Past posting

[metro]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

can you post a link

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4PfACjPltj2mkreG0xlj5R

Stettin touches on a lot of the things discussed here. Surprised me that, according to his comments, these syndicates are getting between 14% and 18% on rebates depending on wager type and host tracks (if I heard him correctly). Also said the syndicates account for up to 30% of handle at NYRA tracks and closer to 50% at smaller tracks. Not sure how that business model can work given the numbers he mentioned when you apply them to the typical daily handle at tracks today, especially the smaller ones.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by metro

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4PfACjPltj2mkreG0xlj5R

Stettin touches on a lot of the things discussed here. Surprised me that, according to his comments, these syndicates are getting between 14% and 18% on rebates depending on wager type and host tracks (if I heard him correctly). Also said the syndicates account for up to 30% of handle at NYRA tracks and closer to 50% at smaller tracks. Not sure how that business model can work given the numbers he mentioned when you apply them to the typical daily handle at tracks today, especially the smaller ones.

I did not listen to this podcast, but if it was said, or implied, that 30% of NYRA's handle is based on CAW play, that is grossly inaccurate by a multiple of the true percentage.

[JerryBoyle]

Originally Posted by metro

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4PfACjPltj2mkreG0xlj5R

Stettin touches on a lot of the things discussed here. Surprised me that, according to his comments, these syndicates are getting between 14% and 18% on rebates depending on wager type and host tracks (if I heard him correctly). Also said the syndicates account for up to 30% of handle at NYRA tracks and closer to 50% at smaller tracks. Not sure how that business model can work given the numbers he mentioned when you apply them to the typical daily handle at tracks today, especially the smaller ones.

At around 21:45 he perfectly captures why the "big teams know the final price they're gonna get when they bet" statement is impossible.

[trifecta]

Originally Posted by the little guy

I did not listen to this podcast, but if it was said, or implied, that 30% of NYRA's handle is based on CAW play, that is grossly inaccurate by a multiple of the true percentage.

I believe he said it was as high as 35%, plus 40-50-60% at smaller tracks like CT and Mnr.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by trifecta

I believe he said it was as high as 35%, plus 40-50-60% at smaller tracks like CT and Mnr.

Well, he would be wrong if he said that. VERY wrong. Once again, I didn't listen, but if that was said it's wildly irresponsible.

[trifecta]

Originally Posted by the little guy

Well, he would be wrong if he said that. VERY wrong. Once again, I didn't listen, but if that was said it's wildly irresponsible.

Between minute 32:50 and 33:20 he said he believed that the syndicates are responsible for about 30% of NYRA's daily handle and 50-60-70 percent of the handle for CT and Mnr.

I thought later on in the podcast he said they were responsible for up to 35% of NYRA's handle but I can't find that section of the podcast.

[Poindexter]

He did not answer the two most important questions to me.

1) Do they have the ability to view all other tickets played in a pick 4/pick 5/pick 6 pool(or even tris and supers for that matter) which would provide a huge edge, even if much of those pools are coming in too late to access/use some of that information.

2) Do they have enough access to the tote that they can read other bets in transit, which would give them a lot later access to money bet than the public that has since the public has wait for the bets to process and display which is typically during the race and too late to do anything with.


These are the two issues that would give these groups an unfair advantage.

He also was very unclear on the rebate portion. For instance I know high takeout trifectas typically provide for much higher rebates than a low percentage win pool, but he said they get rebates of 14 to 18%. A 14% rebate on a 16% takeout win pool or a 15% pick 5 pool would be ridiculously good. A 18% takeout on a 28% takeout trifecta pool not nearly as good.


TLG, the 30% is pretty consistent with everything I have seen with high volume, highly rebated betting groups. If you are saying that it is only 10 to 15% for NYRA, my response simply put would be why bother with them. Who needs that big a tax on everyday players for such a paltry amount of such big pools. Common sense dictates that they have to be betting at least 30% of the pools. Otherwise they are more harmful than beneficial.

[classhandicapper]

I'm pretty sure he said they DON'T have access to pool information that the public does not have.

He also made a good point about how even if they did, it's not necessarily as big an advantage as you would think. If there are 5 or 6 teams, that means there are 5 or 6 teams seeing the same uncovered combinations all putting in their bets in the last few seconds. So they could all potentially cover those same combinations and turn the ticket into an underlay.

