Late changing odds

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by cj

There was obviously a problem as no odds were shown during the race, and Parx does show them above the top 4 runners usually. Possible Jones didn't get excited as he also couldn't see the odds. It would be nice if tracks were a little more forthcoming than just telling us there is a "tote delay", I mean WTF does that even mean?

Delay while tote room employees make sure their past posting buddies get their bets in?

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by cj

What about after the fees? I seem to remember these never really pay as good as they sound from the days when I had TVG. Am I off base?

You're not off base, but I've pointed this out to him a lot of times and it's ignored. I think he works for "the exchange".

[biggestal99]

Originally Posted by castaway01

You're not off base, but I've pointed this out to him a lot of times and it's ignored. I think he works for "the exchange".

A base 2 dollar wager on Quench my thirst paid 15.20 on the exchange minus 1.82 commission to betfair equals a payoff 13.48 for every two bucks wagered.


Now compare that to the PM price of 11.60

13.48 is a 16.2% better price than 11.60.

Not sure why you are anti exchange.

Fixed odds betting is the future.

Horses like quench my thirst are the reasons why.

Which horse player in their right mind doesn’t want to get paid 16% more on a winning bet.

Allan

[biggestal99]

Originally Posted by cj

How much was actually on that race? Doesn't really help most of us anyway since we don't live in New Jersey.

Approx 40,000 (20,000 in matched bets)

Allan

[AltonKelsey]

Originally Posted by biggestal99

Approx 40,000 (20,000 in matched bets)

Allan

Not sure I'd call it 40,000 if only 20k was matched.

[AlsoEligible]

Originally Posted by cj

It would be nice if tracks were a little more forthcoming than just telling us there is a "tote delay", I mean WTF does that even mean?

It often means that the host tote did not receive money from one of the guest totes when the race closed, usually due to a network issue. Without those totals, the host is unable to calculate final odds (thus them not being shown on the tv feed) or payoffs.

The delay occurs because not only does the underlying issue need to be resolved first, but the two totes then need to manually exchange info to confirm that the guest locked at the proper time, no late bets got on, etc.

If the issue can’t be resolved within a few minutes, or the host isn’t confident that there was no past-posting, the track can decide to “throw out” the guest site, taking their money out of the pool, and proceed with their calculations. It’s rare, but it happens.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

So yes, I think the sport should do various things to privilege people who actually go out to a racetrack. I think it is good for the long term health of the sport.

I agree with this. Except you can't turn back history/modernity.

This model: just close 1/2 the track facilities (which require resources of employees, electricity, etc.), put some tracks out in the middle of a farm somewhere with no attendees, and let everyone bet from the comfort of their recliners.

To me, the whole concept of a *sport* is that it have fans. People who peer into paddocks, look at horses' feet, and their walk over to the gates with their binnoculars. (Saratoga, Oaklawn, etc. ), consider tracks a destination for entertainment and a day out, etc.

Allowing the game to turn into the stock market where there are only inannimate widgets, with preferential treatment of CRWs and Whales, is what has killed the game for many racegoers, and why many tracks have turned into veritable ghost towns.

The ghost towns do not need to exist with all the facilities maintenance involved. If there aren't enough people who wish to actually SEE horses, live animals, then close them and put a track out in the middle of nowhere so people can watch the horses on-line only. You don't need actual facilities with restaurants, tellers, etc. for that.

And to hear everyone tell it, the casual bettors who actually GO to the track these days "don't matter anyway....they aren't enough to push handle". So why even have these huge facilities taking up valuable real estate.

This is actually where it's going anyway, live horse racing is in the background, the casinos and people betting from home + the CRWs/Whales is the lions share ........... and the industry allowed it to get that way. I'm not going to shed tears for them.

Oaklawn estimated an attendance of 55,000 for the three days of opening meet. Keep tracks like this open.......close any tracks that don't have this. The state/communities don't *need* facilities if people aren't actually ATTENDING. If you don't support your local then don't complain when it goes away. Put your money into the stock market instead and play that on your computer.

[clicknow]

** the 55,000 was across days where the weather was absolutely awful, cold, windy and wet (for the most part).

[biggestal99]

Originally Posted by AltonKelsey

Not sure I'd call it 40,000 if only 20k was matched.

