Late "Accurate" Betting

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

NYRA might have done a great job of making a few pools now fairer than before, but the change has done me in. i figured out a system to beat the CAW and I never did anything wrong. the new non-jackpot pick 6 was the greatest bet I have ever known and I beat the takeout on a very consistent basis. now it's over. i am now back to win betting only for NYRA, and that has been a struggle.

I wonder what would happen if we all switched to betting WIN only.

Let's say a player churns $100,000 a year betting everything available.

Let's say that player is excellent and over 12 months that $100,000 becomes $120,000

Do you think that figure would be larger if the entire amount was WIN only?

Certainly WIN takes away the chance for a windfall score. But for every windfall we all know there's days on end of torn up tickets.

I wouldn't even know how to test it. But my gut feeling is WIN only would turn out to be financially sound.

Thoughts.

Oh, and Lambo. I truly appreciate the very lovely sentiments you've sent my way over the years and recently.

Humbled

VJS

[geroge.burns99]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

NYRA might have done a great job of making a few pools now fairer than before, but the change has done me in. i figured out a system to beat the CAW and I never did anything wrong. the new non-jackpot pick 6 was the greatest bet I have ever known and I beat the takeout on a very consistent basis. now it's over. i am now back to win betting only for NYRA, and that has been a struggle.

Lam....

The old saying , "When one door closes, another one opens"

Your a smart guy and will figure out another system...

Mike

[Robert Fischer]

different models

• 1. Known Money in Multis

Vast majority of the late odds changes.
In this case you can calculate fairly well where the late money is going.
This model represents most of the cases, and covers many a bettor's complaint, on-track gripe, or online tweet.

• 2. Ownership Action

Owner, Owner partnership, Trainer, Agent, etc... who happens today and/or always/usually bets on their entry to win, or cold DD,etc... for 'action'.
Can identify and anticipate certain parties, especially certain partnerships.

• 3. Inside Info

A horse is thriving today and late money comes in. If they had hammered the multis, it would simply be the model#1 ('knownMulti'), but these are less comprehensive bettors.
Covers "Word is out", covers medium players who work hard, and/or scout or pay for info.

• 4. Betting Coup

These rare events make up a small percentage of the late odds drops.
A trainer and/or team have noticed through intention or circumstance, etc... that previous form is darkened, and the odds are high, and the horse happens to be thriving today.
Again if they had covered multis, it would be clear that the horse was 'live' today.

• 5. Randomness

There is likely to be some randomness.
For the sake of this post, this model also covers models that I may have failed to mention . Speak up if you have opinions on the models, or stuff I forgot, disagree? etc...

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

I wonder what would happen if we all switched to betting WIN only.

Let's say a player churns $100,000 a year betting everything available.

Let's say that player is excellent and over 12 months that $100,000 becomes $120,000

Do you think that figure would be larger if the entire amount was WIN only?

Certainly WIN takes away the chance for a windfall score. But for every windfall we all know there's days on end of torn up tickets.

I wouldn't even know how to test it. But my gut feeling is WIN only would turn out to be financially sound.

Thoughts.

Oh, and Lambo. I truly appreciate the very lovely sentiments you've sent my way over the years and recently.

Humbled

VJS

Since I only bet when Mnr is down, when I like a winner I need to get paid. That mindset had made me a straight bettor-until last year, that is, when I branched out to include some horizontals. I play only Mahoning, again, with the focus less on action than on profit, and was looking to better leverage my hard-earned knowledge of the Austintown scene.

Despite inconclusive results, I do plan to emphasize gimmicks even more this winter. And my gut says it's going to be good...

[lamboguy]

when you play in contests Vic, the CAW affects all the contest participants equally. but when you show up in a pari-mutual win pool that allows the CAW, a regular player like you or myself is at a distinct disadvantage over and above the takeout and the breakage.

by the way, the place that you work for, Oaklawn Park is pretty dam good. they don't accept any CAW in any pool there. i actually win in that place pari- mutually. i am now giving NYRA a shot in the win pools.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

I wonder what would happen if we all switched to betting WIN only.

Let's say a player churns $100,000 a year betting everything available.

Let's say that player is excellent and over 12 months that $100,000 becomes $120,000

Do you think that figure would be larger if the entire amount was WIN only?

Certainly WIN takes away the chance for a windfall score. But for every windfall we all know there's days on end of torn up tickets.

I wouldn't even know how to test it. But my gut feeling is WIN only would turn out to be financially sound.

Thoughts.

Oh, and Lambo. I truly appreciate the very lovely sentiments you've sent my way over the years and recently.

Humbled

VJS

Doubtful. The overall betting handle figures to decline if the bettor restricts himself to win-betting, IMO...and that will result in a lesser overall profit. There aren't many races where the bettor can find a sound win-bet...whereas the flexibility of the exotics can have him betting on practically every race that he sees. In fact...I'm of the opinion that the popularity of the exotics can be mainly attributed to the players inability to come up with enough sound win-bets. We need a lot of self-confidence as strict win-bettors...whereas the exotics allow us to be rather vague in our handicapping and betting.

