Do Bettors get it right?

[Canadian]

Just a general question for those who track such things. Do bettors generally get it right? I know the favorites win at a higher rate then the 5 th favorite. But do 10-1's win at a 10-1 rate (well, take out adjusted, I should probably ask does a 10-1 win at a 12-1 rate). How acurate is the odds board?

[shouldacoulda]

The odds on the tote board are with respect to payout. It is determined by the players placing wagers. In reality it has to do with the public's perception of who will win. It isn't the horses actual odds of winning the race. Considering favorites win 1/3 the time that means they are wrong 2/3 of the time.

[thaskalos]

Not only do the bettors as a whole generally get it right...they are nothing short of amazing in their accuracy.

Studies based on hundreds of thousands of races have reveiled that the favorites win the most races, the second favorites win the second most, the third favorites win the third most, etc...all the way down the line.

[cnollfan]

Also, the longshots get bet heavier than they should. So while the public's ordinal ranking of horses is accurate, those at the favorite end of the spectrum tend to a return on investment of - 10%, outperforming the track take of about 18%, while those at the longshot end tend to a return on investment of - 30%.

[Canadian]

Originally Posted by shouldacoulda

The odds on the tote board are with respect to payout. It is determined by the players placing wagers. In reality it has to do with the public's perception of who will win. It isn't the horses actual odds of winning the race. Considering favorites win 1/3 the time that means they are wrong 2/3 of the time.

But that's kind of what I asked. Your just trying to tell me to word it a different way.

All the horses odds should add up to 100% (after factoring for takeout). Would they not? Meaning a 1-1 would have a 50% chance of winning, a 10-1 would have a .... would have a .. well what ever it works out to be.

But I am wondering do horses win at the rate as shown on the odds board?

[misscashalot]

Originally Posted by Canadian

But that's kind of what I asked. Your just trying to tell me to word it a different way.

All the horses odds should add up to 100% (after factoring for takeout). Would they not? Meaning a 1-1 would have a 50% chance of winning, a 10-1 would have a .... would have a .. well what ever it works out to be.

But I am wondering do horses win at the rate as shown on the odds board?

Yes

[shouldacoulda]

Originally Posted by Canadian

But that's kind of what I asked. Your just trying to tell me to word it a different way.

All the horses odds should add up to 100% (after factoring for takeout). Would they not? Meaning a 1-1 would have a 50% chance of winning, a 10-1 would have a .... would have a .. well what ever it works out to be.

But I am wondering do horses win at the rate as shown on the odds board?

If you mean the absolute mathematical probability of the horse to win the race then no, that is not what the tote board represents.

[Canadian]

Originally Posted by shouldacoulda

If you mean the absolute mathematical probability of the horse to win the race then no, that is not what the tote board represents.

But doesn't it though? Maybe we're just getting caught up in semantics. If 5% of all money bet is on a given horse, do these horses win at a 5% rate over time.

Obviously not all 20-1's are equal as good handicappers know. Again it was just and overtime question.

[lamboguy]

what a question. i couldn't answer this one in a million years.the only thing that i can compare parimutual racing with is equity market trading. as in the equities markets, the market is the final arbitrator. in racing, the toteboard is the final arbitrator.

[Robert Goren]

I seen several studies on this. If you bet just the horse at a given odds you will aways lose money. The lower odds the less money you lose. If you were to bet 100,000 random horses at 4/5, you would lose less money that if you bet 100,000 random horses at 20/1. Not all 20/1 horses are created equal, but then nether are 4/5 horses. There is a ton of math that can explain that, but it will give you a headache.

[Robert Fischer]

the boring answer = by definition of the parimutuel system, the public will have a Value equal to
1.00 - the track take.

EXAMPLE (@20%TAKE)
VALUE = 1.0 - .20 = $0.80 = 20%loss

[shouldacoulda]

Originally Posted by Canadian

But doesn't it though? Maybe we're just getting caught up in semantics. If 5% of all money bet is on a given horse, do these horses win at a 5% rate over time.

No. It doesn't work that way.

[Canadian]

Originally Posted by shouldacoulda

No. It doesn't work that way.

Do you have a number from so many races over a given amount of time that you can tell the rate at which horses recieving 5% of the money win @?

[acorn54]

in william quirin's book, computer studies winning at the races, he devotes a chapter to where he documented public odds in relation to the horses chances of winning. the conclusion drawn from his study was that yes, over time horses win according to their odds. there was a slight over bet bias on longshot horses in the 20-1 and higher range and a slight underbetting bias in the very low odds range, but overall yes horses win according to their odds over time.

[WinterTriangle]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Not only do the bettors as a whole generally get it right...they are nothing short of amazing in their accuracy.

How is being wrong about the favorite 2/3 of the time amazingly accurate?