Late changing odds

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

......If you are, or are trying to become, a sharp, model-based bettor, horse racing, and parimutuel betting in general, are MUCH better options..... .

Why would parimutuel be better? Handicapping horses is hard enough without having to handicap the toteboard.

[AskinHaskin]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

If this is true...then the assumption must be made that only the "unsophisticated" gamblers are avoiding horse racing as their primary betting choice.

One need only glance at any toteboard in North America at mid-card in 2019 and compare same with 1985 to determine that it’s the unsophisticated people who are avoiding racing in 2019.

The sophisticated bettors in 2019 are more sophisticated than ever before.


You don’t have to assume...


And of course the answer is to DO SOMETHING for the crowd as a whole, beginning with the unsophisticated players, who have been wholly ignored by racing for generations.

Today, racing only does something for the 1% ... further destroying itself with each such effort.

[AskinHaskin]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Why would parimutuel be better? Handicapping horses is hard enough without having to handicap the toteboard.

Parimutuel wagering, when properly optimized, is a far better method than what is used elsewhere.

It would be stupid to willingly derive your revenue from how much your public collectively loses when you have the option to derive your revenue from how much they collectively wager.


It’s THAT simple.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

Parimutuel wagering, when properly optimized, is a far better method than what is used elsewhere.

It would be stupid to willingly derive your revenue from how much your public collectively loses when you have the option to derive your revenue from how much they collectively wager.


It’s THAT simple.

Exchange wagering does not produce revenue via public losses. It produces revenue through commissions while providing price stability to the bettor. It's that simple.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

One need only glance at any toteboard in North America at mid-card in 2019 and compare same with 1985 to determine that it’s the unsophisticated people who are avoiding racing in 2019.

I live in Las Vegas...the great gambling laboratory where all the different forms of gambling are allowed to compete directly with one-another on a daily basis. And horse racing lags way behind in this competition...regardless of the "advantages" that our game supposedly offers to the "sophisticated" gambler. There has to be a reason for that...IMO.

[AskinHaskin]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I live in Las Vegas...the great gambling laboratory where all the different forms of gambling are allowed to compete directly with one-another on a daily basis. And horse racing lags way behind in this competition...regardless of the "advantages" that our game supposedly offers to the "sophisticated" gambler. There has to be a reason for that...IMO.

Right...

because you’re not DOing anything for the people who walk in the door everyday.

The lottery doesn’t share such problems because they treat all of their players equally.


And in your example, it is precisely those *advantages* afforded to the tiny sliver... that drive everybody else away.

How long would McDonald’s last if only Croatian people were given deep discounts while all others were made to pay full price AND a bit more to offset the would-be deep discounts afforded only to Croatian people???

That parallels exactly the way racing treats its clientele.

[AskinHaskin]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Exchange wagering does not produce revenue via public losses. It produces revenue through commissions while providing price stability to the bettor. It's that simple.

You seem quite clueless regarding the fact that exchange wagering is illegal in most of North America.

I imagine cocaine provides stability to some as well.

[JerryBoyle]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Why would parimutuel be better? Handicapping horses is hard enough without having to handicap the toteboard.

Because handicapping the toteboard isn't so hard that it outweighs the benefits of using large PM pools over betting through sportsbooks. Specifically that you can get down very large sums of money without getting turned away. As I understand it, successful sports bettors require teams of people to be able to get down money across all their various outs, and the outs are constantly being closed.

FWIW, I've seen a few people who are involved w/ sports betting comment that those who make the most money are in horse racing. Alan Denkenson mentioned this as did sthe author of Gambling Wizards, Richard Munchkin.

Basically what I'm getting at is that it may be better for the casual player to bet through fixed odds, but it's not going to be better for the sharp player.

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

Basically what I'm getting at is that it may be better for the casual player to bet through fixed odds, but it's not going to be better for the sharp player.

That is exactly true...

BUT...

For the exact reason Andy C gave:

Why would parimutuel be better? Handicapping horses is hard enough without having to handicap the toteboard.

In other words, if you can' build a tote model, then you're pretty much toast.

Since that is almost everyone, I've got to agree with Andy:

Fixed Odds would be better for the game.

[AskinHaskin]

Too many fools are far too willing to perceive that what is best for them is somehow best for the game.


Who in his right mind would suggest that the game as practiced in Hong Kong (with the largest wagering pools on earth) would be better there with fixed-odds wagering ??


Giving one percent of the idiotic public what it wants has been precisely what has buried the game in North America.


