Past posting

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Imo, 98% of everything being discussed in this thread can be addressed if track management and horsemen alphabet groups in states like CA, NY, and KY led the way by deciding to level the playing field.

Lower the takeout for all and eliminate rebates for all.

This can't be a token takeout reduction.

Lower the takeout for all wagers to (approximately) the same net effective takeout high volume rebate players are currently paying.

Offer the same tote api to every horseplayer who wants it. Remove the speed restrictions that purposely slow text file upload offered by traditional ADWs.

Suddenly you've created a level playing field.

Everybody is paying the same net effective takeout rates.

And everybody is being offered the same technology.

Do this, and one of racing's biggest 'perception' problems suddenly goes away.

Then, market the shit out of racing as a (to borrow a phrase) a true gambling game of skill.



-jp

.

If you did this, there'd still be a huge problem with last second odds changes. Indeed, it might even get worse.

As I said above, that's a perception problem, assuming there is no real past posting going on. But perception problems, if big enough, can kill a gambling enterprise.

I do think that if we must have interstate computer wagering, we ought to think about an artificial cut-off for computer bets. Maybe a minute before post time or something. Allow people on track to get the last opportunity to bet. But that would need to be done by regulation- no track would ever do it.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Imo, 98% of everything being discussed in this thread can be addressed if track management and horsemen alphabet groups in states like CA, FL, KY, and NY led the way by deciding to level the playing field.

Lower the takeout for all and eliminate rebates for all.

This can't be a token takeout reduction.

Lower the takeout for all wagers to (approximately) the same net effective takeout high volume rebate players are currently paying.

Offer the same tote api to every horseplayer who wants it. Remove the speed restrictions that purposely slow text file upload offered by traditional ADWs.

Suddenly you've created a level playing field.

Everybody is paying the same net effective takeout rates.

And everybody is being offered the same technology.

Do this, and one of racing's biggest 'perception' problems suddenly goes away.

Then, market the shit out of racing as a (to borrow a phrase) a true gambling game of skill.


-jp

.

This would encourage more play from regular people, but the fear is that they would they not gain enough "new" revenue to offset the much lower take.

Another idea would be to lower the take partially and put everyone on a level playing field, but then they may gain new revenue from regular players and lose a lot of the preferred customer money when those guys go from small profits to small losses.

It's tough to understand what will happen unless everyone does the same thing and you give it a lot of time, otherwise money will move from circuit to circuit looking for the best deal.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

This would encourage more play from regular people, but the fear is that they would they not gain enough "new" revenue to offset the much lower take.

Another idea would be to lower the take partially and put everyone on a level playing field, but then they may gain new revenue from regular players and lose a lot of the preferred customer money when those guys go from small profits to small losses.

It's tough to understand what will happen unless everyone does the same thing and you give it a lot of time, otherwise money will move from circuit to circuit looking for the best deal.

Yes. That's the fear... not creating enough new revenue to offset the lower take.

But you can't run a business paralyzed by fear. Businesses that do that have a history of failing.

Imo, racing has been doing just that (running a business paralyzed by fear) and for years.

Imo, the result of operating that way is that racing has been failing (shrinking in market segments where it counts the most) for years.

I pointed it out it in my earlier post.

The TIF (Thoroughbred Idea Foundation) did a VERY good job of pointing it out in the report at the link that CJ posted.

And Pat Cummings, Executive Director of the TIF did a fantastic job of pointing it out in the second half of the podcast at the link that GMB@BP posted.

Here it is in bold type:

Since 2003-2004, racing has driven away a significant portion (60 plus percent) of its higher margin business while growing a lesser amount of its lowest margin business.

Imo, that's a recipe for disaster.

Not sure what the right analogy is. But I see racing purposely steering its ship towards the rocks while maybe thinking there's time for a course change.

Imo, the officers in charge seem paralyzed with fear. They're not sure whether to turn to starboard or port. So they do nothing while the ship draws ever closer to the rocks.

Imo, somewhere between the 8% to 12% net effective takeout rates racing is charging it highest volume players and the 21% to 22% blended takeout rates racing is charging the casual fan:

There exists a price point (Imo multiple price points depending on customer demographics) that will generate increases in handle, increases in revenue, and increases in purse money vs. what racing is generating now.

