Controversy at the BCBC.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey

.......So if an entry is made under the person of an LLC, it's members might be able to concur, and make decisions together, and maybe it would not be considered colluding..?

Seems like two or more people would have to enter as the LLC to begin with though, but I'm no lawyer so who knows...Just like a fellow poster asked awhile back, if LLC's were permitted to enter contests...?

Try not to get any stains on your clothes up there on the grassy knoll. Your focus on the use of an LLC to somehow offer a betting advantage to the members of the LLC is quite a reach.

The use of the LLC is more likely a means to fund the players for bets and entries to tournaments and/or to provide for a way to allocate profits and losses.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Try not to get any stains on your clothes up there on the grassy knoll. Your focus on the use of an LLC to somehow offer a betting advantage to the members of the LLC is quite a reach.

The use of the LLC is more likely a means to fund the players for bets and entries to tournaments and/or to provide for a way to allocate profits and losses.

No worries, I not the character assassination type, I just think it is an interesting subject matter, this whole Team Work approach looks like it is quite common in contests, and it all starts with the dual entry for a single person, branches out to the husband/ wife / brother/ son team, then on to occluded partnership, beards, directors of bets, etc...wow...who would have thunk these friendly contests are actually so complex...

...but like you, I totally see the advantages of the all-in...early/ late dutching techniques employed by these masters at the tournaments, partners obfuscated, that everybody knows about, deeds prohibited in word, yet never enforced, and virtually unenforceable...but NOW we get concerned with the tournaments being "compromised"...?

[thaskalos]

I'm glad that tournament horseplay isn't in my future.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I'm glad that tournament horseplay isn't in my future.

Not sure why. Get the financial backing, put together a team of your own and it will be the easiest money you ever made in this game. Meanwhile, the sport of horse racing will continue soliciting suckers for you to feed off.

[RunForTheRoses]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

Not sure why. Get the financial backing, put together a team of your own and it will be the easiest money you ever made in this game. Meanwhile, the sport of horse racing will continue soliciting suckers for you to feed off.

Pick six boys meet the PA all stars at the ok corrall

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

Not sure why. Get the financial backing, put together a team of your own and it will be the easiest money you ever made in this game. Meanwhile, the sport of horse racing will continue soliciting suckers for you to feed off.

Naw...that side of the game doesn't interest me much. I'd rather play a lone hand...while sitting around in my pajamas at 2 in the afternoon.

[PICSIX]

Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey

It would be interesting to know how many players pursue a "win or bust" strategy...Is this strategy sort of rare...? Wouldn't most players try to be more conservative and not lose all of their $7500. I don't picture most players going for the "all or nothing strategy and risk losing 10K (including their entry fee)..how many players could really afford to pursue this risky angle...?

Players that have multiple backers and entries can afford to do this frequently.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by burnsy

Yeah, but the tournament is NOT long term. Its a defined term. They can dutch certain entries and hold back on one or two, take the penalty and hammer something late. Looks like they hammered a few times because some entries went belly up. If you are playing for yourself you can't afford to take all these differing money management opportunities. You basically buy one or two shots. When people get together and manage multiple entries in unison. I have not done the math but they are getting a way higher probability rate then the average Joe in this tournament. They can say whatever they want, its a form of collusion but they also went by the rules as they are now it seems. Yes, they could lose but if they just come in the money with 1 entry its a coup.

You are thinking in terms of winning a specific tournament.

I agree with you on that.

I am thinking in terms of winning money over the long term.

I'm not a tournament player. So I don't even have a strategy for trying to maximize my long term edge. But if did, I would gladly compete against guys that were trying to win a specific tournament with strategies that might help them today but possibly cost them money over the long haul. I wouldn't care about any one tournament. I would care about a series of several hundred.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I'm glad that tournament horseplay isn't in my future.

I've spent most of my life trying to find horses that have a greater chance of winning than their odds suggest. The very idea of trying to find horses that will improve my position even if they are bad value, or trying to block people behind me by picking the same horses as them, or trying to swing for the fences on some longshot underlay because it's my only way to get into the money etc... is anathema to me.

I played in one tournament in my life.

I was solidly in the money after a day of handicapping at AQU and OP. Pretty much the only way I was going to get knocked out of the money was if a bomb came in in the last race and a lot of people had it. Well guess what. The longest shot on the board came in and a bunch of people that were at the bottom and doing poorly all day jumped over me and knocked me out of the money by 1 position. Now if they liked that horse because they thought he was good value, so be it. You shake their hand and move on. But they all knew their only chance to get into the money was to get lucky on a bomb they all hated. That was already enough for me. Good thing it was a free roll.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

You are thinking in terms of winning a specific tournament.

