Odds changes during races WHAT A JOKE

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by AltonKelsey

Ok, now I get it. The lower the payoff on winners, the better it is for those betting them.

Do you just like to argue? Or do you also like to make sense?

No, not the lower the payoff, the better. Their models, which some (like Pointdexter apparently) believe are the "best on the planet," tell them what a horse should be in terms of odds. They can then bet as much as it will take to bring it close to those odds. Maybe they only bet half of what they should because of the other teams in play. Who knows how their models are set up.

But obviously, if you have a long term SUCCESSFUL model that tells you a horse should be 5-2, and it's up there at 9-1, and your model also has shown you, given the history of how much money these teams are sending in on any given race, that you can bet this amount of money to bring it down to say 5-1 or 6-1, and some other team also is on the horse and sends it to 9-2...you're still getting a nice overlay.

All of this has been modeled out for them already. They know precisely how much to bet to ensure profit and they know pretty much where the odds will end up and "how far they can take it."

So no, it's not "the lower the payoff the better."

Where do you come up with this? I haven't said anything remotely like that.

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Do you just like to argue? Or do you also like to make sense?

No, not the lower the payoff, the better. Their models, which some (like Pointdexter apparently) believe are the "best on the planet," tell them what a horse should be in terms of odds. They can then bet as much as it will take to bring it close to those odds. Maybe they only bet half of what they should because of the other teams in play. Who knows how their models are set up.

But obviously, if you have a long term SUCCESSFUL model that tells you a horse should be 5-2, and it's up there at 9-1, and your model also has shown you, given the history of how much money these teams are sending in on any given race, that you can bet this amount of money to bring it down to say 5-1 or 6-1, and some other team also is on the horse and sends it to 9-2...you're still getting a nice overlay.

All of this has been modeled out for them already. They know precisely how much to bet to ensure profit and they know pretty much where the odds will end up and "how far they can take it."

So no, it's not "the lower the payoff the better."

Where do you come up with this? I haven't said anything remotely like that.

This is a really intelligent post.

And to be clear, when their odds projection models for a given race are off on a particular card, they lose.

What does it take for "odds projection models to be off?" Agreement with the other whales.

This is what has caused the big last-minute odds changes in favor of the winning horses. More specifically, it is that so much pool money is controlled by just a few people.

Two decades ago, there were "big" and "smart" players. There were even "big and smart" players. But nobody was wagering $100m per year. By comparison to the whales of today, the "big" player was a small fry.

Were (are) there guys who would bet a few thousand dollars or more into a single race? Sure. But they didn't do it across 85% of the races at almost all tracks.

Remember that back in the "good old days," we'd occasionally see horses drop hugely in the first flash after the gate opened. I recall a horse going from 12/1 to 6/1 at Hollywood when the guy in front of me bet like ten dimes. The horse lost and I got shut out on the winner while they counted the money. LOL

In today's world, when the whales agree the horse(s) get hammered and everyone has made a bad bet whether the horse wins or loses.

I am sure that there are some really saavy investors here who are aware of the term, "price discovery" as it applies to the stock and commodities markets. My understanding is that many whales used to spread their bets over several minutes in order to see what the other whales were doing.

I've been told (but have no proof) that this changed as the whales' models of tote action improved. Imagine having years of tote data showing price movements.

Note that this is not "tote watching" to scope out who the best horses are. It is tote watching for the purpose of understanding how the public reacts.

Finally, about this past-posting-thing. Is it happening? Probably. It's happened in the past and, human nature being what it is, I can only assume that somewhere, sometimes, it is happening now.

But that is not a whale strategy. That is a strategy used by "sharpies" who can game the system for a few bucks. It is not a day-to-day, race-by-race strategy for someone pushing $100m+ through the (figurative) window, with a roomful of employees participating.

Do you really think if that was the case that they'd be able to hide this? Do you really think that there wouldn't be a disgruntled whistle blower? For that matter, do you really think that the employees are highly paid? (Sure, the quants and specialists make quite a lot, but not everybody.)


Finally, the key to winning today is to absolutely not do what the whales are doing. If you try, they will eat you alive. You must have a DIFFERENT approach.

