The first computer generated figs??

[fmhealth]

Interesting article in a financial blog on what could be the first numbers ever computer generated. It poignantly points out the fact that T/O rates truly have a deleterious impact on the remote possibility of becoming a profitable player.

You have to read down a bit, but it's worth a few minutes of your time. Enjoy.

http://www.thereformedbroker.com/

[maddog42]

Originally Posted by fmhealth

Interesting article in a financial blog on what could be the first numbers ever computer generated. It poignantly points out the fact that T/O rates truly have a deleterious impact on the remote possibility of becoming a profitable player.

You have to read down a bit, but it's worth a few minutes of your time. Enjoy.

http://www.thereformedbroker.com/

Nice article. Never heard of the guy.

[ALL CIRCUITS GO]

interesting..

thanks for sharing..

[thaskalos]

Can this article really be believed?

Did New York REALLY have a 14% takeout on win bets until the mid 1980s...and WHEN did they raise it to 18%?

And if a bettor held the HUGE edge over the game which would lead to $10,000 monthly profits (betting $100 a race...on ONE TRACK!)...would that edge be completely negated by a 4% rise in takeout?

[maddog42]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Can this article really be believed?

Did New York REALLY have a 14% takeout on win bets until the mid 1980s...and WHEN did they raise it to 18%?

And if a bettor held the HUGE edge over the game which would lead to $10,000 monthly profits (betting $100 a race...on ONE TRACK!)...would that edge be completely negated by a 4% rise in takeout?

Betting $500 per day for 40 days would be 20k. 50% return on investment? Possible, but not likely.

[On Spec]

Originally Posted by maddog42

Betting $500 per day for 40 days would be 20k. 50% return on investment? Possible, but not likely.

Yeah, I hate to tell the reformed-broker son that his father was BS-ing him about why he stopped playing the ponies, but . . .

I'm willing to concede a high ROI if the dad was among the first using computing power to beat the races -- but the story falls apart for me (as it seems to have for others) when it hangs on a mere 4% change in takeout making a 50% ROI vanish.

If he was hitting a 25% ROI, he was probably experiencing several net-minus days that could have washed out a marginally committed horseplayer.

I'm guessing the guy made a profit, but not enough of one to override the fact that he liked spending his time somewhere besides a racetrack, or engaging his mind on something more interesting to him.

[Pace Cap'n]

That would be a 28.5% rise in takeout, not 4%.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Can this article really be believed?

Did New York REALLY have a 14% takeout on win bets until the mid 1980s...and WHEN did they raise it to 18%?

And if a bettor held the HUGE edge over the game which would lead to $10,000 monthly profits (betting $100 a race...on ONE TRACK!)...would that edge be completely negated by a 4% rise in takeout?

it was under 15% for awhile, then it got raised up and when BARRY SWARTZ came in he got the takeout lowered and paid to the dime which was huge especially in today's world of simulcasting. paying to the dime is bigger than a lower takeout. in the long run, NYRA gives the player a better deal even with smaller rebates than most other tracks including places like penn national and charlestown in the wps pools. the problem with new york racing is that so much business comes in from the casino's in nevada at lower signal fees than what adw's and simulcast racetracks pay.

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

it was under 15% for awhile, then it got raised up and when BARRY SWARTZ came in he got the takeout lowered and paid to the dime which was huge especially in today's world of simulcasting. paying to the dime is bigger than a lower takeout. in the long run, NYRA gives the player a better deal even with smaller rebates than most other tracks including places like penn national and charlestown in the wps pools. the problem with new york racing is that so much business comes in from the casino's in nevada at lower signal fees than what adw's and simulcast racetracks pay.

I did not know that. That explains a lot.

[maddog42]

Originally Posted by On Spec

Yeah, I hate to tell the reformed-broker son that his father was BS-ing him about why he stopped playing the ponies, but . . .

I'm willing to concede a high ROI if the dad was among the first using computing power to beat the races -- but the story falls apart for me (as it seems to have for others) when it hangs on a mere 4% change in takeout making a 50% ROI vanish.

If he was hitting a 25% ROI, he was probably experiencing several net-minus days that could have washed out a marginally committed horseplayer.

I'm guessing the guy made a profit, but not enough of one to override the fact that he liked spending his time somewhere besides a racetrack, or engaging his mind on something more interesting to him.

Well the main point of the article is well taken. A 4% raise in takeout WOULD
make a lot of that money disappear maybe as much as 40%. The Churn and the extra 4% would certainly take a lot. I will try to simulate this.

[maddog42]

Originally Posted by On Spec

Yeah, I hate to tell the reformed-broker son that his father was BS-ing him about why he stopped playing the ponies, but . . .

I'm willing to concede a high ROI if the dad was among the first using computing power to beat the races -- but the story falls apart for me (as it seems to have for others) when it hangs on a mere 4% change in takeout making a 50% ROI vanish.

If he was hitting a 25% ROI, he was probably experiencing several net-minus days that could have washed out a marginally committed horseplayer.

I'm guessing the guy made a profit, but not enough of one to override the fact that he liked spending his time somewhere besides a racetrack, or engaging his mind on something more interesting to him.

Sorry I was computing this like a rebate.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

BARRY SWARTZ

So not only did you butcher his name, but you put it in ALL CAPS so nobody would miss it?

I love this board....

[Stevecsd]

They have already posted a new article for 6/28 which didn't talk about horse racing. I was wondering what the heck you guys were reading, because today's article is about technical vs. fundamental stock picking.

Here is the new link to yesterday's article:

http://www.thereformedbroker.com/201...nding-an-edge/