Imo, racing has to at least try to find that price point.

Otherwise, racing's ship eventually reaches the rocks.



-jp

.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

If you did this, there'd still be a huge problem with last second odds changes. Indeed, it might even get worse.

As I said above, that's a perception problem, assuming there is no real past posting going on. But perception problems, if big enough, can kill a gambling enterprise.

I do think that if we must have interstate computer wagering, we ought to think about an artificial cut-off for computer bets. Maybe a minute before post time or something. Allow people on track to get the last opportunity to bet. But that would need to be done by regulation- no track would ever do it.

I don't know why the solution proposed by Jeff would make the late odds situation worse. I think initially it would be similar, horses instead of dropping from 6-1 to 7/2, would be dropping from 7-1 down to 4-1. I think over time, pools would grow, become more efficient and the big caw groups would have smaller errors to correct.

I do think that if the game was dealt with a fair deck, everyone would do better and the past posting perceptions would be less of a concern for that reason alone.

I am curious why you think the late odds changes would be more pronounced with the elimination of rebates and lowering of takeout.

[classhandicapper]

Imo, racing has to at least try to find that price point.

I find it hard to believe they haven't already hired people to take a look at the data and also drawn from experience when they've tinkered in the past. If there's a complication, it's that some of these studies take awhile to play out before you know the result. They may not be patient enough to eat short term losses trying to find a way to grow the pie.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

This would encourage more play from regular people, but the fear is that they would they not gain enough "new" revenue to offset the much lower take.

Another idea would be to lower the take partially and put everyone on a level playing field, but then they may gain new revenue from regular players and lose a lot of the preferred customer money when those guys go from small profits to small losses.

It's tough to understand what will happen unless everyone does the same thing and you give it a lot of time, otherwise money will move from circuit to circuit looking for the best deal.

If you want the game to thrive you have to put everyone on a fair playing field. It is just common sense. People may not know that big betting groups are getting 10% rebates or maybe even rationalize it because they know they bet huge amounts of money, but they do know this when they look at their bottom line and realize that they cannot overcome what for them is a 30% take. This is why I am so insistent that rebates be eliminated.

Because the game has become dependent on big betting groups, these groups have to be given a say in this equation. My gut tells me that 8% wps and 12% exotic is that magic number. But you are correct, there is a risk and this unfortunately is not something that will get better immediately. It take time to re-introduce the market and convert other gamblers and stock traders......Honestly, this sport needs someone like a Jeff Bezos. Someone that understands the importance of all customers and has the cash flow to ride the storm and has a vision. How many years did it take Amazon to make a profit? Look at them now, they own the world. Not suggesting that kind of success is available to horse racing but horse racing imo is 100 fold the most entertaining and accessible gambling game there is and it takes a backseat to everything in the gambling world.

But I see it in this forum. Tastes have changed. Horse racing is a relic. Young people aren't interested. To slow for young people (there is a race going off every 5 minutes from your living room). I don't buy any of that. I believe just like a lot of young people jumped on the poker bandwagon, they would jump on the horse racing bandwagon if you could convince them it was exploitable. But as long as the current situation exists there is no honest way to convince anyone this game is exploitable. You don't become a Poker Pro by investing millions of dollars before you make your first bet, but that is what these effective CAW groups do.


A little off topic, but TLG mentioned earlier in this thread that a lot of players who get rebates are in this thread/forum. Yes. Simply because without them, they have no chance in the world of surviving this game. That is the game's fault not our fault. Just because you get rebates or seek rebates doesn't mean you don't realize that the game would be a whole lot better if they did not exist. Why would anyone want to drive the fish away?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

I don't know why the solution proposed by Jeff would make the late odds situation worse. I think initially it would be similar, horses instead of dropping from 6-1 to 7/2, would be dropping from 7-1 down to 4-1. I think over time, pools would grow, become more efficient and the big caw groups would have smaller errors to correct.

I do think that if the game was dealt with a fair deck, everyone would do better and the past posting perceptions would be less of a concern for that reason alone.

I am curious why you think the late odds changes would be more pronounced with the elimination of rebates and lowering of takeout.