And don't think that means, "I have to bet longshots," because they bet them too. Of course, they are not-so-long-shots when they're done with them. As PA's rant indicated.

My advice about this whole game is:
1. Lighten up and enjoy the game.
2. Accept that nobody is going to change the game for you because you don't like the way it is being played.
3. Find a way that works - and don't think for a minute that the "ways of the '80s are going to work 30 years later.
4. Learn to beat the small fields. It's what's for dinner.


Best to you all.

Dave

[AltonKelsey]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Do you just like to argue? Or do you also like to make sense?


......
Where do you come up with this? I haven't said anything remotely like that.

It's very easy to get lost in the weeds on this. Exactly what is being objected to here. That the whales are betting at the last second and changing the odds?

Well apparently, everyone is betting the winner, and all the winners drop in odds, else there wouldn't be the constant whining.

We know neither of those is the case.

How about logging how often the winner goes up in odds vs down. I think its more often than is given credit.

And not mentioned is there are often multiple horses that drop in odds, not just the winner. Maybe 3 or 4 in a 12 horse field get punched late.

[cj]

Originally Posted by AltonKelsey

It's very easy to get lost in the weeds on this. Exactly what is being objected to here. That the whales are betting at the last second and changing the odds?

Well apparently, everyone is betting the winner, and all the winners drop in odds, else there wouldn't be the constant whining.

We know neither of those is the case.

How about logging how often the winner goes up in odds vs down. I think its more often than is given credit.

And not mentioned is there are often multiple horses that drop in odds, not just the winner. Maybe 3 or 4 in a 12 horse field get punched late.

The number of winners that drop in odds after the bell far outnumbers the amount that go up in price. I'm sure you could track this for a week and see for yourself if you think it isn't true.

[Lafecs]

It's very easy to get lost in the weeds on this. Exactly what is being objected to here. That the whales are betting at the last second and changing the odds?

That the game is ****ing ruined. Lol....

Well apparently, everyone is betting the winner, and all the winners drop in odds, else there wouldn't be the constant whining.

Overall this is pretty accurate.

We know neither of those is the case.

How about logging how often the winner goes up in odds vs down. I think its more often than is given credit.

We've discussed this already, it's close to 80% at some tracks

And not mentioned is there are often multiple horses that drop in odds, not just the winner. Maybe 3 or 4 in a 12 horse field get punched late.

Why couldn't they dutch 2 or 3 horses if they see fit to? You do realize all the other losing horses odds would go up, right?

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by Lafecs

It's very easy to get lost in the weeds on this. Exactly what is being objected to here. That the whales are betting at the last second and changing the odds?

That the game is ****ing ruined. Lol....

Well apparently, everyone is betting the winner, and all the winners drop in odds, else there wouldn't be the constant whining.

Overall this is pretty accurate.

We know neither of those is the case.

How about logging how often the winner goes up in odds vs down. I think its more often than is given credit.

We've discussed this already, it's close to 80% at some tracks

And not mentioned is there are often multiple horses that drop in odds, not just the winner. Maybe 3 or 4 in a 12 horse field get punched late.

Why couldn't they dutch 2 or 3 horses if they see fit to? You do realize all the other losing horses odds would go up, right?

please give us a break with that nonsense. taking the after the bell out of the equation, the people that don't have access to the real-time odds are at a severe disadvantage to those that have them. the people that have the real-time don't even need the after the bell access to win. anyone without real time cannot win for any sustained period of time.

and by the way, your percentages are nowhere near close. i am going to give you a clue how you can tell. don't look at the winner, look at the horses that didn't win and see how many of them had their odds go up after the running of the race. then get back to us and explain how wrong you are.

[biggestal99]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

My advice about this whole game is:
1. Lighten up and enjoy the game.
2. Accept that nobody is going to change the game for you because you don't like the way it is being played.
3. Find a way that works - and don't think for a minute that the "ways of the '80s are going to work 30 years later.
4. Learn to beat the small fields. It's what's for dinner.


Best to you all.

Dave

Exactly. My current method is to bet against at 9.0 or lower, horses that have a less than 10% chance of winning so far so good as the horses in question have been winning at a 7% rate this year and last. Yes when that 7% come in.....well its a loss and I have had 2 7%ers in a row win. That doesnt do wonders for the bankroll I will tell you that.

