|
|
10-02-2020, 03:36 PM
|
#91
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC
I agree with your analysis. I would also say that there is no pent up demand to bet US racing if only it was run cleanly.
|
I agree. While drugs in the game are a nuisance they are not the driving force behind people not betting.
I think takeout and field size are much more impactful to playing the game. I would also say the inability for many states to still bet online has stunted growth in an area where it may have grown otherwise.
|
|
|
10-02-2020, 03:47 PM
|
#92
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 18,957
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP
I agree. While drugs in the game are a nuisance they are not the driving force behind people not betting.
I think takeout and field size are much more impactful to playing the game. I would also say the inability for many states to still bet online has stunted growth in an area where it may have grown otherwise.
|
Obviously you're NOT a heavy bettor looking for a clean game.
I'd love to hear your comments after you feel you've been cheated out of a couple of grand!
As I've mentioned many times before "Take-out" has nothing to do with growth of the game!
|
|
|
10-02-2020, 03:50 PM
|
#93
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,549
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro
Obviously you're NOT a heavy bettor looking for a clean game.
I'd love to hear your comments after you feel you've been cheated out of a couple of grand!
As I've mentioned many times before "Take-out" has nothing to do with growth of the game!
|
When a high takeout is combined with the short fields...its affect spells doom to the bettors' bankrolls.
__________________
Live to play another day.
|
|
|
10-02-2020, 04:43 PM
|
#94
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 18,957
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
When a high takeout is combined with the short fields...its affect spells doom to the bettors' bankrolls.
|
Look I’m really tired of the “Take-out” topic.
So rather than retype my feelings about it I’m going to post what I’ve mentioned before and hope in sinks in.
Sorry for the redundancy!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro
It was doomed from the onset.
There’s no substitute for all the options offered through para-mutual wagering.
If you can’t compete in that betting environment then perhaps you should reconsider playing this great game at all.
And those of you who are constantly worried and perhaps agitated by the take-out %, remember that this percentage is only removed from the betting pools as the betting takes place. The odds and will-pays displayed show “What-You-See-is-What-You-Get” if you have a winning play. If that’s unacceptable, you always have the option to simply pass.
I would think that there should be much more concern about having a reasonably good personal hit frequency and profit margin, because whenever you lose the take-out is 100% of everything you’ve bet. That's a big difference and common sense dictates where the priorities should be.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate
Nitro, I think you're off track here, pun intended. The take out is critical in determining the number of players who can stay afloat and support the game with a higher handle. When the pot is raided by a larger rake, and especially when some of the coin siphoned off is returned to the "special" high rebate parties, it's a recipe for decline. The competition gets tougher, and the sharps are fighting with the squares and degenerate losers for the shrinking profits. Your view is similar to that of SRU (Still Riled Up) who insisted all wagers and payouts occurred in some sort of vacuum, and only other factors like hit rates and (positive) profit margins mattered.
Have you ever considered how your play would be altered if another 5 or 7 percent of profit were tacked on to those Sha Tin Q's you're always cashing? Would you bet more, maybe? Have you ever considered the fringe player, say a shop keeper in Hong Kong, who used to break even 20 years ago and push $100K through the windows each year, who now finds himself down $5K or $7K at the end of the year, due to the influence of the whales, computer teams, and rebates that he doesn't get, and has had to scale back his play to $10K per year instead to stop the bleeding?
Take a gander some time at the number of winning players in South America where takeouts are 25% or more in many of the pools. The result is $1500 purses, $1500 claimers, and horses that race 100 times in their career. Even a crack analysis of the insider wagering will pass an inflection point where profits are unattainable.
How many fans do you think will continue to play the races on the weekends when they can only find two races on card worth betting? That's what I'm experiencing. Back in the 1980s I would typically bet several hundred dollars on two or three races, fifty bucks on three others, and maybe five to 10 buck flyers on the other three, in a typical nine race card from NY. Today I bet several hundred dollars in a race maybe half a dozen times a year. A typical Saturday, I bet one or two races for 5 or 10 bucks, and maybe a medium sized bet once or twice a month. There's just not enough slosh in the pools now to make it a profitable or break even hobby. Hong Kong is a venue where I can still find a several races to bet heavier on for each card, but even there I have to be more selective than I was 15 years ago.
Exchange wagering represented a great boom in the UK, where gambling profits aren't taxed, and books can match bettors without having to pay off the tracks. Here in the states, the row was much tougher to hoe, with commissions required for purse reimbursements. Before the offshore crack down back in the early 2000s, I had an account at IASBET, where I could place fixed odds bets - and like exchange wagering, it sometimes provided a hedge against the parimutuel system's flaws, which have morphed into a number of decided negative influences in today's game.
But you can't fight city hall, and apparently can't fight the racing monopolies either, which is why more and more players are taking your advice and passing on races, whole cards, and whole years. Entirely.
|
Hi Parkview.
Thanks for taking the time to provide your thoughts related to the impact of the track’s take-out percentages. I’ve heard similar comments over the years, and I would say that most players would probably agree with many of your points. However, as you probably realize I’m not like most players. While the majority of players think of themselves as “Playing the horses”, I think of myself as “Playing the Money”.
