How much more or less would you bet if racing had "fixed odds"?

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Why would the tracks not be the bookmakers, its their product, right?

And, because its THEIR product, by definition, they know more about their product than the fans, so there should be no problem.

Perhaps in theory, but not at all practical.

There would be two options open to the tracks, and both are based on the UK/Irish models.

Exchange wagering is the first, and we all know that it's on shaky legal ground in the US. An attractive fixed odds option for bettors, but it's open to abuse from insiders and, giving individuals the opportunity to lay bets is nothing other than bookmaking with a new label.

The second option would be legalizing independent individual bookmakers that used to trade on US race tracks before the advent of pari-mutuel wagering. The possibility of that ever occurring is non-existent.

Moving on.
The issue of "takeout" is raised in this thread.
Booking bets gives you a theoretical takeout, and nothing more.
With a pari-mutuel pool, takeout is pre-determined and always calculable.
Not so for bookmakers. Of course, they set their odds line with a theoretical built-in profit margin - usually around 20% on most races. The theoretical part is the assumption that you have balanced action on all runners in the race.
This seldom occurs, if ever.
In theory, a bookmaker can lay off money elsewhere to balance his book.
Some will do so, especially if the liability on a certain horse is excessive.
At the end of the day, though, if more money is bet on a winning horse than can be matched by the total sum bet on the losing entrants, someone has to bear the loss within the bookmaking community.
That would never be a US race track. They aren't equipped to function as bookmakers,
and would never be allowed to do so.
At the same time, if exchange wagering were legalized, could they become the operator of that wagering system, bringing together those laying odds with those wishing to wager? You bet they could......

[thaskalos]

How can we even DREAM of modernized betting platforms...when the pps are still created with the help of guys who view the races through binoculars...and use "lengths" as measuring units for the distance separating the different horses?

This sport is 50 years behind the times...and no longer deserves our patronage.

[Jeff P]

I see it a bit differently...

The sport deserves my business.

The people running it? Not so much.



-jp

.

[speed]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

I see it a bit differently...

The sport deserves my business.

The people running it? Not so much.



-jp

.

Incredibly well put

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

I see it a bit differently...

The sport deserves my business.

The people running it? Not so much.



-jp

.

Sadly...you can't separate the sport from the people who run it.

[Stillriledup]

The biggest mistake the "people running the sport" fail to realize is that this sport doesnt work like Target or WalMart. The people in this sport think that you need to separate every customer from as much money as you can, today. You don't worry about tomorrow. Racing thinks like dept stores in this regard.

Every dollar that's stuffed under the racetracks mattress is only worth 1 dollar. But, that same dollar back in the hands of the bettor is worth more than one dollar because that dollar gets churned. The more you take from the players, the less the players can churn.

Tracks have the false perception that a dollar in their pocket is their dollar and a dollar in the pocket of the player is the players dollar......that dollar that the track thinks is theirs is like a worker bee, if that dollar went back to the player, everytime that dollar gets bet in churn, its worth 15 cents (assuming 15% takeout) to the track....and, in the end, they're still going to get that dollar anyway, they just need the player to have the dollar in his pocket as long as possible before he eventually gives it to the track.

[Fox]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

Exchange wagering is the first, and we all know that it's on shaky legal ground in the US.

What shaky legal ground is the proposed California exchange on?

[raybo]

I would not bet any more if there were fixed odds. I personally don't have a significant problem with the way odds are now. The odds changes work both ways, dropping and rising, and that's just for straight betting. For my superfecta wagering the actual odds have no affect on payouts, only the odds rankings. Of course, I'm used to having to predict minimum payouts in superfectas, so predicting win odds/payouts is pretty much built into my play. The people who really get affected by odds drops after the gate are those who habitually bet low priced horses, that's not me anyway. The vast percentage of the time, the odds on my selections stay the same, or go up, after the gate.

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by Fox

What shaky legal ground is the proposed California exchange on?

Until it comes into effect in US, exchange wagering is fighting an uphill battle.
I believe that those opposed to it will win out.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

Until it comes into effect in US, exchange wagering is fighting an uphill battle.
I believe that those opposed to it will win out.

You know who's opposed to it? Trainers. The game is all about them, bettors are just a necessary evil and in the case of slots tracks, the bettors arent even that.

[horses4courses]

Sure. Some trainers are against it.
I would imagine the ones that earn their living from training fees, purse percentages, and any bloodstock deals they can make a profit from.

The trainers that don't fit into that category (quite often low percentage outfits) are prone to supplementing their income through gambling - obtaining insider information from other racing connections or, if they have the talent and an opportunity, betting on their own horses in rare favorable situations.

Those in the second category should be very much in favor of exchange betting.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

Perhaps in theory, but not at all practical.

There would be two options open to the tracks, and both are based on the UK/Irish models.