So...even though the win-bettor can boast of a bigger ROI...his overall profit figures to be less due to win-betting's more restrictive nature.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

So...even though the win-bettor can boast of a bigger ROI...his overall profit figures to be less due to win-betting's more restrictive nature.

I agree....It's about getting as much money in good, in any pool where you've determined that you have the best of it....It's all about Profitable Churn.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by geroge.burns99

Lam....

The old saying , "When one door closes, another one opens"

Your a smart guy and will figure out another system...

Mike

the system I had in NYRA is completely dead now without the CAW.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

the system I had in NYRA is completely dead now without the CAW.

Did it involve unicorns?

[MJC922]

As I said in the other thread the track would probably have to post the projected odds to put this issue to rest. It's not something for the masses to do on their own. With rolling doubles available it could be provided after the first race completes and then all subsequent races as a courtesy. I look at it as the next step beyond a morning line. Spin it as a horizontal odds projector or something if it needs to be spun. I'll attach a screenshot of the spreadsheet I put together to do it. Go to Amwager, check the results for the first race at Saratoga 8/22/2021, click the DD probables for Race 1, select them all, copy them into Excel. If you're unsure what to do next follow Beyer's good example in the Winning Horseplayer (section about Doc) to get an odds line out of the probables. Shown on the left of the screenshot where it says Win Odds, those were the final odds for Race 2. The decimal odds that were estimated and known at the conclusion of Race 1 are at the bottom of the sheet. Using these odds I am perfectly fine ignoring where the odds go throughout the betting, up down wherever, I don't even need to consider it. I assume the final odds will average out exactly as projected over a series of races, the slight variation that I see with NYRA for example should equal out. These estimates are plenty close enough for me as a win bettor to treat as fixed odds.

[The_Turf_Monster]

Favorites are hitting at a higher rate since I’ve been tracking the data. More money is bet at the last second than ever thanks to ADW couch bettors (their handle is outnumbering whatever computer boogeyman anybody thinks exists), meaning that the favorite is going to get bet down to an underlay before anybody can cancel or adjust. There’s no secret here, and anybody betting through an ADW is contributing to it

I wish for the life of me there could simply be a separate pool for on track bettors that wait in line to bet, I wouldn’t have to deal with the nonsense caused by the ADW bettors

[Nitro]

Originally Posted by MJC922

These estimates are plenty close enough for me as a win bettor to treat as fixed odds.

I was wondering when someone was going to mention "fix odds". Based on what I've read so far about this latest tote innovation I believe it also puts another nail in the coffin of the "fixed odds" concept. I'm curious though as to whether or not this was in fact a subliminal intention when the proposal was originally conceived.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by Nitro

I was wondering when someone was going to mention "fix odds". Based on what I've read so far about this latest tote innovation I believe it also puts another nail in the coffin of the "fixed odds" concept. I'm curious though as to whether or not this was in fact a subliminal intention when the proposal was originally conceived.

I probably shouldn't say fixed odds. I mean I do look at them that way but it's not the correct term. With fixed odds you would be able to lock in the price, though there would likely be limits on wager size, but your wager would not lower the odds you receive. Depending upon how it's being implemented it may lower the next player's odds on the same horse though as the goal of the book would be to balance the action. What someone could do however with those projected odds from the double probables is calculate how much they will likely be able to wager on an overlay given the average win pool size at the venue. So they can get a pretty close estimate on what price they'll receive given their own bet is included.

[CBYRacer]

Originally Posted by The_Turf_Monster

Favorites are hitting at a higher rate since I’ve been tracking the data. More money is bet at the last second than ever thanks to ADW couch bettors (their handle is outnumbering whatever computer boogeyman anybody thinks exists), meaning that the favorite is going to get bet down to an underlay before anybody can cancel or adjust. There’s no secret here, and anybody betting through an ADW is contributing to it

I wish for the life of me there could simply be a separate pool for on track bettors that wait in line to bet, I wouldn’t have to deal with the nonsense caused by the ADW bettors

How do you know the couch bettors wager more than the algo players? Also, "couch" bettors could also be algo players so the lines are blurred.

Also, if true, why does this necessarily imply that favorites will get bet down?

[The_Turf_Monster]

Originally Posted by CBYRacer

How do you know the couch bettors wager more than the algo players? Also, "couch" bettors could also be algo players so the lines are blurred.

Also, if true, why does this necessarily imply that favorites will get bet down?

With the favorite hitting on average 40% of the time in America now, an efficient payout would be roughly 7/5. It’s not (the average favorite is an overlay at that 2nd to last refresh of data), hence why it gets bet down at the final click before the pool can correct itself because there’s no opportunity for bettors to make the correction

Regarding who or what is betting more in the aggregate, I think NYRA (Tampa, Oaklawn, others that exclude CRW’s) have demonstrated that while it’s likely the CRW’s bet more on a per capita basis, they do not in the aggregate vs the entirety of the ADW money. This doesn’t even account for the fact that CRW’s would have no reason to participate in a pool without more money being wagered from other bettors to support the model of making the pool efficient