Fixed Odds Wagering

[Nitro]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

An interesting article about the Sport of Kings from the Washington Post in
1993.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archi...-1bb435c6a839/

I am pretty sure that as this progresses most fixed odds wagering will be essentially sucker only betting. Anyone that shows any proficiency whatsoever will be severely limited in how much they can bet. Just think, all these juice jobs that look like 12-1 shots and win at 3-1 like they are 3/5 shots. How long will books take it in the chin giving 8-1 to 15-1 on these horses?

This will ultimately be a useless attempt at cross marketing sports bettors into horse racing. It only has appeal to long time horse players not to sports bettors who don't play or know the first thing about horse racing. Given what I said in the last paragraph, it will not be all that useful for long term horse players either.

Some very salient and realistic points!

Give me Pari-mutual wagering all day any day over Fixed Odds wagering!

Maybe someone could explain how that type of wagering will benefit and improve the overall racing picture.

Does anyone really believe that it will make the game easier and more profitable for them?

I’m also curious as to why some players (who seem to favor this wagering approach) are apparently so frightened of continuing to compete with other players in the betting arena.
Do they really believe that they’re losing because they’re playing against smarter players?
If they’re really interested in succeeding, why don’t they first look to themselves and attempt to genuinely overcome their personal gaming shortcomings.
.
.

[TrifectaBox]

Originally Posted by MJC922

The evidence for how accurate muti-race wagering mirrors final odds is pretty cut and dried at least at major tracks. I could post race after race 20 minutes to post to prove that to you because clearly a lot of people out here have not taken the time to verify that claim. So unless you think those pools are way off what you're saying makes no sense at all. People keep bringing up this old casino that let people bet into the morning line or some such nonsense, that would not be long for this world. If that's what they plan to do here their line will need to have a 60% vig. I was hoping for this years Derby there would be some horse against horse action offered on-shore. That would be cool for starters.

The multis are largely set by the same people who crush late.



Of course they match up with final odds .



This has nothing to do with fixed odds.



Unless they take only small action at any one price and quickly move the line, the CRW teams will win more at fixed odds than they do at the windows.



Won't happen, as they will shut them down , or stop offering the service altogether as soon as they see the negative cash flow.


Another factor, these teams make a lot (most ?) of their money in the exacta , as well as tri/super . Don't think the books will be offering those .

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by Nitro

Some very salient and realistic points!

Give me Pari-mutual wagering all day any day over Fixed Odds wagering!

Maybe someone could explain how that type of wagering will benefit and improve the overall racing picture.

Does anyone really believe that it will make the game easier and more profitable for them?

I’m also curious as to why some players (who seem to favor this wagering approach) are apparently so frightened of continuing to compete with other players in the betting arena.
Do they really believe that they’re losing because they’re playing against smarter players?
If they’re really interested in succeeding, why don’t they first look to themselves and attempt to genuinely overcome their personal gaming shortcomings.
.
.

Those of us in the real world have to deal with actual competition. Everyone says you're an idiot troll, but are you seriously that clueless about horse racing and gambling? You'd think you'd have picked up some knowledge by accident.

[Nitro]

Originally Posted by castaway01

Those of us in the real world have to deal with actual competition.

You sure could have fooled me!

Originally Posted by castaway01

Everyone says you're an idiot troll, but are you seriously that clueless about horse racing and gambling?

Who has entitled you to speak for “Everyone”?

Originally Posted by castaway01

You'd think you'd have picked up some knowledge by accident.

Sorry, it’s surely no “accident”, but from what I’ve read of your enlightening posts I sure question your ability to comprehend much of anything related to this game or the opinions that others might have.

I realize that it might be difficult, but instead of continually acting so foolishly why not just try and respond with some rational replies to the questions presented.
Perhaps that’s asking too much and I’ll just leave it at that.
.
.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by TrifectaBox

The multis are largely set by the same people who crush late.



Of course they match up with final odds .



This has nothing to do with fixed odds.



Unless they take only small action at any one price and quickly move the line, the CRW teams will win more at fixed odds than they do at the windows.



Won't happen, as they will shut them down , or stop offering the service altogether as soon as they see the negative cash flow.


Another factor, these teams make a lot (most ?) of their money in the exacta , as well as tri/super . Don't think the books will be offering those .