Because he would also allow everyone the capability of batch betting at the last second.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

If you want the game to thrive you have to put everyone on a fair playing field. It is just common sense. People may not know that big betting groups are getting 10% rebates or maybe even rationalize it because they know they bet huge amounts of money, but they do know this when they look at their bottom line and realize that they cannot overcome what for them is a 30% take. This is why I am so insistent that rebates be eliminated.

Because the game has become dependent on big betting groups, these groups have to be given a say in this equation. My gut tells me that 8% wps and 12% exotic is that magic number. But you are correct, there is a risk and this unfortunately is not something that will get better immediately. It take time to re-introduce the market and convert other gamblers and stock traders......Honestly, this sport needs someone like a Jeff Bezos. Someone that understands the importance of all customers and has the cash flow to ride the storm and has a vision. How many years did it take Amazon to make a profit? Look at them now, they own the world. Not suggesting that kind of success is available to horse racing but horse racing imo is 100 fold the most entertaining and accessible gambling game there is and it takes a backseat to everything in the gambling world.

But I see it in this forum. Tastes have changed. Horse racing is a relic. Young people aren't interested. To slow for young people (there is a race going off every 5 minutes from your living room). I don't buy any of that. I believe just like a lot of young people jumped on the poker bandwagon, they would jump on the horse racing bandwagon if you could convince them it was exploitable. But as long as the current situation exists there is no honest way to convince anyone this game is exploitable. You don't become a Poker Pro by investing millions of dollars before you make your first bet, but that is what these effective CAW groups do.


A little off topic, but TLG mentioned earlier in this thread that a lot of players who get rebates are in this thread/forum. Yes. Simply because without them, they have no chance in the world of surviving this game. That is the game's fault not our fault. Just because you get rebates or seek rebates doesn't mean you don't realize that the game would be a whole lot better if they did not exist. Why would anyone want to drive the fish away?

It's worth noting that something like 97 percent of poker players are losers. Gambling games succeed by creating an illusion that people can win while slowly taking their money.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

It's worth noting that something like 97 percent of poker players are losers. Gambling games succeed by creating an illusion that people can win while slowly taking their money.

Well understood. That is where horse racing fails miserably. The velocity in which they take away the funds of the typical horse player takes away any rational hope/expectation that they can be amongst the 3%'ers or 1%'ers or whatever it may be and also creates a gambling experience so expensive and so frustrating that the typical horse player eventually takes their money elsewhere. To that matter they also are high on promoting gimmick bets like the jackpot pick 6 and pick 5's as they find the enticement of big money a strong draw, but in turn subject the often unprepared gambler into betting very low probability events that can drain their bankroll significantly, before they ever can hit one.

[MJC922]

I'm optimistic racing will figure out ways to innovate (eventually) and IMO introducing fixed odds or exchange wagering would certainly help level the playing field.

The question is how long will it take racing to bring in these other wagering options and (in the meantime) are there any decent workarounds, like others have suggested willpays, Amwager has TRU odds and DRF apparently has their own version etc. I took a quick look at willpays after Andy posted because I've been meaning to do some testing around this.

For example SAR 8/2/2020, the most basic calculation of DD willpays on the winners looked like this:

Race WillpayOdds vs ActualPayoff
2nd -40%
3rd -14%
4th -18%
5th -34%
6th -15%
7th +10%
8th +4%
9th +72%
10th -31%

So if those calculations are correct the majority of the winners won at odds that were below the willpay, however if you insisted on a 50% overlay before committing to the wager you didn't get 'stuck' with any underlays. So IMO it's worth looking into and with a lot larger sample size obviously. You definitely couldn't look at it as fixed odds because fixed odds even one tick above your line is playable but it should beat the heck out of conditional wagering at 0MTP which may be the fastest way on earth to part with your money these days IMO.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by MJC922

I'm optimistic racing will figure out ways to innovate (eventually) and IMO introducing fixed odds or exchange wagering would certainly help level the playing field.

