CRW’s and California Racing

[elhelmete]

Originally Posted by o_crunk

One other thing I would like to note.

When I say "Elite" I'm referring to the entire umbrella of tote codes that is "Elite", of which there are dozens. To me, it's all one organization. To others, they are separate teams functioning separately. This part is not entirely clear to me though so I can see both sides of the argument. As far as I'm concerned, Elite7 not making a bet in a race but Elite12 making a bet in the same race....to me, it all comes from Elite. It's a technical point but an important distinction.

This is amazing. A couple questions, if I may?

Do you think there is ever collusion between individual Elite (just an example) teams (your example being 'Elite7' and 'Elite12')?

Since they're getting large rebates AND they represent a majority of a pool (i.e., they're a market maker, not a market responder) do these teams even do the same kinds of handicapping a regular sharpie might use? Why bother when their need to land on +ev bets is diminished by the rebates?

[lamboguy]

the CAW don't need rebates, they could probably pay you a rebate and still win.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by MJC922

I suspect the number one thing that caused many longtime serious players to move on completely or scale way back their wagering was the late odds volatility. IMO rebates and takeout have only a limited impact on that. You can get rid of rebates and lower takeout tomorrow but many of these teams won't go away, they will adjust and continue to bet very late for obvious reasons, so you'll still see the odds drops persist after the bell. Maybe you'll settle at one tick higher in odds than before but you'll still see the same drops and still end up on a lot of underlays you don't want to be on.

I suppose maybe you could tie rebates to betting earlier, have a sliding scale on rebates based upon MTP or something along those lines, that is if you want to keep rebates around something like a bet at 10MTP gets a full rebate and after 5MTP-4MTP is very little or no rebate. I think it's better to remove the rebates and lower takeout for everyone but that may be easier said than done.

If you can get the CAW money into the pools earlier IMO you'll finally see they aren't as formidable as people are making them out to be. That's the point I'm trying to make, the final odds still show me some overlays exist and if these teams were near perfect you wouldn't see any overlays. Granted there are days I don't see many overlays but I'm not playing fulltime so there's a lot I'm not seeing for obvious reasons, e.g. massive gaps in the knowledge base that I never had when I was an everyday player.

So that's my two cents on it. What was insurmountable for many people (including me before I went to DD probables in the past year or two) is the late odds drops forced people on to far too many underlays which virtually guarantees a negative ROI. I believe most fans that stuck it out over the years as well as any new fans to the game said nevermind to the win pool and figured they'd just start betting longer horizontals where the drops don't matter because nobody can see them anyway. The first problem with that is it's betting into blind pools, how does anyone judge the goodness of a bet when the odds are unknown? that's half the equation to a kelly bet, right? plus when the CAW likely has the ability to look-ahead to what's taking money it's really another no-win situation for anyone that isn't harvesting pool data the same way. Sure good ticket construction can offset that disadvantage to some degree but if that's most of your game I don't think it's long for this world.

Okay I am not versed on this multiple quotes in a response so I will just respond to paragraphs 1 to 4 in order.

Paragraph 1) My reasoning is that the Whales are going to bet 50 to 60% of what they currently do if they were to fix pricing as suggested and eliminate rebates. I think with that kind of reduction in betting the late changes would be far less pronounced. But if I am wrong there is always the NYRA band-aid
(drive them out of the win pool). I also think everyone else will do much better in their betting and they will not be annoyed nearly as much by these late odds changes. Regarding easier said then done: the future of this entire industry rests on some major corrective action. It should be clear as day by now that this preferential treatment of one team over another team over another group of bettors who have preferential treatment over everyone else doesn't work.


Paragraph 2) I like the idea but whales have no interest. Just look at how they reacted to NYRA requiring them to bet 3 minutes to post. Forget easier said than done. They need to make it happen and give this industry a future. Otherwise there will be no future.

Paragraph 3) You may not think they are formidable, but they are printing money. There record in just the pick 6 carryovers that were researched is plenty of evidence of how talented they are. Do not forget that you are much more capable than the average horse player. The numbers that the public is losing (and the racing industry has these numbers they just don't to act appropriately on them) is proof positive that they are extremely formidable with their current setup of betting in the closing seconds (and hopefully not after the bell).

