Odds changes during races WHAT A JOKE

[AltonKelsey]

Too long of a day, with all the money they are minting, I heard they run 5 shifts.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by cj

It is pretty obvious, the big CRW teams are making a killing on the backs of the smaller players at GP. That is why the handle is so big. Why the smaller players continue to bet the place I can't say.

I think the rainbow six is driving a lot of handle at Gulfstream. I think there is a big appetite for nice paying 20 Cent pick sixes. They are running big and competitive fields. The jackpot has been large much of this meet, and there have been horses alive for the jackpot on numerous days feeding the hope. Seeing a 20 cent pick six pay $15,000 or $30,000 or $50,000 is pretty enticing. Also not unusual for them to pay generously despite the extra takeout. Some of these payouts are bigger than the entire pools at a lot of tracks(even on carryover days). Once people cap they are going to bet. Once players bet, the whales bet more. As critical as I am about racing, the rainbow six at Gulfstream has proven to be a winning concept. Just looked at the wps pools for Sunday, significant jump in handle starting with race 8 (the start of rainbow six).

[dasch]

Originally Posted by AltonKelsey

Too long of a day, with all the money they are minting, I heard they run 5 shifts.

Maybe they only want the "A" team working GP & SA

[ultracapper]

Just for the sake of truth and honesty. Just happened to watch this replay.

Feb 4, 2018 2nd at Santa Anita

Thankful Every Day

Enters the gate at 3/5
Leaves the gate at 4/5
Enters the far turn at Even
Leads every step of the race.

A very "Gore-ian" Inconvenient Truth.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by DGroundhog

Let's say they owners decide to 'fix' the problem with updating odds. The money isn't going to just magically appear. They would likely raise the takeouts to fund the upgrade - which bettors would complain about and probably launch a boycott (like they did when Keeneland tried to raise takeout).

Would you accept a raise in takeouts to fund updating the current system?

You're ridiculous. The racing industry has been MIRED in 1970s technology for the most part.

You mean to tell me in the last three decades (we won't even go back to the 1970s), they couldn't raise enough money to update the tote system at each track to bring them all IN LINE with what the major tote companies can offer if need be?

And not only that, you want US, the customer, to pay for this "luxury" of more accurate pool info?

[PaceAdvantage]

Interesting observation on a winner I just had (posted it on here too, in VIP).

Race 1 at MVR.

horse is 3-1 going into the gate...a speed horse...broke first, and won for fun at.....3-1

What was interesting? His odds didn't go down.

The real interesting part...there was a blinding snowstorm going on, and you couldn't see the horses break from the gate...

[jay68802]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

Just for the sake of truth and honesty. Just happened to watch this replay.

Feb 4, 2018 2nd at Santa Anita

Thankful Every Day

Enters the gate at 3/5
Leaves the gate at 4/5
Enters the far turn at Even
Leads every step of the race.

A very "Gore-ian" Inconvenient Truth.

In the last 28 races at GS, there has been 8 horses that at the gate were 3/2 or lower in odds. All of them had final odds higher than at the gate. 6 won. The 2 that did not win also had the the largest increase in odds.

[dasch]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

Just for the sake of truth and honesty. Just happened to watch this replay.

Feb 4, 2018 2nd at Santa Anita

Thankful Every Day

Enters the gate at 3/5
Leaves the gate at 4/5
Enters the far turn at Even
Leads every step of the race.

A very "Gore-ian" Inconvenient Truth.

He was 4 wide bobbing heads for the lead when he went from 4-5 to Even

And curiously where did you watch the replay that shows him 3-5 in the gate? The replay I watched from rtn has no gate odds.

[jay68802]

Looking at the last dump at GS has been very interesting. One thing I looked at was the large number of transactions that take place at this time. There were 4 races where the win pool did not get final until about 40 seconds into the race. The races all had a common theme. They were the start of the rainbow 6, or another multi race wager. When you add in exact, tri, and all the other wagers, the tote is trying to process a very large amount of wagers, and since the base wager is smaller for these bets, it only adds to the problem. My understanding is that all the wagers are being processed at the same time. The question I have is could the tote company separate the win pool from all of these other wagers? Maybe use a dedicated server for win bets only? I have a useful but limited knowledge of how this works. As near as I can tell, this could eliminate the time in getting the pool updated. But someone with a better understanding of how this works may have a different view.