If I ask you to offer a fixed odds line would you not think the best line to offer would be the final odds on the board or as close as possible to it? Figure out how to get there. My word, you know what they say about commonsense. That's ok I get it, keep thinking about offering the morning line. smh

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by Nitro

Some very salient and realistic points!

Give me Pari-mutual wagering all day any day over Fixed Odds wagering!

Maybe someone could explain how that type of wagering will benefit and improve the overall racing picture.

Does anyone really believe that it will make the game easier and more profitable for them?

I’m also curious as to why some players (who seem to favor this wagering approach) are apparently so frightened of continuing to compete with other players in the betting arena.
Do they really believe that they’re losing because they’re playing against smarter players?
If they’re really interested in succeeding, why don’t they first look to themselves and attempt to genuinely overcome their personal gaming shortcomings.
.
.

I'm pretty sure it will help make the game more palatable for some people when the whole thing boils down to a risk reward calculation and anyone who walks in will be able to (for once) stare directly at the reward piece of it. One wonders why fellow horseplayers would want others to have to deal with the late odds changes that have plagued the game for 25 years and driven a huge amount of players away from the game. I'm sure if it doesn't pan out they'll scrap it, end of story. It may not pan out but I'm happy to see someone at least wants to try.

[classhandicapper]

I think we all agree the main problem is the late odds changes.

It's going to be difficult for any bookmaker to set prices that are better for us than the current system. No matter how sharp, they are basically just another set of handicappers working with imperfect knowledge and incomplete/sometimes inaccurate information. If anything the prices will be worse or they'll cut off the winners.

IMO, the solution is exchange wagering. Not that we'll get consistently better prices, but at least when you choose to make a bet at a certain price it's locked in (on either side of the bet).

I've said this before, but my experience betting on an exchange was excellent. I'm not sure why it hasn't caught on in experiments here.

How to make the model work for the tracks also is a problem for the industry to figure out (which gives me little hope given the competence displayed), but imo that's the best solution.

[dilanesp]

My "solution", which I realize I will never convince anyone of, is to give a preference to people on the track by closing betting at 1 minute before post time for off track and internet bettors while allowing people on track to bet at the windows and self service machines only until the start.

That would basically destroy the incentive for computer players putting money in late, because sharpies will see the odds changes at the track and be able to react to them. It's basically using one group of sharpies against another.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I think we all agree the main problem is the late odds changes.

It's going to be difficult for any bookmaker to set prices that are better for us than the current system. No matter how sharp, they are basically just another set of handicappers working with imperfect knowledge and incomplete/sometimes inaccurate information. If anything the prices will be worse or they'll cut off the winners.

IMO, the solution is exchange wagering. Not that we'll get consistently better prices, but at least when you choose to make a bet at a certain price it's locked in (on either side of the bet).

I've said this before, but my experience betting on an exchange was excellent. I'm not sure why it hasn't caught on in experiments here.

How to make the model work for the tracks also is a problem for the industry to figure out (which gives me little hope given the competence displayed), but imo that's the best solution.

Exchange Wagering WAS supported by players when it was available.

As an FYI, for the longest time, after exchange wagering was offered in Australia, total thoroughbred handle saw year over year growth - not just on the exchange - but on the Tab (parimutuel wagering) as well.

It never caught on in here in the US because Track Management and Horsemen made a concerted effort to deny major track signals to exchange platforms.

In 2011, after TVG/BetFair had successfully lobbied the California Legislature and Governor's Office to add language to SB1072 authorizing exchange wagering, I showed up at a public CHRB Meeting to voice support for one of the agenda items:

Exchange Wagering.

I recall being one of only 2 or 3 people in the room (among a hundred or so) in favor of Exchange Wagering.

I recall Track Management and Horsemen sending a seemingly endless parade of speakers to the podium not just opposed to exchange wagering but who outright vilified it.

It didn't take me long to realize they were never going to allow exchange wagering here in the US - unless they had their own exchange platform.

There was even a speaker from CDI (who other than Twinspires) doesn't have a presence in California - who took the podium and mentioned CDI had been working on an exchange platform.

Imo, a look at the track owned vs. non-track owned ADW platforms back then told me tracks weren't about to develop their own ready for prime time exchange platform any time soon.