Paragraph 4) The racing industry is largely responsible for why people gravitate to pick 5's and pick 6's (mandatory payout) and even stupid rainbow 6's when there is no mandatory payout. This game has become too tough for the layman so they just settle on a pick 4 here and pick 5 there and rainbow six there. When I post my suggested takeouts it is 8% wps and 10% double and exacta and 15% on the rest. Racing gives the best takeout on the pick 5. Very expensive bet and unless the player hits it (very small chance of that most of the time) zero churn from him. If joe fan has $200 for the weekend and chooses to invest in 4 pick 5's, unless he hits one his total bet for the weekend is $200. Not exactly the best way to grow handle. But Joe has also learned that betting $10 here and $20 there doesn't get him anywhere. So why not take a stab at the pick 5's and possibly hit for $1000. or $2000. Rebates/whales have made this game too tough for the recreational player and those that haven't left the game see no better option than gravitating to the lower probability plays. In all honesty the low takeout pick 5 pool should be 20 cent minimum. It works great at Woodbine Mohawk harness. If they are not going to fix the pricing at least let the recreational bettor have a chance at a score for an affordable amount of money. But to grow this game the lower takeouts of course need to be on the higher probability wagers win/double/exacta.

[classhandicapper]

I forget who wrote the article or was interviewed in the podcast (can’t remember the source). It didn’t mention whether the CAWs have to bet every race, but the person being interviewed said there are times they make bets even though they have a negative expectation. They do it to meet the required volume for their rebate deals. So it may be 6 to one and half dozen to another. They may or may not be required to bet every race as part of their rebate deals, but they wind up doing that anyway, if not individually, then as group because one of the teams is always in.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I forget who wrote the article or was interviewed in the podcast (can’t remember the source). It didn’t mention whether the CAWs have to bet every race, but the person being interviewed said there are times they make bets even though they have a negative expectation. They do it to meet the required volume for their rebate deals. So it may be 6 to one and half dozen to another. They may or may not be required to bet every race as part of their rebate deals, but they wind up doing that anyway, if not individually, then as group because one of the teams is always in.

Even if they are in every race, the harm they cause the game far outweighs the liquidity they bring into this game. I actually agree with Andy A. If the caw were to decide tomorrow to leave the game, it would be the best thing that could ever happen to this game But that is not happening so mute point.
But even if they did you have to eliminate rebates and correct pricing. I am not really sure why it matters if the CAW bets every race or not. The game needs public money not caw money. This dependence came from a ridiculous decision to feed the whales for 20 plus years. It basically was a self fulfilling prophecy. Feed the whales, we need whales, feed the whales, we need whales......Then 20 years down the line the most of the fish are gone and they now have whales feasting on a sharper crowd. As this sharper crowd gets gobbled up and leaves the game the only possible conclusion is game over. What does the fact that the caw are betting 30% of the handle in some crappy 4 horse field at Santa Anita (perhaps at a loss) do for the game? Nothing.


The only way this game can succeed is by providing a robust racing economy. The only way to do so is to provide a level playing (I realize that the sharper players will still feast on the weaker players but they will not bet getting huge rebates on top of that) field for all participants and a takeout competitive with other gambling games. There is only one way for this to happen. At that point and not until then will you get people to transition to this game and more importantly stay in this game. The "entertainment" fantasy is over. It was a nice fantasy for the racing industry, but the data clearly shows that it doesn't work. How can anyone logically conclude that the model that has completely failed for the last 15 years will suddenly work? People may be tired of me posting about this but seriously, provide an alternative that can work. Racing has had years to make this work. Do you think the Nyra Band-aid is going to fix the game? Show me data that it is working. This has been going for close to 18 months I believe. Do we have evidence that the NYRA market has grown (adjusted for inflation)? Seriously at what point does racing realize that their plan is destroying the industry. Or maybe they have given up on the game altogether and it is just get every form of charity (cough, cough, business agreements) that they can until they no longer can? Keep feeding the Whales so they can pretend that the industry is doing fine. This is okay with you horse players? Seriously? 9 out of 10 people in the racing part of this forum are far more involved in this sport than I am. Why do I seem to be the only one that cares? This industry is playing you for fools (even if you are getting rebates-because eventually they will not be enough for you to make it).