This goes hand-in-hand with the attitude and mentality that most horse players have toward approaching this game. Very few treat it like a business and more often than not, they don’t even bother keeping personal financial records (in business it’s called basic bookkeeping). However, there are also other very relevant aspects to treating your game like a business that lead primarily to securing a profit. My views are far from the idea that we’re all betting in a vacuum. I’ll not only explain why the hit rate frequency and profit margins are much more important than the take-out, they’re actually the bottom-line in terms of maintaining a healthy business outlook.
So, in my example (below) the business type I’ll use produces and sells expendable data through a number of distributors all over the country. For arguments sake we’ll say the data packages have a shelf-life of only 90 days (1 Quarter). There will be an obvious correlation to the items we’re concerned about like “ take-out”, “ hit frequency”, and of course “ profit margin”.
I’ll try to keep things as straightforward as possible so that even the simplest minds (I won’t mention any names) can see what I’m getting at and can either agree or disagree with my argument. Also, note that I’m not shying away from the Take-out % and using the same % used in Hong Kong for both the Quinella ( 25%) and the Win ( 17%) type of bets.
Code:
1 ST Q U A R T E R 2 ND Q U A R T E R
DATA PACKAGE QUINNELA2 DUTCHW3 QUINNELA2 DUTCHW3
RETAIL PRICE $200 $95 $200 $95
DATA PKG UNIT PRODUCTION COST $100 $45 $100 $45
DISTRIBUTOR DISCOUNT-(TAKE OUT) 25% 17% 25% 17%
DISTRIB COST/ UNIT W/DISCOUNT $175 $79 $175 $79
MFG. PROFIT MARGIN 75% 75% 75% 75%
DATA PKG UNITS IN INVENTORY 40 100 40 100
INVENTORY MANUFACTURED VALUE $4,000 $4,500 $4,000 $4,500
TOTAL SALES OVER 90 DAYS-WINS 24 60 28 70
SALES %- (HIT FREQUENCY) 60% 60% 70% 70%
MFG. PROFIT FROM SALES (HITS) $1,800 $2,040 $2,100 $2,380
UNSOLD UNITS-(LOSING BETS) 16 40 12 30
TOTAL LOSS-UNSOLD INVENTORY $1,600 $1,800 $1,200 $1,350
ACTUAL MFGS. PROFIT $200 $240 $900 $1,030
RETURN ON INVESTMENT (ROI) 11% 12% 23% 23%
A) The example shows (2) Quarters of a typical Distributor’s Inventory & Sales history.
B) The Take-out (distributor Discount) is a constant for each type Data package. So is the Profit Margin % for each package.
C) The 2nd Quarter is obviously more profitable. Not because the Take-out was reduced, but because the Hit frequency was increased and the losses reduced.
D) The Take-out is simply one of the costs of doing business.
Once that’s accepted, it has no real impact on Profit Margin fluctuations.
I’m not concerned with the % of take out. I don’t consider it “bleeding” and it has no affect on how much I bet. As I mentioned, the Hit Frequency is as far as I’m concerned a much more important factor to contemplate.
I’ve heard the same commentary about how the take-out continues to drain the pool as if at some point the pool will be empty. Well, I’ve been playing this game an awfully long time and I’m sure I’m not the only player that’s witnessed continuously filled and nice size betting pools at a majority of the mid-size to larger race tracks. Sure there’s been some patronage decline over the last 20 years, but it’s still funny how those same betting pools are continually filled on a daily basis.
Again if you’re looking for real “profitability” the 2 factors to consider together are Hit Frequency and Profit Margin on a race-by-race basis. As an example, you may have noticed that I’m when playing Hong Kong that I only make a 3 horse Dutch Win bet when the overall Profit Margin on the return is 50% or greater. That’s primarily because I know for a fact what my Hit Frequency is. (It’s not only known for specific individual race conditions, but for a typical 10 race card.) If I’ve hit 50% of the playable races on any race card, all remaining races are a Pass.
I’ve found that players who can control their number of plays and the size of their wagers on any given day are more prone to be successful than those just looking for betting action with uninhibited wagering. If you let the game get away and you lose control you’re destined for failure.
|
|
|
10-02-2020, 05:25 PM
|
#95
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,285
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
You can not accept gravity while you are at it. It was perfectly clear the CHRB covered up Justify's positive test.
|
If you believe it then it must be true.
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
|
|
|
10-03-2020, 12:12 PM
|
#96
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro
Obviously you're NOT a heavy bettor looking for a clean game.
I'd love to hear your comments after you feel you've been cheated out of a couple of grand!