20k handle from both sides = 40,000

40,000 was risked. (Although to be fair bots are quite bit of this handle). Live bettors as myself are rare.

Allan

[iamt]

What Betfair calculate as matched, is the Bettors stake, doubled.


So $20,000 matched is only $10,000 in bettors stakes, the layer is however risking more than that in this example.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by clicknow

I agree with this. Except you can't turn back history/modernity.

This model: just close 1/2 the track facilities (which require resources of employees, electricity, etc.), put some tracks out in the middle of a farm somewhere with no attendees, and let everyone bet from the comfort of their recliners.

To me, the whole concept of a *sport* is that it have fans. People who peer into paddocks, look at horses' feet, and their walk over to the gates with their binnoculars. (Saratoga, Oaklawn, etc. ), consider tracks a destination for entertainment and a day out, etc.

Allowing the game to turn into the stock market where there are only inannimate widgets, with preferential treatment of CRWs and Whales, is what has killed the game for many racegoers, and why many tracks have turned into veritable ghost towns.

The ghost towns do not need to exist with all the facilities maintenance involved. If there aren't enough people who wish to actually SEE horses, live animals, then close them and put a track out in the middle of nowhere so people can watch the horses on-line only. You don't need actual facilities with restaurants, tellers, etc. for that.

And to hear everyone tell it, the casual bettors who actually GO to the track these days "don't matter anyway....they aren't enough to push handle". So why even have these huge facilities taking up valuable real estate.

This is actually where it's going anyway, live horse racing is in the background, the casinos and people betting from home + the CRWs/Whales is the lions share ........... and the industry allowed it to get that way. I'm not going to shed tears for them.

Oaklawn estimated an attendance of 55,000 for the three days of opening meet. Keep tracks like this open.......close any tracks that don't have this. The state/communities don't *need* facilities if people aren't actually ATTENDING. If you don't support your local then don't complain when it goes away. Put your money into the stock market instead and play that on your computer.

I agree with a lot of this. Visual inspection is one of the best parts of the game. Let's keep in mind however that visual inspection was additional work that few were actually willing to do anyway, see Pittsburg Phil for his commentary on the average fan looking at him with ridicule for his post-race routine. With that said, for those few who are actually willing to do the additional work they need to get paid something. For that to happen there must be an overhaul to the way odds are being offered, a rollback toward the old ways, toward the direction of fixed odds wagering or exchange wagering because the tote system as it stands now is offering little more than a wild guess as to what the final odds will be.

The tote wasn't like that at all 30 years ago. Granted it wasn't perfect but the volatility after the average fan placed a wager was mild; drastic odds drops when the horses were loading was a once and awhile annoyance, once in awhile I'd say ugh, he's not even an overlay now, he's pretty much break-even, oh well break even isn't a big deal... but final odds ending up as an underlay was rare if you were betting the rule of thumb 50% overlays, even at four minutes to post you could do that and get away with it, now you can bet 100% overlay when the last horse is loading up and get paid underlaid final odds.

[aaron]

Originally Posted by MJC922

I agree with a lot of this. Visual inspection is one of the best parts of the game. Let's keep in mind however that visual inspection was additional work that few were actually willing to do anyway, see Pittsburg Phil for his commentary on the average fan looking at him with ridicule for his post-race routine. With that said, for those few who are actually willing to do the additional work they need to get paid something. For that to happen there must be an overhaul to the way odds are being offered, a rollback toward the old ways, toward the direction of fixed odds wagering or exchange wagering because the tote system as it stands now is offering little more than a wild guess as to what the final odds will be.

The tote wasn't like that at all 30 years ago. Granted it wasn't perfect but the volatility after the average fan placed a wager was mild; drastic odds drops when the horses were loading was a once and awhile annoyance, once in awhile I'd say ugh, he's not even an overlay now, he's pretty much break-even, oh well break even isn't a big deal... but final odds ending up as an underlay was rare if you were betting the rule of thumb 50% overlays, even at four minutes to post you could do that and get away with it, now you can bet 100% overlay when the last horse is loading up and get paid underlaid final odds.

The tote is a different animal than years ago. The way I deal with it is looking at the DD will pays. In most cases that tells you how the race will be bet. If you are making a win bet in the race, it is a helpful tool.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by aaron

The tote is a different animal than years ago. The way I deal with it is looking at the DD will pays. In most cases that tells you how the race will be bet. If you are making a win bet in the race, it is a helpful tool.