[thaskalos]

Has anyone seen any proof that the horse racing "industry" is interested in 'fixing the game'? Isn't that just a term that we the horseplayers use whenever we voice our newest complaints? Why should the industry worry about "fixing the game"? They have the "Whales"...and these Whales keep betting more and more as time goes on. And they have a piece of the casino and the sports betting action...which guarantee them sizable future profits that they know they don't rightly deserve. IMO, the industry couldn't be happier...and the only unhappy participants in this game are we the long-time horseplayers...who are under the mistaken impression that our loyalty to this game for all these years somehow deserves to be recognized and rewarded. Our fault.

The horse racing industry bends over backwards for these "Whales" because they recognize these Whales as the FUTURE. And we are the PAST...and the past is worth about as much as yesterday's newspaper.

[Nitro]

A duplicate of my post from a different thread.

Originally Posted by Nitro

I am personally so tired hearing about all the negativity surrounding the CAW type player and how they might impact the game. So, I decided to check it out further and away from all the bias and apparent inaccuracies being made about them here on this forum.

For those of you who might want some real clarification to better understand the realities of this type of player I would highly recommend reading “Horseracing’s true lifeline”.
https://pastthewire.com/horseracings-true-lifeline/

You just might learn something. I know I did.
,
.

[Poindexter]

Nitro it is a pretty simple concept. The more sharp bettors bet the higher the takeout is on everyone else. Interviewed caw bettor bet 106 k and made 84 k. Then he went caw and his betting grew “exponentially.”

That is what rebates do. Thanks for providing more evidence. The objective is to keep the sharp bettors betting less not more. You look at it as a good thing that maybe he is betting 3 million a year now. It is not. The extra handle rebate create
drive up the takeout on everyone else. That is why you have had a huge drop in handle over 15 to 20 years.

[JustRalph]

I read that article posted by Nitro back when it first came out. I still believe without the rebate they go away…..

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Has anyone seen any proof that the horse racing "industry" is interested in 'fixing the game'? Isn't that just a term that we the horseplayers use whenever we voice our newest complaints? Why should the industry worry about "fixing the game"? They have the "Whales"...and these Whales keep betting more and more as time goes on. And they have a piece of the casino and the sports betting action...which guarantee them sizable future profits that they know they don't rightly deserve. IMO, the industry couldn't be happier...and the only unhappy participants in this game are we the long-time horseplayers...who are under the mistaken impression that our loyalty to this game for all these years somehow deserves to be recognized and rewarded. Our fault.

The horse racing industry bends over backwards for these "Whales" because they recognize these Whales as the FUTURE. And we are the PAST...and the past is worth about as much as yesterday's newspaper.

not the biggest argument, but Kentucky went to penny breakage and they didn't lower the rebates. that to me is a very big math deal. other than that i can't see to much that helps the horseplayer. one step further though, as bad as things have turned out with pari-mutual wagering, its still better than betting casinos on sports. i promise you that there is nothing positive at all for players or the states that host sports gambling coming down the pike.

[Nitro]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

Nitro it is a pretty simple concept. The more sharp bettors bet the higher the takeout is on everyone else. Interviewed caw bettor bet 106 k and made 84 k. Then he went caw and his betting grew “exponentially.”

That is what rebates do. Thanks for providing more evidence. The objective is to keep the sharp bettors betting less not more. You look at it as a good thing that maybe he is betting 3 million a year now. It is not. The extra handle rebate create drive up the takeout on everyone else. That is why you have had a huge drop in handle over 15 to 20 years.

Yes, it is a very simple concept, except I’m afraid your notion about the CAW’s causing the major handle drop is totally misconceived. Now I know from your previous posts that you seem to have certainly demonstrated a clear disdain for the CAW type player. So, you would us believe that if the CAW’s didn’t exist that the O.A. handles over the last 20 years wouldn’t have dropped? Try thinking about how much more they would have actually dropped without CAW involvement.

You’re trying to make a case for their participation causing a greater takeout (lowering the odds value) as if they hit every play they make. That’s not reality! Besides, are they playing every racetrack, every race, and making the same type of wager everyone else is? I think not!

Personally, I like the idea of the CAW players competing against one another. Kind of reminds me of the monetary concept of what this game was originally created upon: “The Sport of Kings”.