As I've mentioned many times before "Take-out" has nothing to do with growth of the game!
|
You know nothing about me and how I have bet over the years.
you dont get anymore of a condescending asshole than this guy.
|
|
|
10-03-2020, 01:06 PM
|
#97
|
self medicated
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: toga
Posts: 3,087
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC
If you believe it then it must be true.
|
It is kind of true. When people tolerate or condone this sort of thing. Well, it just pisses off customers , makes the public suspicious and brings government attention. That simple. It’s magnified because this is a wagering game. I’m not just talking about one incident either. There are just too many things they get caught hiding or covering up . So, they never learn and passive people enable by making 9000 excuses. The excuses hit 9001 and now eventually the heavy hand of the govt steps in. How can anyone that bets a sees what goes on over the years be surprised? This has been coming for a long time . Only the see no evil , hear no evil monkeys believe otherwise
|
|
|
10-03-2020, 01:56 PM
|
#98
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,285
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by burnsy
It is kind of true. When people tolerate or condone this sort of thing. Well, it just pisses off customers , makes the public suspicious and brings government attention. That simple. It’s magnified because this is a wagering game. I’m not just talking about one incident either. There are just too many things they get caught hiding or covering up . So, they never learn and passive people enable by making 9000 excuses. The excuses hit 9001 and now eventually the heavy hand of the govt steps in. How can anyone that bets a sees what goes on over the years be surprised? This has been coming for a long time . Only the see no evil , hear no evil monkeys believe otherwise
|
So we need the heavy hand of the Federal Govt to step in because the heavy hand of the state government is covering things up?
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
|
|
|
10-05-2020, 05:00 PM
|
#99
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 18,957
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP
You know nothing about me and how I have bet over the years.
you dont get anymore of a condescending asshole than this guy.
|
You’re Right! And believe me I have no desire to know someone who doesn’t mind being cheated especially when there’s money involved.
Apparently I’ve ruffled some of your feather’s, but you don’t have to apologize about being a small bettor. There’s nothing to be ashamed about.
|
|
|
10-05-2020, 06:09 PM
|
#100
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC
So we need the heavy hand of the Federal Govt to step in because the heavy hand of the state government is covering things up?
|
You need the heavy hand of the federal government because the state governments are incapable or unwilling of applying the heavy hand because they are too close to the subjects of their regulation. Which is a story that has repeated over and over again in US history with different issues.
|
|
|
10-05-2020, 08:12 PM
|
#101
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,285
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
You need the heavy hand of the federal government because the state governments are incapable or unwilling of applying the heavy hand because they are too close to the subjects of their regulation. Which is a story that has repeated over and over again in US history with different issues.
|
So using your logic the state government shouldn't regulate anything because they are too close to the subjects.
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
|
|
|
10-06-2020, 04:37 PM
|
#102
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,992
|
This is a little off topic, but Nitro, since you follow the money with your tote method, shouldn't the use of illegal drugs work very much in your favor. After all if trainer x, is juicing up his horse today, likely he is betting it and likely you are the beneficiary with your tote software.
In fact do we know that horse racing in Hong Kong is drug free. Maybe they are just ahead of the technology out there and have their own juicers. Maybe it is the juicing that is making you all of this money.
|
|
|
10-06-2020, 05:52 PM
|
#103
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 18,957
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poindexter
This is a little off topic, but Nitro, since you follow the money with your tote method, shouldn't the use of illegal drugs work very much in your favor. After all if trainer x, is juicing up his horse today, likely he is betting it and likely you are the beneficiary with your tote software.
In fact do we know that horse racing in Hong Kong is drug free. Maybe they are just ahead of the technology out there and have their own juicers. Maybe it is the juicing that is making you all of this money.
|
Possibly, but who says that the drugs being used make them run better or faster?
It’s really immaterial because for one reason or another they’re betting certain entries because if for no other reason they have intentions of trying to win. You can’t say that about every entry in a race unless it might be a Stakes race.
Believe it or not, we do know the facts about racing in Hong Kong. If you took some time to review their product you wouldn’t even ask that that question.
|
|
|
10-06-2020, 05:55 PM
|
#104
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poindexter
This is a little off topic, but Nitro, since you follow the money with your tote method, shouldn't the use of illegal drugs work very much in your favor. After all if trainer x, is juicing up his horse today, likely he is betting it and likely you are the beneficiary with your tote software.
In fact do we know that horse racing in Hong Kong is drug free. Maybe they are just ahead of the technology out there and have their own juicers. Maybe it is the juicing that is making you all of this money.
|
I think there are always savvy handicappers who can take advantage of suspected and actual doping.
That doesn't mean it isn't unfair to the other handicappers, though, just like if you can figure out how a poker player cheats and exploit it, it doesn't make it not unfair to the other poker players.
|
|
|
10-06-2020, 06:39 PM
|
#105
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,992
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro
Possibly, but who says that the drugs being used make them run better or faster?
It’s really immaterial because for one reason or another they’re betting certain entries because if for no other reason they have intentions of trying to win. You can’t say that about every entry in a race unless it might be a Stakes race.
Believe it or not, we do know the facts about racing in Hong Kong. If you took some time to review their product you wouldn’t even ask that that question.
|
You state this frequently, and I am not disputing it, although I think in most instances most horses are in a race to win, but this is a seriously problem, is it not? If a horse is not trying to win isn't the betting public being completely defrauded? If it is necessary for horses to race themselves into condition without trying to win a race, should they not be entered for purse money only? Are you saying this not trying to win also goes on in the mighty Hong Kong?
Is all of this okay, because you have a tote method that puts you on the horses that are supposedly trying?
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|