Back in the day, every few weeks the DRF would publish a list of the best-attended spectator sports in America... and Horse Racing was almost always #1.

It has been decades since they even bothered to publish such a list on a regular basis, for obvious reasons.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

Too many fools are far too willing to perceive that what is best for them is somehow best for the game.


Who in his right mind would suggest that the game as practiced in Hong Kong (with the largest wagering pools on earth) would be better there with fixed-odds wagering ??


Giving one percent of the idiotic public what it wants has been precisely what has buried the game in North America.


Back in the day, every few weeks the DRF would publish a list of the best-attended spectator sports in America... and Horse Racing was almost always #1.

It has been decades since they even bothered to publish such a list on a regular basis, for obvious reasons.

I don't agree that the public are idiots.

But I do agree that consumers often feel that consumer satisfaction is the way to run a successful business, and that isn't always true. E.g., the airlines a wildly profitable now that everyone hates them and lost money when they delivered better service.

I don't know enough about exchange wagering to have an opinion on it. But I do agree that just because bettors want it doesn't guarantee it will be more profitable.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I don't agree that the public are idiots.

But I do agree that consumers often feel that consumer satisfaction is the way to run a successful business, and that isn't always true. E.g., the airlines a wildly profitable now that everyone hates them and lost money when they delivered better service.

I don't know enough about exchange wagering to have an opinion on it. But I do agree that just because bettors want it doesn't guarantee it will be more profitable.

public is smarter than they ever have been now..

in New Jersey you pay 12% commission everytime you win. the exchange picks and chooses and changes the races and pools they carry. basically the exchange itself offers the liquidity in their pools, meaning they are most likely booking all the bets.

with a secure pool, i prefer pari=mutuel over exchange by a mile. if a guy wants to book horses based on the pari-mutuel pool would be fine by me too.
the people behind the exchange are nothing but whore's and i really don't blame Churchill for not giving them the content.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

Because handicapping the toteboard isn't so hard that it outweighs the benefits of using large PM pools over betting through sportsbooks. Specifically that you can get down very large sums of money without getting turned away. As I understand it, successful sports bettors require teams of people to be able to get down money across all their various outs, and the outs are constantly being closed.

FWIW, I've seen a few people who are involved w/ sports betting comment that those who make the most money are in horse racing. Alan Denkenson mentioned this as did sthe author of Gambling Wizards, Richard Munchkin.

Basically what I'm getting at is that it may be better for the casual player to bet through fixed odds, but it's not going to be better for the sharp player.

I am not suggesting bets be made through sportsbooks. Exchanges would be the preferred method.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

Because handicapping the toteboard isn't so hard that it outweighs the benefits of using large PM pools over betting through sportsbooks. Specifically that you can get down very large sums of money without getting turned away. As I understand it, successful sports bettors require teams of people to be able to get down money across all their various outs, and the outs are constantly being closed.

FWIW, I've seen a few people who are involved w/ sports betting comment that those who make the most money are in horse racing. Alan Denkenson mentioned this as did sthe author of Gambling Wizards, Richard Munchkin.

Basically what I'm getting at is that it may be better for the casual player to bet through fixed odds, but it's not going to be better for the sharp player.

If you place bets online or through a casino app...then your action can be tracked and your "success" could attract negative attention. But if you walk up to a sportsbook counter and bet $2,000 on a given game...what reputable sportsbook will turn away your action? Is it too much trouble to go to 5 separate sportsbooks in order to put down, say, $10,000 on a given game? These guys who complain that they "can't bet very large sums of money without getting turned away"...how much money are they trying to bet? And, if they are such serious operators...why don't they place their wagers in Vegas...where the betting outlets are so numerous?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

If you place bets online or through a casino app...then your action can be tracked and your "success" could attract negative attention. But if you walk up to a sportsbook counter and bet $2,000 on a given game...what reputable sportsbook will turn away your action? Is it too much trouble to go to 5 separate sportsbooks in order to put down, say, $10,000 on a given game? These guys who complain that they "can't bet very large sums of money without getting turned away"...how much money are they trying to bet? And, if they are such serious operators...why don't they place their wagers in Vegas...where the betting outlets are so numerous?

Well (and I am sure you know this from poker), winrates are always a very small percentage of total handle, which is why it's very hard to "make a living" at 8/16 or 20/40 limit, or $500nl. You need to be betting large enough sums that your profit margin compensates you for all the work you put into the enterprise.

So perhaps the long term profit margins of these folks are small enough that they need to place large enough bets that they would, indeed, come to the attention of the bookmakers?