Can someone simply explain rebates to me? Is it only off losses?

[Seabiscuit@AR]

If a track has a 20% takeout and then gives a 10% rebate to 20% of the money bet it has effectively reduced its overall takeout to 18%.

This is why the runners not bet by the rebaters improve their payoffs
If the track were to simply have no rebates but reduce its takeout from 20% to 18% then you get the same impact

The key is with the horses bet by the rebaters. On these horses you effectively have 2 different dividends/payouts. The players getting the 10% rebate are obviously receiving a big reduction in takeout but the players not getting the rebate backing the same horse will be facing a large effective hike in takeout (vs the pool with no rebates)

[green80]

Originally Posted by Rutgers

The problem is there is also a window where the bet costs $1.80 that only a few players can get into. (and not all players can get into the $1.88 line).

But because horse racing is pari-mutual wagering, and unlike casino or fixed odds gambling, the few players that can into the $1.80 line have an advantage over the others. You can debate whether or not that is fair or not, but the players that can only get into the $2.00 or $1.88 will eventually stop playing.

The 2.00 players, if they work hard and are successful graduate to the $1.88 line one day and the $1.88 players can move up too.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Seabiscuit@AR

If a track has a 20% takeout and then gives a 10% rebate to 20% of the money bet it has effectively reduced its overall takeout to 18%.

This is why the runners not bet by the rebaters improve their payoffs
If the track were to simply have no rebates but reduce its takeout from 20% to 18% then you get the same impact

The key is with the horses bet by the rebaters. On these horses you effectively have 2 different dividends/payouts. The players getting the 10% rebate are obviously receiving a big reduction in takeout but the players not getting the rebate backing the same horse will be facing a large effective hike in takeout (vs the pool with no rebates)

Every horse in every race has some rebate money on them and some non rebate money. Nobody is receiving a 'hike in takeout'. If a track advertises 15 pct and there's 100k in the pool, 85k gets divided up amongst the winners. If you are one of the winners, you share that 85k.

[bobbyt62]

i just started a complementary post asking if anyone knew (for sure) which tracks dont take the offshore (big rebates, not the 3-6% most of us get now) rebate money. using win pools (which i get 3% on now, but its futile) as an example, and i quote steve crist from page 182 of "horseplayers" by ted mcclelland ..."Imagine a betting pool with $100 in it. After $20 in takeout, the remaining $80 is distributed among the holders of winning tickets. Now add another $100 to the pool from a group that over time gets back $90 out of every $100 it invests. The total pool is now $200, with $160 paid back after takeout. If the new group is getting back $90, that now leaves only $70, rather than the original $80, for the first group of bettors. So even while losing, the new group is taking money from the old one. Someone who loses 10 percent is really doing two different things: losing 20 percent to takeout but winning 10 percent from the other players." very clearly (to me ) stated, unarguable in logic and math. thats why i asked if folks knew where i could play on an (almost-i do get 3%) level playing field. im not looking to argue about what i , steve crist, and many others know. im just trying to figure out if theres any track(s) i can bet without having to fade the offshore(or onshore in north dakota, etc.??) folks.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by bobbyt62

i just started a complementary post asking if anyone knew (for sure) which tracks dont take the offshore (big rebates, not the 3-6% most of us get now) rebate money. using win pools (which i get 3% on now, but its futile) as an example, and i quote steve crist from page 182 of "horseplayers" by ted mcclelland ..."Imagine a betting pool with $100 in it. After $20 in takeout, the remaining $80 is distributed among the holders of winning tickets. Now add another $100 to the pool from a group that over time gets back $90 out of every $100 it invests. The total pool is now $200, with $160 paid back after takeout. If the new group is getting back $90, that now leaves only $70, rather than the original $80, for the first group of bettors. So even while losing, the new group is taking money from the old one. Someone who loses 10 percent is really doing two different things: losing 20 percent to takeout but winning 10 percent from the other players." very clearly (to me ) stated, unarguable in logic and math. thats why i asked if folks knew where i could play on an (almost-i do get 3%) level playing field. im not looking to argue about what i , steve crist, and many others know. im just trying to figure out if theres any track(s) i can bet without having to fade the offshore(or onshore in north dakota, etc.??) folks.

The wrong part is that you don't get back 70, you get back 80. It's sleight of hand from people who want to make you believe you're not really getting back 80.

If the takeout is 20 and 100 is bet, 80 is paid back to bettors, the rest of it is just made up stories from people who aren't smart enough to bet big enough to get their own rebate.

[Fox]

Originally Posted by bobbyt62

im not looking to argue about what i , steve crist, and many others know.

That's cute.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Every horse in every race has some rebate money on them and some non rebate money. Nobody is receiving a 'hike in takeout'. If a track advertises 15 pct and there's 100k in the pool, 85k gets divided up amongst the winners. If you are one of the winners, you share that 85k.

SRU, for God's sake do us ALL a favor and take an accounting class. The rebates do NOT, repeat, DO NOT exist in a vacuum. The track's published takeout IS NOT, repeat IS NOT directly applicable to rebates. The rebate monies are taken out UP front, before the ADW is paid their cut which is TOO HIGH and which allows them the latitude to pay a rebate to begin with.

In your example, $85K is NOT returned to the bettors. It's really $85K PLUS the rebates to the rebate bettors. For non-rebate bettors, the takeout is 15%. For rebate bettors, the EFFECTIVE takeout is something less.

For those of us who are on the anti-rebate side of the argument, we'd prefer no rebates and a lower effective takeout for all.

[baconswitchfarm]

This is like that groundhog day movie.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Hoofless_Wonder

SRU, for God's sake do us ALL a favor and take an accounting class. The rebates do NOT, repeat, DO NOT exist in a vacuum. The track's published takeout IS NOT, repeat IS NOT directly applicable to rebates. The rebate monies are taken out UP front, before the ADW is paid their cut which is TOO HIGH and which allows them the latitude to pay a rebate to begin with.

In your example, $85K is NOT returned to the bettors. It's really $85K PLUS the rebates to the rebate bettors. For non-rebate bettors, the takeout is 15%. For rebate bettors, the EFFECTIVE takeout is something less.

For those of us who are on the anti-rebate side of the argument, we'd prefer no rebates and a lower effective takeout for all.

All I'm talking about is what's returned to non rebate bettors.

[iamt]

I'm convinced SRU is is an account operated by some large whale syndicate at an attempt to get more money into the pools.

He seems to be up at all hours
Presents himself as an expert across all tracks and race types
Watches more races and tracks live than one person possibly could

And if you were a new player wouldn't you like to think:

Rebates make no difference to the payout
If your bet gets beaten it is only the result of jockey error
And that to win you only need to beat someone who can't see such obvious issues even when explained in multiple ways by multiple people.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by iamt

I'm convinced SRU is is an account operated by some large whale syndicate at an attempt to get more money into the pools.

He seems to be up at all hours
Presents himself as an expert across all tracks and race types
Watches more races and tracks live than one person possibly could

And if you were a new player wouldn't you like to think:

Rebates make no difference to the payout
If your bet gets beaten it is only the result of jockey error
And that to win you only need to beat someone who can't see such obvious issues even when explained in multiple ways by multiple people.

Post of the century.

[no breathalyzer]

tin foil hat