I agree with you on that.

I am thinking in terms of winning money over the long term.

I'm not a tournament player. So I don't even have a strategy for trying to maximize my long term edge. But if did, I would gladly compete against guys that were trying to win a specific tournament with strategies that might help them today but possibly cost them money over the long haul. I wouldn't care about any one tournament. I would care about a series of several hundred.

You are missing the point Unless you have the day of your lifetime, your $7500 is not going to become $100,000 or $150,000. Your long term strategy is fine for flat betting, but will leave you as an also ran in the tournaments time and time again. But as I mentioned a few posts ago, just buy having a team of 10 guys going all in on a series of longshots, I have a good chace of having 1 entry near the top as many as 3. Even if my team of 10 goes down the tubes there may be 10 other teams of 6 to 10 memebers that you have to worry about. Long term grinding gets you nothing in these tournaments. Save that for the betting windows. In these tournaments you have to get near the top and from there it is handicapping and execution and of course luck.

My guess is the guys that won this tournament, had a bunch of bullets and talisman sp? was the last one. when he won, it put them near the top and the strong play on the Gun Runner exacta put them over the top. But the point is that Talisman was one of many bullets. It wasn't one guy pinning his hopes on one horse and getting lucky, despite the winners attempt to sell it.

[thaskalos]

Are there legal restrictions prohibiting us from organizing a tournament with a modest entry fee right HERE?

[VigorsTheGrey]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

You are missing the point Unless you have the day of your lifetime, your $7500 is not going to become $100,000 or $150,000. Your long term strategy is fine for flat betting, but will leave you as an also ran in the tournaments time and time again. But as I mentioned a few posts ago, just buy having a team of 10 guys going all in on a series of longshots, I have a good chace of having 1 entry near the top as many as 3. Even if my team of 10 goes down the tubes there may be 10 other teams of 6 to 10 memebers that you have to worry about. Long term grinding gets you nothing in these tournaments. Save that for the betting windows. In these tournaments you have to get near the top and from there it is handicapping and execution and of course luck.

My guess is the guys that won this tournament, had a bunch of bullets and talisman sp? was the last one. when he won, it put them near the top and the strong play on the Gun Runner exacta put them over the top. But the point is that Talisman was one of many bullets. It wasn't one guy pinning his hopes on one horse and getting lucky, despite the winners attempt to sell it.

Sounds like you nailed it here...5 guys with double entries equals 10 large bullets or 20 half size bullets to bet longshots with...drain the partners one by one, conserving the rest until you hit the one that puts you in range...then adjust the strategy as needed to go over the top....if you have bullets left in the last race in different accounts then bet them all in the same pool, dutching....one partners loss is another ones gain, assuming one of the dutches wins...

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

........My guess is the guys that won this tournament, had a bunch of bullets and talisman sp? was the last one. when he won, it put them near the top and the strong play on the Gun Runner exacta put them over the top. But the point is that Talisman was one of many bullets. It wasn't one guy pinning his hopes on one horse and getting lucky, despite the winners attempt to sell it.

Assuming 10 entries at $10,000 a pop it would mean that the team put up $100,000 to win $427,000 a 4.27-1 proposition. To do that the winning entry had to hit a 16-1 shot to succeed. Seems like a lot of risk to get just over 4-1 on your investment.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

You are missing the point Unless you have the day of your lifetime, your $7500 is not going to become $100,000 or $150,000. Your long term strategy is fine for flat betting, but will leave you as an also ran in the tournaments time and time again.

Keep in mind I don't know the tournament circuit.

When I bet trifectas combining horses I think are good value, that strategy leaves me tearing up tickets time and time again. Yet eventually, it all seems to work out when I'm finally right.

IMO, if you participate in similar tournaments with similar rules and prizes on a regular basis, you should expect to be an also ran time and time again. So you will need a healthy bankroll and a lot of confidence to sustain all the losing. But if you are a very good handicapper that isolates live horses at good prices that will probably slip by other contestants you will eventually net profits.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Assuming 10 entries at $10,000 a pop it would mean that the team put up $100,000 to win $427,000 a 4.27-1 proposition. To do that the winning entry had to hit a 16-1 shot to succeed. Seems like a lot of risk to get just over 4-1 on your investment.

I agree. I'm not a tournament guy. So maybe there are several things I am missing. But it still seems to me like everyone is overly concerned with the probability of winning and not the ROI on the much bigger upfront investment to get all those extra entries.

The only edge I can possibly see would come from having enough entries to cover combinations of horses that virtually no one has (kind of like Pick 6 syndicates). But that would require a lot of tickets.