or Loss Before Rebates:  -0.18M
Rebates:                         0.44M
--------------------------------------
Gross Profit Betting Operations: 0.26M (report on Sched C Line 1)

From there the player would have all of the supporting detail such as a .csv file exported from his or her ADW/Rebate House that contains a complete history of individual wagers for the year (one row per wager) as well as rebates paid on each wager.

If you're not a professional horseplayer you would report income earned from betting horses in any given year (provided you had a profit) on the line for "Other Income" on Form 1040.

But unless the IRS asks to see the detail behind the amt reported on Sched C Line 1 or the amt reported as Other Income on Form 1040 (an audit would have them asking to see that detail) they are never going to see individual wager detail.



-jp

.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Me too...agree completely with this.

The industry isn't set up for this kind of refresh rate...do you even know of any individual track that is capable of delivering data at that rate? So, what exactly changes second to second to warrant additional wagers, as is suggested by the timestamps?

I don't know of an individual track set up to deliver at that rate. If anybody does feel free to chime in.

I do recall reading somewhere that some tote companies (not all) built out the ability to process updates at faster refresh rates (5 seconds or so) in the final few minutes of wagering.

I also know that at one time some of the larger tote companies were planning to deliver much faster refresh rates across the industry in the final few minutes of betting.

However, I seem to recall the idea having to be put on hold because there were still too many bottlenecks out there.

Some of the major tote companies might be capable of sending refreshes every few seconds or so. But if you're sending updates at that rate to a track, otb, or adw that's only capable of processing refreshes every 60 seconds or so:

All of those refreshes are just going to pile up in a queue while the current refresh finishes processing. Kind of like how an older laptop freezes up when it runs out of memory.

That said it wouldn't shock me if some the larger rebate shops invested in faster bandwidth enabling faster refresh rates for their players as a selling point.

Similar to market makers and high frequency traders on Wall Street getting faster data updates than the rest of us.

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Are they reading their ADW's internal refresh rate of people betting through that PARTICULAR ADW and projecting that data out? If it is Elite, that's a pretty small sample size (although it is a big dollar size).

I actually thought of this.

I think this is a strong possibility - especially if the player from the article isn't getting refreshes from the tote company in real time.

Imo, it would be the next best thing and a pretty good selling point.


-jp

.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

...So, what exactly changes second to second to warrant additional wagers, as is suggested by the timestamps?

Potentially - pool size, amt wagered on each horse, odds, etc., and the player's resulting EV and bet sizing calculations.


-jp

.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

.......If you're not a professional horseplayer you would report income earned from betting horses in any given year (provided you had a profit) on the line for "Other Income" on Form 1040......
-jp

.

Schedule 1 line 8(b) to be exact.

[westernmassbob]

One thing that is an absolute certainty is that nobody is talking about how many times in these betting situations the horse actually lose. Far more then you realize.

[iamt]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

i don't believe this horse was bet before the race started no matter what the time stamp says. everyone knows the MORARCHOS story. naturally, i don't understand the crazy amounts in question. the explanations on this thread do make sense for the rapid run of bets reading the pools so fast.

i have a friend that was a general manager at one of the big tracks that told me if i ever knew what the CAW can do, i would never make another bet on another horse race ever.
https://pastthewire.com/no-caws-or-c...-as-it-sounds/
here's the good news:

This conspiracy theory is pretty easy to shut down



The horse was shown at 7/1 when the graphics first came on the screen (prior to the 1/2 mile pole in a 5F races). ~ 13 seconds after the gates open.