It seems to me the main problem is that these guys have computer models using sophisticated mathematics to create better odds lines than very skilled handicappers can typically create on their own. They also employ very good handicappers to supplement the PPs in the same way we privately watch replays, make bias notes, look for trainer patterns etc... looking for an edge.

Then on top of that, their computers can scour all the pools looking for the best pool to make the wager.

The competition is thick.

It would seem a good counterattack would be for multiple private handicappers to share their own private value oriented information and data, but unquestionably the right approach is paying attention to what everyone else is doing and doing something else. It's tough to outsmart other very smart people looking at the same numbers in the same way by enough to overcome a high take.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I'm pretty sure he said they DON'T have access to pool information that the public does not have.

He also made a good point about how even if they did, it's not necessarily as big an advantage as you would think. If there are 5 or 6 teams, that means there are 5 or 6 teams seeing the same uncovered combinations all putting in their bets in the last few seconds. So they could all potentially cover those same combinations and turn the ticket into an underlay.

It seems to me the main problem is that these guys have computer models using sophisticated mathematics to create better odds lines than very skilled handicappers can typically create on their own. They also employ very good handicappers to supplement the PPs in the same way we privately watch replays, make bias notes, look for trainer patterns etc... looking for an edge.

Then on top of that, their computers can scour all the pools looking for the best pool to make the wager.

The competition is thick.

It would seem a good counterattack would be for multiple private handicappers to share their own private value oriented information and data, but unquestionably the right approach is paying attention to what everyone else is doing and doing something else. It's tough to outsmart other very smart people looking at the same numbers in the same way by enough to overcome a high take.

if they were paying the same tax (or shouldnt they being paying more since they are making the most money?), and the access to information from the track was the same, then I would not have a problem with what they do.

[Poindexter]

[QUOTE=classhandicapper;2644705][B]I'm pretty sure he said they DON'T have access to pool information that the public does not have.

/QUOTE]

He did say that but wasn't asked my specific questions and don't know that he knows the answer anyhow. Not expecting the groups to actually share that they have access to this information. He was also very vague in a lot of responses indicating to me that he had sort of limited information to begin with.

[classhandicapper]

He did say that but wasn't asked my specific questions and don't know that he knows the answer anyhow. Not expecting the groups to actually share that they have access to this information. He was also very vague in a lot of responses indicating to me that he had sort of limited information to begin with.

I don't know him. I took everything he said with a grain of salt. I'll assume if Andy said he's wrong about NYRA that Andy is right. So who knows what else he's wrong about.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

if they were paying the same tax (or shouldnt they being paying more since they are making the most money?), and the access to information from the track was the same, then I would not have a problem with what they do.

I have mixed feelings about it.

On the one hand it makes me feel like I'm getting screwed because I'm not getting huge rebates. On the flip side almost every business gives volume discounts to their best customers. I think I'd feel better about it if the margin was simply narrower.

[cj]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I have mixed feelings about it.

On the one hand it makes me feel like I'm getting screwed because I'm not getting huge rebates. On the flip side almost every business gives volume discounts to their best customers. I think I'd feel better about it if the margin was simply narrower.

Volume discounts for buying in bulk shouldn't really apply to a gambling game. More and more is starting to seep out about how just unfair this makes the game for the regular player.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by cj

Volume discounts for buying in bulk shouldn't really apply to a gambling game. More and more is starting to seep out about how just unfair this makes the game for the regular player.

And we have to remember we exist because the state gives us permission to exist.

One of my long term fears is if some congressman decides to take on horse racing and holds some hearings. All the various ways the connected folks benefit could make us look like a crooked sport.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

Volume discounts for buying in bulk shouldn't really apply to a gambling game. More and more is starting to seep out about how just unfair this makes the game for the regular player.

Yeah. Vegas gives significant perks to their best casino game customers, but it's different.

It's the amount of money we are taking about here and the fact that their betting volume is impacting our prices which is not the same as fixed odds casino games. The casinos could perk some whale all they want for his blackjack volume and it wouldn't impact me when I play blackjack.

I'm not sure anyone in racing is a long enough term thinker to risk losing all that handle in order to "theoretically" attract more money from the rest of us and new customers.