Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 01-15-2018, 05:40 PM   #16
jay68802
Registered User
 
jay68802's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 15,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by AskinHaskin View Post
Is this collective selective myopia??

Why on earth is the one percent gathered here complaining about the computerized set-ups which know far greater advantages than they do while simultaneously (you) are unable or unwilling to understand in the slightest the huge number you and your ilk have done to the 98% which you have largely driven from racing??


Takeout percentage still has exactly nothing to do with any of the changes which must be made in order to reverse your own collective disastrous effect upon the whole of racing.


Every sensible move done in the interest of reversing the extreme imbalance in today's mutuel pools must be done with the little guy/novice/beginner in mind first and foremost.

The little guy doesn't give a sh*t about the $1.56 you might give him each day through your own, self-centered reduced takeout. (that little guy would be more interested in your offer if you held $1.56 in a small plastic bag with his name on it, visible from the turnstiles beneath the sign which says: "Admission: $6.50")


People bet billions of dollars on lotteries, with each aware going in that their own dollar has just as much chance as do any individual dollars spent by the fabulously wealthy on the same lottery. THAT is the mentality which drives the successes of lotteries. Racing won't even offer that comfort to its masses, and thus racing is circling the drain.



Just who believes that lottery revenue would remain stable or increase if its takeout were suddenly reduced to 40%. Do you believe that the guy who wins $386 Million (instead of $320 million) is now going to wager $66 million more on the lottery?



Begin by assisting the smallest of the small fries in attendance at each racing venue, and that, better than reducing takeout or (eliminating the computer-connections to the mutuel pools known to select few)... will begin the long road ahead toward bringing back the relative balance known to mutuel pools in the 1970's and before. (and who basically demanded over time the one-by-one disasters which have eroded the precious 'balance' in the mutuel pools? - it was you!!... all of you! ) (no racing newcomer ever wandered into Santa Anita guest services and exclaimed: "I'd love to wager here, but only if you add a 2nd pick-5 that overlaps the first one!" ) (no racing newcomer ever responded to a Keeneland BETologist with: "eh, I dunno, I think I'm gonna focus exclusively on rolling pick-3's today, can you help me establish my position?")




Lets call it Trickle-up economics.

Go watch the video (posted here at PA recently) of those guys standing around and screaming at the TV at Los Al and understand that those, along with people brand new to racing, are the people that racing needs to help first! Additionally, it is relatively easy to help those people for the mere fact that they could use any assistance most of anyone.


As for the rest of you... it should have been widely understood by each of you decades ago that you can not be any part of the solution until such time as when you cease to be the problem.
Oaklawn Park has increased the on track attendance and on track handle by offering a "show bet bonus" to its customers. This is nothing more than reducing take out on that wager. Do you think that these same customers, who would have their payout's reduced, by wagering into a higher take out pool, would be coming back? They like it because lower takeout, increases their pay out, and they feel good about the extra money they won.

Today at Gulfstream Park the Rainbow Six pool of 2.7 million dollars increased by about $10,000 after the race started. The win pool of $89,000 increased by $60,000. Do you think a new customer enjoys watching the payout on a 5-1 they bet get cut in half by the time the race is over? Would a new customer even care why this happened? No, all they think is that they were "ripped off" by "the track".

The "1 percent" of us care about this business, and IMO, will be able to help it in the long run.

And, by the way, reduced take out is "trickle-up economics".
jay68802 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-15-2018, 05:56 PM   #17
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Revenue on lotteries went up big time when takeout was reduced.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-15-2018, 05:58 PM   #18
Andy Asaro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj View Post
Revenue on lotteries went up big time when takeout was reduced.
Happened in Ca. in 2011. Lottery reduced take and revenue went up. California increased take and revenue declined dramatically.

They do need a 5 or 5 and 1/2 furlong race on turf for cheaper horses.