Why would you be optimistic about that? The problem is that there are a few people in the game who understand wagering and are advocates for the player, but the everyday horseplayer doesn't generate the profits that these large batch bettors or a slot machine license do. And honestly, when a business is struggling economically, it's pretty hard to take a shot like cutting takeout, which could substantially lower or erase profits. It's not easy, which is why it never gets done and we have these same conversations over and over.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by MJC922

I'm optimistic racing will figure out ways to innovate (eventually) and IMO introducing fixed odds or exchange wagering would certainly help level the playing field.

The question is how long will it take racing to bring in these other wagering options and (in the meantime) are there any decent workarounds, like others have suggested willpays, Amwager has TRU odds and DRF apparently has their own version etc. I took a quick look at willpays after Andy posted because I've been meaning to do some testing around this.

For example SAR 8/2/2020, the most basic calculation of DD willpays on the winners looked like this:

Race WillpayOdds vs ActualPayoff
2nd -40%
3rd -14%
4th -18%
5th -34%
6th -15%
7th +10%
8th +4%
9th +72%
10th -31%

So if those calculations are correct the majority of the winners won at odds that were below the willpay, however if you insisted on a 50% overlay before committing to the wager you didn't get 'stuck' with any underlays. So IMO it's worth looking into and with a lot larger sample size obviously. You definitely couldn't look at it as fixed odds because fixed odds even one tick above your line is playable but it should beat the heck out of conditional wagering at 0MTP which may be the fastest way on earth to part with your money these days IMO.

ahhh

and the r8-r9 double was the Pletcher Double (Fort Worth to Moretti). Other than randomness(i won't rule that out), the DD may have been underlayed relative to the win odds from stable money, betting connections, or some influence of fan type moneys.

I could be missing something(today in whole, could best be described as a 'brain fart'), but this type of info almost says that the doubles are generally 'better' bets.

there's another model that I see once in a while that I vaguely call 'momentum'. Where you look at 'will-pay DD' from the previous race, and then compare them to probable DDs' that are projected into the next race... If you see them getting lower in payout they seem to correlate to 'live' horses/ better winning %. Sometimes related to a morning line that was a bit high on a horse, or a 'steam' horse.
This doesn't help much with betting the focus horse. It's possible that it's a good model for saying "hey, here is a most-likely winner that you should've bet in doubles, and will be at least a slight underlay"... What you do w/ that info (pass?, note that the horse 'took $') is up to you.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

Well understood. That is where horse racing fails miserably. The velocity in which they take away the funds of the typical horse player takes away any rational hope/expectation that they can be amongst the 3%'ers or 1%'ers or whatever it may be and also creates a gambling experience so expensive and so frustrating that the typical horse player eventually takes their money elsewhere. To that matter they also are high on promoting gimmick bets like the jackpot pick 6 and pick 5's as they find the enticement of big money a strong draw, but in turn subject the often unprepared gambler into betting very low probability events that can drain their bankroll significantly, before they ever can hit one.

Gimmicks are actually justifiable. They work great in poker- casino jackpot promotions increase rake but draw in casual players.

The reality is the jackpot pick 6 may be a wonderful invention from a racetrack's perspective- it mathematically favors the big players while attracting casual gamblers who want to hit the lottery.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by castaway01

Why would you be optimistic about that? The problem is that there are a few people in the game who understand wagering and are advocates for the player, but the everyday horseplayer doesn't generate the profits that these large batch bettors or a slot machine license do. And honestly, when a business is struggling economically, it's pretty hard to take a shot like cutting takeout, which could substantially lower or erase profits. It's not easy, which is why it never gets done and we have these same conversations over and over.

Being someone who had an avg +10% ROI for a decade year after year like clockwork while betting into as I recall a 17% win pool take before anyone ever even heard of a rebate I am not a huge lower the take person. Lower it helps of course, I mean cut it in half and there might be 2-3 true overlays per race on avg instead of what is probably 1-2. So to me I think a 15% take is perfectly reasonable tbh.

My issue with racing today is not a scarcity of overlays with a 15% take. My issue is also not that these batch players are soo soo good at setting final odds that there are no longer any overlays left on the tote, I can look at final odds and see underlays and overlays all the time.

