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 Handicapping Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 03-08-2012, 01:16 AM   #1
chickenhead
Lacrimae rerum
 
chickenhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: at my house
Posts: 7,308
Gamblers Fallacy

Have never had a database that made this sort of query easy, just wondering if anyone had ever looked into it with a very large sample size.

Any evidence of the immediately prior race outcome affecting next race betting pools (basically the just ended event causing underestimation or overestimation of repeat occurring)?

i.e.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

the roi of projected front runner after prior race front running winner.
vs
the roi of projected front runner following win by closer.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

the roi of pp following that pp win.
vs
the roi of pp following that pp loss.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

the roi of jockey following jockey win.
vs.
the roi of jockey following jockey loss.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

the roi of trainer following trainer winner.
vs.
the roi of trainer following trainer loss.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

the roi of favorite following favorite prior race winner.
vs.
the roi of favorite following non-favorite prior race winner.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
the roi of longshot horses after longshot prior race winner.
vs.
the roi of longshot horses following favorite prior race winner.


I'd expect them to be weak in most cases, you could string two duplicate priors together to make them stronger I'd guess.
chickenhead is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-08-2012, 05:25 AM   #2
Overlay
 
Overlay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 7,706
I understand what you're saying, but would such behavior necessarily be a "fallacy"? Are the outcomes of the events truly independent in the same sense that they would be in a game of pure chance? For example, perhaps the outcome of the prior race is indicative of a track bias that would be equally applicable to the next race, and it would be perceptive (not fallacious) to pick up on that, and to take it into account when handicapping and wagering.
Overlay is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-08-2012, 08:00 AM   #3
hencicleva
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 66
I've often wondered this and also don't know if I can actually research it from my DB.

I think it would take more than one race to affect the collective betting psyche, such as when the favorite loses the first 3 or 4 races. People will react differently, some (eroneously) thinking the fav is 'overdue' and others thinking that the track is not playing true to Speed Ratings (FT). As Overlay says the 2nd group may not be wrong.
hencicleva is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-08-2012, 08:59 AM   #4
DeanT
Registered User
 
DeanT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,962
The Wall Street Journal had an article (a little bit) related to this with investing.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...toWhatsNewsTop
DeanT is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-08-2012, 09:39 AM   #5
pondman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: California
Posts: 1,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickenhead
Any evidence of the immediately prior race outcome affecting next race betting pools (basically the just ended event causing underestimation or overestimation of repeat occurring)?
I don't think the sentiment of the crowd and a streak has an inverse relationship. For example if Baze/Hollendorfer have a losing streak, I don't believe the crowd rationalizes that the next one needs to be bet. I think the crowd will feel the pain and avoids the pair, and that's when a Baze/Hollendorfer play gets +5-1. When I express it this way, I as the individual am falling prey to the fallacy.

The crowd itself doesn't feel the gamblers sentiment. The crowd goes along with the trend, and avoids the bets when on losing streak, and bets when on a win streak. I believe the crowd will always overbet on a win streak or underbet on a losing streaks.
__________________
Wind extinguishes a candle and energizes fire.
Likewise with randomness, uncertainty, chaos: you want to use them, not hide from them. You want to be fire and wish for wind. -- Antifragile, Nassim Taleb

Last edited by pondman; 03-08-2012 at 09:41 AM.
pondman is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-08-2012, 10:11 AM   #6
Ocala Mike
Registered User
 
Ocala Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,005
Gamblers Fallacy

Back in the days of WPS and DD betting only (no gimmicks), the last race of the day at NYRA would often produce an underbet favorite winner. It was usually a Starter Handicap race, and quite formful; only way to "get out" for the day for many people was to plunge on a longshot, so there was a bias away from the chalk.

Don't have any "database" to prove this, but I guess this comes in as "anecdotal."


Ocala Mike
Ocala Mike is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-08-2012, 10:18 AM   #7
chickenhead
Lacrimae rerum
 
chickenhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: at my house
Posts: 7,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlay
I understand what you're saying, but would such behavior necessarily be a "fallacy"? Are the outcomes of the events truly independent in the same sense that they would be in a game of pure chance? For example, perhaps the outcome of the prior race is indicative of a track bias that would be equally applicable to the next race, and it would be perceptive (not fallacious) to pick up on that, and to take it into account when handicapping and wagering.
I agree, that's partially why I think it's interesting. Most dbases are built to treat races as independent events, it's more difficult to get them to answer questions like this. If they aren't truly independent, the win% might change if there really is something meaningful happening, I'm curious how the roi changes (if bettors are correct in whatever their perception about it is or not).
chickenhead is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-08-2012, 01:02 PM   #8
BIG49010
Registered User
 
BIG49010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ocala Mike
Back in the days of WPS and DD betting only (no gimmicks), the last race of the day at NYRA would often produce an underbet favorite winner. It was usually a Starter Handicap race, and quite formful; only way to "get out" for the day for many people was to plunge on a longshot, so there was a bias away from the chalk.

Don't have any "database" to prove this, but I guess this comes in as "anecdotal."


Ocala Mike
I believe Bill Quirn touched on this in his book, I know this isn't the first time I have heard this about a favorite paying more in the last race of the day.
BIG49010 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-08-2012, 01:49 PM   #9
GameTheory
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,128
I have a feeling that these kind of relationships have probably broken down (or weakened, anyway) in this era of simulcasting where you are not necessarily thinking about the last race at a particular track when you've played 4 other tracks in between races. However, if the first four races of the day are all won wire-to-wire on the rail or something like that, people certainly take notice. But does that then make it a good idea to bet the closer? Probably not.
GameTheory is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-08-2012, 01:58 PM   #10
Robert Fischer
clean money
 
Robert Fischer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 23,512
There are times when a major event will influence subsequent events.
__________________
Preparation. Discipline. Patience. Decisiveness.
Robert Fischer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-08-2012, 11:22 PM   #11
Ocala Mike
Registered User
 
Ocala Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,005
Gamblers Fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Fischer
There are times when a major event will influence subsequent events.
Amen. Not only on the racetrack, i.e., did anyone think the Cubs had even a chance to beat the Marlins in their 2003 Game 7? Preordained.


Ocala Mike
Ocala Mike is offline   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 06:27 AM.


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.