You know who absolutely crushes it on mandatory payout days?

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by MJC922

I think it's unreasonable to expect the tote systems to have to push data for long horizontals and the like out to the ADWs. Let's be realistic. IMO the current state of available tote info is adequate for players to work with, the problem is the players for the most part aren't able to work with it. I mean no disrespect if someone can't wrap their head around the likely odds of the next race using a two leg DD matrix, they surely don't stand a chance with data streaming in from a four, five or six leg pool. More data only helps if you can use it but very very few players would ever be able to use that. Like PA suggested that data probably isn't going to be very efficient anyway. I totally agree. Would it help to have it? Yes, I'm sure the CAW will be in favor of more data streams that will help them win and which the average player can't possibly wrangle.

Very good point. The caw players that do not have access to this information would be given tools they currently do not have and would take better advantage of it. I can’t argue that point. It would likely make a bad situation worse.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by MJC922

I think it's unreasonable to expect the tote systems to have to push data for long horizontals and the like out to the ADWs. Let's be realistic. IMO the current state of available tote info is adequate for players to work with, the problem is the players for the most part aren't able to work with it. I mean no disrespect if someone can't wrap their head around the likely odds of the next race using a two leg DD matrix, they surely don't stand a chance with data streaming in from a four, five or six leg pool. More data only helps if you can use it but very very few players would ever be able to use that. Like PA suggested that data probably isn't going to be very efficient anyway. I totally agree. Would it help to have it? Yes, I'm sure the CAW will be in favor of more data streams that will help them win and which the average player can't possibly wrangle.

How unreasonable would it be to send info that can be shown on just 1 screen? How come win-place-show, DD, and exacta data can be shown?


We are presumably talking about high-speed computers.



As an absolute minimum the info should be sent out after the first race of a sequence to show how all the horses in the down legs were bet. I doubt that the big players would forsake the horizontals so that their bets in the win pool would still be blind.



To make data easy to use, a matrix can show each horse by their win equivalent odds and not just by total dollar amount. So if $500,000 is bet in a P-5, a matrix would show each horse in each leg as win odds for a win pool of $500,000. The matrix should show all of the betting action and not just the amounts from the winner of the first leg.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by MJC922

I think it's unreasonable to expect the tote systems to have to push data for long horizontals and the like out to the ADWs. Let's be realistic. IMO the current state of available tote info is adequate for players to work with, the problem is the players for the most part aren't able to work with it. I mean no disrespect if someone can't wrap their head around the likely odds of the next race using a two leg DD matrix, they surely don't stand a chance with data streaming in from a four, five or six leg pool. More data only helps if you can use it but very very few players would ever be able to use that. Like PA suggested that data probably isn't going to be very efficient anyway. I totally agree. Would it help to have it? Yes, I'm sure the CAW will be in favor of more data streams that will help them win and which the average player can't possibly wrangle.

I agree...very few players would bother to use the additional long horizontal data if the tote systems started providing this info. But those few players who WOULD use this data represent the lion's share of the wagering pool, IMO...and they deserve to have this information available to them regardless. At some of the minor tracks that I play, the DD pools are so small that I question their ability to reflect the upcoming win odds with any sort of reliability. I want to have as much data available to me as possible...and I am sure that other regular bettors feel the same way.

What is the reason for this information to be kept away from the general wagering public? Are the costs too high, or is this just another indication of the low regard in which the general betting public is being held by the racing industry?

[Nitro]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Shifting gears a bit to financial markets --

In their book "Follow The Smart Money" the authors Jon and Pete Najarian cite a handful of cases where as floor traders they were burned by "unusual options activity" that later turned out to be based on inside information. They also make the point that inside information has a funny way of showing up in the markets as "unusual options activity."

Shifting gears back to horseracing --
-jp

To be honest I found some immediate interest in your comments about the financial markets, but the balloon burst when you shifted gears. It’s unfortunate that so many can’t make that correlation. After all, the horseracing game could certainly be considered a financial market.
Bill Benter certainly made that connection:

Originally Posted by Bill Benter

The complexity of predicting horse performance makes the specification of an elegant handicapping model quite difficult. Ideally, each independent variable would capture a unique aspect of the influences effecting horse performance. In my experience, the trial and error method of adding independent variables to increase the model's goodness-of-fit, results in the model tending to become a hodgepodge of highly correlated variables whose individual significance's are difficult to determine and often counter-intuitive.