But if the methodology is good and I stick with the program...well I won last year and am winning this one using the 10% lay strategy.

sometimes if the odds drift enough, I will cash out and take the guaranteed profit, other times when a big enough profit isnt insured or I calculate wrong and i am in the red at the off, I roll the dice depending on my method to bring me profits.

adapt to what is happening.

The 20 year old Allan was a gambler.

The 61 year old Allan is a calculated risk taker.

Allan

[Lafecs]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

please give us a break with that nonsense. taking the after the bell out of the equation, the people that don't have access to the real-time odds are at a severe disadvantage to those that have them. the people that have the real-time don't even need the after the bell access to win. anyone without real time cannot win for any sustained period of time.

and by the way, your percentages are nowhere near close. i am going to give you a clue how you can tell. don't look at the winner, look at the horses that didn't win and see how many of them had their odds go up after the running of the race. then get back to us and explain how wrong you are.

I don't doubt this for a second. But the playing field is stacked in favor of the guys who least need it. I'm tired of debating it. If you don't like the current landscape, then the solution is simple, stop betting it. Which I did. American racing might be the best in the world, but in my opinion the product they offer is one of the worst.

-L

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by Lafecs

I don't doubt this for a second. But the playing field is stacked in favor of the guys who least need it. I'm tired of debating it. If you don't like the current landscape, then the solution is simple, stop betting it. Which I did. American racing might be the best in the world, but in my opinion the product they offer is one of the worst.

-L

i basically have stopped, maybe if i am at a track i will go at it again or a change in the tote system.

there are some places that are way up in handle this year, Gulfstream, Santa Anita, Laurel and Oaklawn that i know of.

[Lafecs]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

i basically have stopped, maybe if i am at a track i will go at it again or a change in the tote system.

there are some places that are way up in handle this year, Gulfstream, Santa Anita, Laurel and Oaklawn that i know of.

To be honest, the real problem is that there are too many tracks. The sport is too hard to follow for the casual fan, the wagering dollars are too diluted. If they were smart, NY, FL, CA, and KY would join together with what they have and organize and coordinate it into one racing league. The product would be 10x better than the shit show it is now

[JerryBoyle]

Originally Posted by Lafecs

To be honest, the real problem is that there are too many tracks. The sport is too hard to follow for the casual fan, the wagering dollars are too diluted. If they were smart, NY, FL, CA, and KY would join together with what they have and organize and coordinate it into one racing league. The product would be 10x better than the shit show it is now

This would be so great. The product would be improved in countless ways. Someone needs to get on the inside and start making moves

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

This would be so great. The product would be improved in countless ways. Someone needs to get on the inside and start making moves

First stop, ARIP!

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

This would be so great. The product would be improved in countless ways. Someone needs to get on the inside and start making moves

First stop, RTIP!

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by AltonKelsey

It's very easy to get lost in the weeds on this. Exactly what is being objected to here. That the whales are betting at the last second and changing the odds?

Well apparently, everyone is betting the winner, and all the winners drop in odds, else there wouldn't be the constant whining.

We know neither of those is the case.

How about logging how often the winner goes up in odds vs down. I think its more often than is given credit.

And not mentioned is there are often multiple horses that drop in odds, not just the winner. Maybe 3 or 4 in a 12 horse field get punched late.

I've seen winners go up in price. I've seen losers go down in price.

Who care if the ratio is 50 to 1 in favor of losers going down?

So....not....the....point.

[AltonKelsey]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I've seen winners go up in price. I've seen losers go down in price.

Who care if the ratio is 50 to 1 in favor of losers going down?

So....not....the....point.

Exactly my point. What is the point?

I have no idea what the complaint is here.

You realize you cant stop anyone form betting as much as they want on any horse, right?

Let's assume there's no after the bell betting. No proof of it at this point.


Are we objecting to big bettors? Bettors that bet late? Bettors that are smarter than you/have more info than you?

Rebaters?

What exactly would calm the natives?

You realize you cant stop anyone from betting as much as they want at any time up till the bell on any horse.