Last edited by Andy Asaro; 01-15-2018 at 06:01 PM.
Andy Asaro is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-15-2018, 06:20 PM   #19
Dave Schwartz
 
Dave Schwartz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 16,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by AskinHaskin View Post
Is this collective selective myopia??

The little guy doesn't give a sh*t about the $1.56 you might give him each day through your own, self-centered reduced takeout. (that little guy would be more interested in your offer if you held $1.56 in a small plastic bag with his name on it, visible from the turnstiles beneath the sign which says: "Admission: $6.50").
I hate to break it to you, but the tracks don't give a sh*t about the little guy, either.

Reality.

Dave
Dave Schwartz is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-15-2018, 06:23 PM   #20
castaway01
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP View Post
With these robotic wagers in play does it make sense to play at smaller tracks with smaller pools? I would have to believe that pool size has to go a long way in their ability to generate money.
It's hard to know what to believe. Some say the robotic wagers are in play at the smaller tracks too, but just on a smaller scale, and the amount of rebate they get (I.e., a very high percentage) makes it worth their while to do so.
castaway01 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-15-2018, 08:37 PM   #21
SG4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 915
If robotic wagering whales are covering so many combinations & responsible for so much of the pool, shouldn't smaller players find this a benefit in that it should ensure more realistic payouts across all combinations? I really don't understand the complaints from people, please explain where the payoffs are so unfair?
SG4 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-15-2018, 09:52 PM   #22
linrom1
Veteran
 
linrom1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by SG4 View Post
If robotic wagering whales are covering so many combinations & responsible for so much of the pool, shouldn't smaller players find this a benefit in that it should ensure more realistic payouts across all combinations? I really don't understand the complaints from people, please explain where the payoffs are so unfair?
You seem to lack basic understanding how robotic wagers work: a wager is made if its expected value is greater than zero. Robotic wagers DON'T add any value to other players, they reduce payoffs for everyone else.

Since they also receive a fat rebate, the likelihood that tracks will reduce takeout is zero, you pay for it.

I am amazed how naive many players are.

Suppose I as a member of a computer wagering entity, wager $100 million for a profit of 1% and then receive a 17-18% rebate, I'll kiss Stronach arse, and if I am a money launderer from South America or Asia.........well.

Last edited by linrom1; 01-15-2018 at 09:53 PM.
linrom1 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-15-2018, 10:12 PM   #23
AltonKelsey
Veteran
 
AltonKelsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by linrom1 View Post
You seem to lack basic understanding how robotic wagers work: a wager is made if its expected value is greater than zero. Robotic wagers DON'T add any value to other players, they reduce payoffs for everyone else.

Since they also receive a fat rebate, the likelihood that tracks will reduce takeout is zero, you pay for it.

I am amazed how naive many players are.

Suppose I as a member of a computer wagering entity, wager $100 million for a profit of 1% and then receive a 17-18% rebate, I'll kiss Stronach arse, and if I am a money launderer from South America or Asia.........well.

Probably right about the money launderers who might even play and LOSE as long as they are cleaning the coin. I've considered that.

Once in a while , the value seeking bots pump up the winning payoff. They can't get it right every time, and if they concentrate on one set off combinations, the others will float. Trouble is, much of that is random (from your perspective) so you can't really predict what will happen in advance.
AltonKelsey is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-15-2018, 10:16 PM   #24
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by green80 View Post
Oaklawn gets it, that's why their handle is up. Not many tracks show and increase in handle and attendance for last year as did OP.
Oaklawn doesn't charge for admission and by their own count the attendance went down. Handle was up very slightly.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-15-2018, 10:23 PM   #25
ronsmac
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by MONEY View Post
From what I understand from reading hear at PaceAdvantage, Whales as a whole lose a small percentage of their bankrolls, but make a profit because of large rebates on the takeout.