My issue IS that I can't reliably predict within a tight enough tolerance what the final odds are going to be any more i.e just how low will they go, and I've posted before my results out here when I did real world testing at Twinspires with betting 50% overlays, (even 100% overlays) at 0MTP conditionally the horses ended up below my line something like 40% of the time. There is absolutely no way anyone is going show a profit like that, if my line is correct I'm guaranteed a loss.

Let me clarify about underlays, I'm saying if I make a horse 4-1 and I insist on a 50% overlay then I want to bet it at 6-1 or more. 40% of the time if I bet 6-1 and up on the horse at 0MTP the final odds ended up below 4-1, not between 4-1 and 6-1. If my line is correct it guarantees loss.

Also testing against final odds of any kind is silly these days, it proves nothing. Now 25 years ago I bet what I considered to be late (on track) I attended every day, bet at 2 MTP, 1MTP even at 3MTP there could be several people ahead of you so you bet at 3MTP, nobody agonized about it. The odds might have gone into underlay territory honestly once in a great while, it didn't hurt you much, nothing like this silly stuff we see today when odds are often cut down in huge swaths while the race is in progress.

I think we'll eventually get to the point where the tracks recognize they need to offer more options, options that will move us back in the general direction of the great actual 'game' we had back then. It was damn tough to win but I don't think many of us realized how good we had things with the odds, it never crossed my mind. Anyway there are options they have and choices they can make in the coming years that will (not might) bring back most of the people like me overnight, people who actually did wager millions over the years and also bring in new people that will have a fighting chance to learn the game, to learn how to invest using good fundamentals and to learn the joys of handicapping.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by MJC922

Being someone who had an avg +10% ROI for a decade year after year like clockwork while betting into as I recall a 17% win pool take before anyone ever even heard of a rebate I am not a huge lower the take person. Lower it helps of course, I mean cut it in half and there might be 2-3 true overlays per race on avg instead of what is probably 1-2. So to me I think a 15% take is perfectly reasonable tbh.

My issue with racing today is not a scarcity of overlays with a 15% take. My issue is also not that these batch players are soo soo good at setting final odds that there are no longer any overlays left on the tote, I can look at final odds and see underlays and overlays all the time.

My issue IS that I can't reliably predict within a tight enough tolerance what the final odds are going to be any more i.e just how low will they go, and I've posted before my results out here when I did real world testing at Twinspires with betting 50% overlays, (even 100% overlays) at 0MTP conditionally the horses ended up below my line something like 40% of the time. There is absolutely no way anyone is going show a profit like that, if my line is correct I'm guaranteed a loss.

Let me clarify about underlays, I'm saying if I make a horse 4-1 and I insist on a 50% overlay then I want to bet it at 6-1 or more. 40% of the time if I bet 6-1 and up on the horse at 0MTP the final odds ended up below 4-1, not between 4-1 and 6-1. If my line is correct it guarantees loss.

Also testing against final odds of any kind is silly these days, it proves nothing. Now 25 years ago I bet what I considered to be late (on track) I attended every day, bet at 2 MTP, 1MTP even at 3MTP there could be several people ahead of you so you bet at 3MTP, nobody agonized about it. The odds might have gone into underlay territory honestly once in a great while, it didn't hurt you much, nothing like this silly stuff we see today when odds are often cut down in huge swaths while the race is in progress.

I think we'll eventually get to the point where the tracks recognize they need to offer more options, options that will move us back in the general direction of the great actual 'game' we had back then. It was damn tough to win but I don't think many of us realized how good we had things with the odds, it never crossed my mind. Anyway there are options they have and choices they can make in the coming years that will (not might) bring back most of the people like me overnight, people who actually did wager millions over the years and also bring in new people that will have a fighting chance to learn the game, to learn how to invest using good fundamentals and to learn the joys of handicapping.

I have a very different opinion. As far as I am concerned...no one in the industry cares about players like you and me...who played a "lone hand" and wagered millions of dollars over the years. We used to be the game's best customers, but we are now an afterthought...and the prevailing opinion within the industry is that the game can function just fine without us. Anything that the game does to appease players like you and me is sure to upset the heavily-rebated batch players, who have now become the new "best customers" of the game...and the batch players' money is too big and too consistent to risk for the sake of inconsistent players like us. It's obvious to me that the industry has made up its mind that we are quite expendable...while the batch players are not.