I realize that but what it suggests is I have to restrict my conditional wagers to the back ends of doubles. So the horse I've been waiting to bet back for a month is doomed to be unprofitable unless it lands on the backend of a double. Not viable for me unless I only play a track with rolling doubles.

Let's say even at that, I restrict my hard work to focus on a track with rolling doubles. Now I have a horse I make even money or less in the 2nd race, I'm ready to make a prime bet at 3-2 or higher. The horse is 2-1 at the gate, they start to load and the horse was 4/5 in the double, by this logic I need to stay out or bet less because while the race is in progress we should expect a dramatic drop in odds.

Other scenario, the same horse was 2-1 in the double pool but is 6-5 now, I stay out, correct? or I take underlaid odds and expect it them to go up?

I'm not saying this doesn't help but it's a hell of a way to make a living. Good luck. If the will pays are so good (and I'm not saying they aren't, they should be quite good) the tracks should look to leverage that info to improve the game, either offer fixed odds based upon the will pays with a higher take or use it as a stabilizer, make the win odds calculate on 50% of the double will pays as a stabilizer and the other 50% what is actually bet in the win pool or combined action on all pools etc, there's a lot that can be done. There's also no reason they can't limit wager sizes along the way and 'move' the fixed odds to balance the action as it comes in just like every other bookmaker does.

There are things that can be done and the track that innovates first in this area will have a huge increase in handle. Yes they need to be brave enough to not go home crying when they take a bit less % wise out of a race because someone hit something a bit harder at fixed odds than they would've liked, it will go in their favor plenty of times too.

[aaron]

Originally Posted by MJC922

I realize that but what it suggests is I have to restrict my conditional wagers to the back ends of doubles. So the horse I've been waiting to bet back for a month is doomed to be unprofitable unless it lands on the backend of a double. Not viable for me unless I only play a track with rolling doubles.

Let's say even at that, I restrict my hard work to focus on a track with rolling doubles. Now I have a horse I make even money or less in the 2nd race, I'm ready to make a prime bet at 3-2 or higher. The horse is 2-1 at the gate, they start to load and the horse was 4/5 in the double, by this logic I need to stay out or bet less because while the race is in progress we should expect a dramatic drop in odds.

Other scenario, the same horse was 2-1 in the double pool but is 6-5 now, I stay out, correct? or I take underlaid odds and expect it them to go up?

I'm not saying this doesn't help but it's a hell of a way to make a living. Good luck. If the will pays are so good (and I'm not saying they aren't, they should be quite good) the tracks should look to leverage that info to improve the game, either offer fixed odds based upon the will pays with a higher take or use it as a stabilizer, make the win odds calculate on 50% of the double will pays as a stabilizer and the other 50% what is actually bet in the win pool or combined action on all pools etc, there's a lot that can be done. There's also no reason they can't limit wager sizes along the way and 'move' the fixed odds to balance the action as it comes in just like every other bookmaker does.

There are things that can be done and the track that innovates first in this area will have a huge increase in handle. Yes they need to be brave enough to not go home crying when they take a bit less % wise out of a race because someone hit something a bit harder at fixed odds than they would've liked, it will go in their favor plenty of times too.

Great post. I agree with everything you said.Based mostly on my experience at the NY tracks, I would say you stay out out of race when horse is 4/5 in the double and 2-1 when they are loading. I have seen hs scenario many times and you are more likely to get even money than 3/2. The other scenario I would expect the horse to go up,especially if the double favorite is overlaid on the board as they go to post.Woodbne is another track that the doubles seem to tell the story.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by aaron

Great post. I agree with everything you said.Based mostly on my experience at the NY tracks, I would say you stay out out of race when horse is 4/5 in the double and 2-1 when they are loading. I have seen hs scenario many times and you are more likely to get even money than 3/2. The other scenario I would expect the horse to go up,especially if the double favorite is overlaid on the board as they go to post.Woodbne is another track that the doubles seem to tell the story.

Thanks. I appreciate that and your observations. Some of my details were off a tad after a long week at the office but thanks for walking through it. Still would love to see a revival for this great game.