[cj]

Originally Posted by jay68802

Looking at the last dump at GS has been very interesting. One thing I looked at was the large number of transactions that take place at this time. There were 4 races where the win pool did not get final until about 40 seconds into the race. The races all had a common theme. They were the start of the rainbow 6, or another multi race wager. When you add in exact, tri, and all the other wagers, the tote is trying to process a very large amount of wagers, and since the base wager is smaller for these bets, it only adds to the problem. My understanding is that all the wagers are being processed at the same time. The question I have is could the tote company separate the win pool from all of these other wagers? Maybe use a dedicated server for win bets only? I have a useful but limited knowledge of how this works. As near as I can tell, this could eliminate the time in getting the pool updated. But someone with a better understanding of how this works may have a different view.

GP...GP...GP!!!

GS was Garden State, unless it was harness racing where it was GSP.

Anyway, doesn't matter, but that bugs me almost as much as when people spell Lukas wrong.

I like your point about processing win wagers first. That is probably too forward thinking for those in charge.

[BCOURTNEY]

I'm less concerned about odds changes due to old technology and more concerned with teams who have the ability to see real time odds changes while the average bettor cannot. Think "flash boys" on wall street. Solving this issue would at least ensure everyone is on a level playing field whether automated or not. Perhaps someone should file suit against a data or signal providers and show how distribution of the signal updates is happening in an inequitable manner to ensure fair play - this would be illegal on wall street, why is it in a federally regulated parimutuel pool?

This is the right question to ask to get movement on this topic - has been forever if the players can organize it into legislation, that is the only thing the signal providers and horsemen will react to at this point. Does it upset anyone that the computer teams get to see the real time odds for an entire minute and decide whether or not to jump in?

March 14, 2001
http://www.espn.com/sports/horse/news/story?id=1154966

An outraged professional gambler observed that this is equivalent to "a secret auction where one bidder gets to see all the other bids and then decides whether he wants to participate."

Campaigning this is simple: ALL participants get 1 minute updates. It's fair, it's straightforward. It best ensures equitable treatment under the law. (to be written)

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by BCOURTNEY

I'm less concerned about odds changes due to old technology and more concerned with teams who have the ability to see real time odds changes while the average bettor cannot. Think "flash boys" on wall street. Solving this issue would at least ensure everyone is on a level playing field whether automated or not. Perhaps someone should file suit against a data or signal providers and show how distribution of the signal updates is happening in an inequitable manner to ensure fair play - this would be illegal on wall street, why is it in a federally regulated parimutuel pool?

What you are speaking of does not (to my knowledge) exist.

There certainly are tote systems that are faster than they ADW totes you and I use, but the bottleneck is still the tote system itself.

It's just like when people assume that there is a segment of the betting public that gets trifecta and superfecta payoffs. They simply do not exist.

But my question to you, sir, would be, "What would you do with such information? How would you make use of it?"


Dave

[jay68802]

Originally Posted by cj

GP...GP...GP!!!

GS was Garden State, unless it was harness racing where it was GSP.

Anyway, doesn't matter, but that bugs me almost as much as when people spell Lukas wrong.

I like your point about processing win wagers first. That is probably too forward thinking for those in charge.

I must have a mental block on this, and probably other things. I read your post and looked at my data of GP, about 400 races and they all were GS. At least I can fix that by copying.

[AltonKelsey]

If anyone here thinks these odds changes are the reason they lose money, they are delusional.

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by AltonKelsey

If anyone here thinks these odds changes are the reason they lose money, they are delusional.

I would probably not be quite so harsh. Instead, I would say that if the odds changes REALLY ARE why you are losing, then you are truly only a stone's throw from being a winning player.

It means that you are making phenomenal selections.


Just my opinion.

Dave