Exchange wagering is the first, and we all know that it's on shaky legal ground in the US. An attractive fixed odds option for bettors, but it's open to abuse from insiders and, giving individuals the opportunity to lay bets is nothing other than bookmaking with a new label.

The second option would be legalizing independent individual bookmakers that used to trade on US race tracks before the advent of pari-mutuel wagering. The possibility of that ever occurring is non-existent.

Moving on.
The issue of "takeout" is raised in this thread.
Booking bets gives you a theoretical takeout, and nothing more.
With a pari-mutuel pool, takeout is pre-determined and always calculable.
Not so for bookmakers. Of course, they set their odds line with a theoretical built-in profit margin - usually around 20% on most races. The theoretical part is the assumption that you have balanced action on all runners in the race.
This seldom occurs, if ever.
In theory, a bookmaker can lay off money elsewhere to balance his book.
Some will do so, especially if the liability on a certain horse is excessive.
At the end of the day, though, if more money is bet on a winning horse than can be matched by the total sum bet on the losing entrants, someone has to bear the loss within the bookmaking community.
That would never be a US race track. They aren't equipped to function as bookmakers,
and would never be allowed to do so.

At the same time, if exchange wagering were legalized, could they become the operator of that wagering system, bringing together those laying odds with those wishing to wager? You bet they could......

It's not all about 'getting hurt' though, just as often it ought to be the opposite. If they set 5-2 on a horse which takes 6-1 worth of action and it wins, presumably they pay less than they take in. That slush should carry over to cover the opposite scenario. There's a lot that can be done using modern technology to make the odds both dynamic and still offer fixed-odds wagering. It might require wagering limits that taper off etc but there are ways and it's unlikely they would get hurt much if at all. Even worst-case if they take in less on a percentage basis I would not be surprised to see win pools double in size leading to more money. Try it for one race per day as a gimmick, I don't think they need to dive in all the way right away. Something should be done in any case because what we see now with half the pool coming in after the break is a farce. Conditional wagering at zero to mitigate against this issue is often times feeling like some jackass is shoulder surfing you up to the windows and betting ten times as much on your horse. It's a vastly different game today, tons of off-track money pouring in and not in real-time makes it more of a guessing game than ever before.

[njcurveball]

I may have missed this, but has anyone posted what happens in the event of a late scratch?

Let's say all the horses warm up at Chucky Town and then #1 who is 2-1 on the board is scratched. Do they simply refund the money and race for purse money only?

As I said I may have missed it, but that is the "800 pound gorilla" I don't see anyone talking about.

What happens if the gate does not open for a horse and he is scratched after betting closes? Imagine getting 10-1 fixed odds on a wire to wire winner and then the 2-1 favorite is declared a non starter.

There can never be fixed odds unless you declare any bet a loser if the horse is scratched after the betting begins.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

njcurveball

late scratchings are not a problem with fixed odds betting

Bookies will operate under a table of deductions for scratchings. So a 2-1 chance is a 33.3% chance of winning the race if it gets scratched then the odds on all the other runners will be reduced by about 33%. The deduction won't quite be 33% as the horse would have been a 33% chance in a market with 115% to 120% overround not 100% overround so this will affect the percentage change to the odds. You might see a deduction rate of 27% to 28% applied to the odds of all the remaining chances. So a 6-1 chance might become a 4-1 chance or so if a 2-1 chance is scratched

Here is a table of deductions for UK markets

http://www.bettingmad.com/rule4s.asp

Betfair call it the "reduction factor" and you can see the reduction factor for any horse on Betfair by clicking on its odds chart before the race. You will see the percentage by which all other runners will have their odds reduced if this runner is scratched

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by LottaKash

I have always been enamored by the notion of "fixed price" betting, and have always had this wish in that regard, to be able to get my price and lock it in...

Trouble with me is; I have so many more questions than answers about the game, and how it can be played successfully using fixed prices as the way to go...

What about the "whales" ?....As it is now, they have the "last word", but what about having the "first word" ?...Would that change the game ?....Wouldn't an early, from the get-go, "whale-sized bet" ruin the whole betting board from then on....What about cancellations, and would that be "still" allowed ?...I think that if "no cancellations" were allowed, then that would create a whole new world of possibilities for finding true overlays, especially if the "whales" had gotten it wrong in any particular situation, in the first place..

If the whales are right, and they get their price early on, and it did ruin the betting from thereon, wouldn't the track (bookie) be at great risk, since the action may have been nil to very low from thereon, and they wouldn't have a fully rounded book ?...The track (bookie) would have to pay, and on many an occasion, I would suspect, they would be operating at a deficit....Is that how it works ?

Still, knowing what I know now, I would love to have the luxury, as in the Pittsburgh Phil days, to be able to shop around for a worthy price for my selection(s)....Today tho, the pari-mutuel game is hosted by only one bookie, the track, so I don't think that they would go for the concept of fixed odds pricing...It would put them at great risk, I think...

Were there no whales during the days of private bookmakers at tracks in the UK?