Whether or not I may be involved in the same betting pools is immaterial. I ultimately have a choice based on the values of the selections of my interest. If I’m only betting a 10th of the potential return on a Superfecta do think for minute that I’m ever concerned about the 25% take-out?
.
.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by Nitro

Yes, it is a very simple concept, except I’m afraid your notion about the CAW’s causing the major handle drop is totally misconceived. Now I know from your previous posts that you seem to have certainly demonstrated a clear disdain for the CAW type player. So, you would us believe that if the CAW’s didn’t exist that the O.A. handles over the last 20 years wouldn’t have dropped? Try thinking about how much more they would have actually dropped without CAW involvement.

You’re trying to make a case for their participation causing a greater takeout (lowering the odds value) as if they hit every play they make. That’s not reality! Besides, are they playing every racetrack, every race, and making the same type of wager everyone else is? I think not!

Personally, I like the idea of the CAW players competing against one another. Kind of reminds me of the monetary concept of what this game was originally created upon: “The Sport of Kings”.

Whether or not I may be involved in the same betting pools is immaterial. I ultimately have a choice based on the values of the selections of my interest. If I’m only betting a 10th of the potential return on a Superfecta do think for minute that I’m ever concerned about the 25% take-out?
.
.

Disdain? What post have I ever made has not put the caw in the highest regard. It is not there fault that racing chose to sacrifice every other player in the pool by providing huge rebates to these players. I have explained my position ad nauseum.I don’t think anyone wants to read it again. If you don’t get it, you don’t get it. The math is simple. Try the search function on the sight. I assure you I am correct on this subject, but believe what you want to. If you or anyone else wants clarification, pm me. I will go as in depth as needed to explain my position. But people are tired of the subject.

[Robert Fischer]

we are all doomed

The CAWs are scary and demoralizing

Twitter

__________________
Preparation. Discipline. Patience. Decisiveness.

[upthecreek]

https://racingthinktank.com/blog/sha...gering-markets

[Poindexter]

re: the numbers posted in the racing think tank article just shown by up the creek and posted by Andy A in another thread:

Well the numbers posted indicate that the Caw money bet is basically peaked out (essentially reached the point where they cannot bet much more). So to gauge the future of this sport you need to look at the non rebated betting from 2020 on. The decline in that area will be the best indication of where this sport is going. If you look at the growth of these "elite" teams between 2017 and 2020 it was typically about a 50% growth. Growth between 2020 and 2022 not really significant. In some areas maybe 10%. What is interesting to me is the growth of the place/show pools over the 5 years from 5.6% of those pools to 17.2% of those pools. At least one team has embraced the place/show pools.

So if you personally are doing okay at Del Mar (assume it is pretty similar elsewhere) since 2020, you are probably pretty safe (don't expect it to get much worse).

With them making up about 1/3rd of all betting in the tri, super and pic 3 to pick 6 pools, non rebated bettors are really up against it (I am still a big fan of playing mandatory payouts).

Assuming they are working on 13% rebates on these pools which are 23% takeout pools for every 100 k bet the whale money is probably losing 9% making 4% net after rebates. So 100 k, public is betting 66.7 k whales 33.3 k (of course I am not taking into account other sharp bettors that are also rebated as article is only taking into account the top 17 teams). So best guess is that non rebated bettors make up about 60% of these pools. Will assume the sharp money which includes the top teams and every other rebated bettor probably works on about -7% before rebate. So 100k bet sharp money loses 7k takeout/ Since there is a 23,680 takeout that means that non rebated money is losing 16,680 k on 60 k bet which is about 27.3%.

Of course the exception is the mandatory payouts and and pick 5. The pick 5 is only a 14% takeout so the rebates will be much smaller. In the pick 5 we will assume that the sharps (teams plus other rebated bettors) will be working at about even. Making 4% on rebates (higher for the elite teams). Since in 2022 the top teams made up 38% of the pools will assume that all rebated bettors make up about 45% of the pools (that is a huge number). If 45% of the pool is working at break even that means that 55% of the pool (the non rebated bettors) are working on -14k/55K. Which means that the public is losing about 25.45% on the 14% low takeout pick 5 pool.

Happy punting. No worries the exceptionally smart people that run the racing industry have your back.