Additionally, there will always be a significant amount of 'inside information' in horse racing that cannot be readily included in a statistical model. Trainer's and jockey's intentions, secret workouts, whether the horse ate its breakfast, and the like, will be available to certain parties who will no doubt take advantage of it. Their betting will be reflected in the odds. This presents an obstacle to the model developer with access to published information only. For a statistical model to compete in this environment, it must make full use of the advantages of computer modeling, namely, the ability to make complex calculations on large data sets.

The odds set by the public betting yield a sophisticated estimate of the horses' win probabilities.

For those who have difficulty with the term "probability".
.
.

[Jeff P]

Hey, just so you know, in the 20 plus years I've been posting here, I never said, or meant to imply (not even once) that horseracing pools aren't a financial market.

In fact, in some of my posts (in threads about state restrictions on ADWs and source market fee) I said just the opposite.

There are many states where we can't legally place a bet on a horse race over the internet.

There is even one state (Arizona) that enacted a state law lobbied for by AZ tracks and horsemen back in 2009 that made it a felony to bet on a horse race by phone or by internet. They've since rescinded that law. You can bet by phone. But my understanding is AZ residents still can't bet on a horse race over the internet.

There are many other states where if we do place a bet on a horserace over the internet, the state wants to charge the bet taker an extra 2.5%, 5%, 6.5%, or even 10% source market fee (above and beyond the track takeout) on the amount we bet.

But in every state, we absolutely can buy or sell 1000 shares of XYZ Corp or options on XYZ Corp over the internet.

I think this is absolutely nuts.

In many ways, the two (betting on horses and buying and selling stocks) are the same activity.

BOTH offer financial markets.



-jp

.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Hey, just so you know, in the 20 plus years I've been posting here, I never said, or meant to imply (not even once) that horseracing pools aren't a financial market.

In fact, in some of my posts (in threads about state restrictions on ADWs and source market fee) I said just the opposite.

There are many states where we can't legally place a bet on a horse race over the internet.

There is even one state (Arizona) that enacted a state law lobbied for by AZ tracks and horsemen back in 2009 that made it a felony to bet on a horse race by phone or by internet. They've since rescinded that law. You can bet by phone. But my understanding is AZ residents still can't bet on a horse race over the internet.

There are many other states where if we do place a bet on a horserace over the internet, the state wants to charge the bet taker an extra 2.5%, 5%, 6.5%, or even 10% source market fee (above and beyond the track takeout) on the amount we bet.

But in every state, we absolutely can buy or sell 1000 shares of XYZ Corp or options on XYZ Corp over the internet.

I think this is absolutely nuts.

In many ways, the two (betting on horses and buying and selling stocks) are the same activity.

BOTH offer financial markets.



-jp

.

this is just the world being two-faced. for sure, the markets are more crooked than horseracing, they have their own CAW's and past posters worse than horse racing could ever dream of.

[BarchCapper]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

There is even one state (Arizona) that enacted a state law lobbied for by AZ tracks and horsemen back in 2009 that made it a felony to bet on a horse race by phone or by internet. They've since rescinded that law. You can bet by phone. But my understanding is AZ residents still can't bet on a horse race over the internet.

.

It appears that in April 2021 internet/app wagering on racing in AZ came into play with legislation that allowed the casinos to offer mobile sports wagering.

https://paulickreport.com/news/the-b...acks-get-keno/

"Language in Section 5-1314B of the legislation (page 37) apparently will eventually permit horseplayers to use wagering apps or computers to make their pari-mutuel wagers rather than being restricted to a telephone and call-in number."

I thought I remembered some of my Arizona friends rejoicing a while back. They still dealt with other "turf wars" between providers due to an ongoing Turf Paradise/Arizona Downs dispute.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

this is just the world being two-faced. for sure, the markets are more crooked than horseracing, they have their own CAW's and past posters worse than horse racing could ever dream of.

And apparently a lot of them are in DC working with the crooks on Wall St. So that's never going to get fixed.