Almost all of the innovation in the ADW world (rebates, handicapping contests, text file upload, intuitive interfaces for rapid ticket construction, downloadable wager history detail to .csv file, etc.) was being made by the non-track owned entities such as Premier Turf Club, AmWager, etc.

On top of that Betfair had at least a decade head start on the tracks when it came to an exchange wagering platform.

I'd still love to be proven wrong.

But fast forward to present day, and I've seen nothing to change my mind.

Exchange wagering on major track signals isn't going to happen here in the US any time soon.


-jp
.

[Nitro]

Thanks for mentioning “exchange wagering”. Based on the explanations, it sure gets my vote as well. I also like the idea of closing the remote betting prior to them loading the horses into the gate. A minute sounds about right.
I wonder sometimes why those in the industry can’t see the forest for the trees? Yet time and again a lot of good ideas are presented by many here.

[mike_123_ca]

The U.K. has successfully had fixed odds wagering as far back as I can remembered. I see no reason why the same is not possible on this side of the pond.

Cheers

[TrifectaBox]

Originally Posted by MJC922

If I ask you to offer a fixed odds line would you not think the best line to offer would be the final odds on the board or as close as possible to it? Figure out how to get there. My word, you know what they say about commonsense. That's ok I get it, keep thinking about offering the morning line. smh

You might be able to get a good paying job , helping them post the 'true' final odds 7 hours before the race . Hear they are always looking for that kind of wizardry. Hard to come by.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by TrifectaBox

You might be able to get a good paying job , helping them post the 'true' final odds 7 hours before the race . Hear they are always looking for that kind of wizardry. Hard to come by.

How about you tell me what odds you would accept 7 hours before and then 20 mtp it'll either be a bet or no bet? Aside from the red tape there's no reason why that can't happen tomorrow at least at the major tracks. Keep in mind the odds you're expecting people to destroy will be pulled out of the horizontals. These are finalized pools that of course typically include CAW money. This isn't going to be another sport of kings casino allowing people to bet into the morning line (if it is then I agree with you 100% it's DOA). On top of these long-term known accurate percentages that you'll be betting into is a significant takeout that will be applied of course making everything generally speaking an underlay in the first place. The CAW are everyone's favorite bogeymen who have allegedly squeezed every last ounce of value out of the pools. That's what you'll be presented with here are those odds and I do have my doubts when people think it's going to be this feeding frenzy free-for-all to bankrupt the bookie at those odds.

[TrifectaBox]

Don't they post fixed odds long in advance..... which would negate any peek at multi race wagers , or the tote?

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by TrifectaBox

Don't they post fixed odds long in advance..... which would negate any peek at multi race wagers , or the tote?

They can try to do it that way if they want to. I wouldn't, except maybe on the biggest of races.

This IMO should really be about experimenting to find multiple new and compelling wagers to add to the menu as a supplement.

Find out what people who are betting on sports might find to be an attractive and compelling wager. Fixed odds is probably going to be part of it in some way. We already know for most of those people as well as most of the ones we've lost over the years that long horizontals aren't what they find to be compelling.

We have the long horizontal crowd already locked in and they aren't going anywhere unless they're finally fed up with drugs and breakdowns. HISA is working on that. Racing does long horizontals well. It needs to shore up what it hasn't been doing so well and bring in some new options too.

From my standpoint and I'm probably an outlier but I'd be satisfied with just a select handful of fixed odds offerings on a race. Like offer fixed odds on the first three favorites in the race and base those three odds offerings on the long horizontals action which means you don't offer those on the first race of the card. In addition to that try to offer at least one match-up i.e. horse against horse option per race if possible. Just find a pair of horses closest in odds and offer it as a money line at 8% vig. Could be the fourth and fifth choices in the race, doesn't matter as long as they're close, that's your wager to compete with a sports bet. It's a start... try some things, see what happens. The tote will still be there.

Maybe the matchups could be identified more in advance, that would be nice. I don't know, they can experiment with that if they want to. Let Mr. Aragona pick out a few pairs of inseperable horses on the card. Offer them at -115, if they're really that close you probably won't have to worry about about moving the line but I don't know. Maybe line movements will be part of what we finally end up with. That's fine. Whatever we do end up with I think it'll definitely be a much better 'gambling game' than what we have right now.