Why would I be against people that are putting large amounts of money into the pools for me to win?
If they're losing less than the takeout, then you're not winning because of their money.
ronsmac is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-15-2018, 10:25 PM   #26
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by linrom1 View Post
You seem to lack basic understanding how robotic wagers work: a wager is made if its expected value is greater than zero. Robotic wagers DON'T add any value to other players, they reduce payoffs for everyone else......
I guess I am lacking understanding as well. If bets are made on horses with expected values greater than zero wouldn't this move the odds for horses whose expected values are less than zero?
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-16-2018, 02:46 AM   #27
Fox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Home
Posts: 342
Better off just taking computers out of the game all together. Make everyone go back to paper programs and pencils. No highlighters though. Those aren’t fair.
Fox is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-16-2018, 04:01 AM   #28
Seabiscuit@AR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 659
Racetracks that allow rebaters to infest their pools are insane. All they are doing is enabling the rebaters to get rick quick while the racetrack over the long run goes bust as it slowly loses all the non rebate customers who are paying the full takeout

The more people win the more they bet. The more they lose the less they bet until they reach the point where they quit the game altogether. If you let rebaters infest your pools then the non rebate players basically only have poor value bets to choose from at -20% or worse. They are guaranteed to only ever be small players in the pools and to eventually quit forever. Meanwhile the rebate players are able to corner the market on all the value bets in the pool and make a mint

If the rebate player and non rebate player back the same horse, the rebates work to make that bet positive expectation for the rebate player but negative expectation for the non rebate player. So the rebate player and non rebate player can make exactly the same bets but the rebater makes a fortune while the non rebate player goes broke in the long run. The ultimate in unfair play
Seabiscuit@AR is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-16-2018, 06:45 AM   #29
biggestal99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 4,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabiscuit@AR View Post
Racetracks that allow rebaters to infest their pools are insane. All they are doing is enabling the rebaters to get rick quick while the racetrack over the long run goes bust as it slowly loses all the non rebate customers who are paying the full takeout

The more people win the more they bet. The more they lose the less they bet until they reach the point where they quit the game altogether. If you let rebaters infest your pools then the non rebate players basically only have poor value bets to choose from at -20% or worse. They are guaranteed to only ever be small players in the pools and to eventually quit forever. Meanwhile the rebate players are able to corner the market on all the value bets in the pool and make a mint

If the rebate player and non rebate player back the same horse, the rebates work to make that bet positive expectation for the rebate player but negative expectation for the non rebate player. So the rebate player and non rebate player can make exactly the same bets but the rebater makes a fortune while the non rebate player goes broke in the long run. The ultimate in unfair play
It’s is equally insane that these tracks (mostly)
Don’t allow exchange wagering at their tracks.
Commission too low. Yet they give out masses sums of money to robotic players to play their pools.


Fixed odds betting is great.

If I was allowed to I,d set up my bookie umbrella at Monmouth every summer and let the little man bet at good odds, not the crumbs they pm system allows in 2018. For instance there was a horse called big awesome at Tampa Bay 2nd race on Saturday. 9/2. Bet down to 5/2.Matt Carothers liked this horse. He even commented about the odds drop. Betfair price was over 5-1. Whoever bet this horse at the full takeout, I feel sorry for.

Allan
biggestal99 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-16-2018, 08:43 AM   #30
lamboguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston+Ocala
Posts: 23,657
in the old days at Rockingham, a good chunk of the handle was coming from bookmakers. there must have been 500 of them on track taking bets and laying them off in the pools. Lou Smith was a legend and he allowed them to do their business on his property, because the net result was there was more handle being pumped through the window's. i suppose the same thing could happen with exchange wagering. they can both thrive at the same time.

maybe things were a bit different back in the 60's and 70's. there was no such thing as an otb, but there were thousand's of bookmaking shops all over in places like dry-cleaner's, restaraunts and bars and small variety shops. but almost everyone you knew bet on horse racing every day. when the law closed down those places for good, people started betting on sports over the telephone.
lamboguy is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.