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 Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 01-20-2018, 08:59 AM   #151
Fager Fan
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlsoEligible View Post
Surely you don't think that horse players are the only breed of gambler who bother to study statistical data and past performances before putting down their money? Come on now.

No, I don't see any difference. If you want people to wager on your product, you can't just count on them to throw money at you based on gut feelings or horse names. Sure, some casual $2 bettors will do that, but not over any sustained period of time.



^ This is the correct answer, except make basic PP's free, and then charge for more advanced metrics and stats.

Asking for some basic free data is not unreasonable. It's in the industry's best interest to provide that information to anyone and everyone who may be curious about betting horses. Not hide it behind paywalls, require account signups and deposits, or nickel and dime people who already took the time and effort to show up at your facility and want to bet.

If other sports can do this, there is no reason that horse racing cannot. The idea that it can't be done because <insert track> or <insert ADW> will lose a few bucks is a great example of why racing continues to struggle. We're unable and unwilling to come together and work as an industry on anything. And we're too short-sighted to look past our own bottom lines to see the bigger picture. Otherwise we'd realize that something like this would be good for the industry, and benefit everyone, and that everyone includes themselves.
But the BUSINESS of those sports doesn't revolve around betting and the importance of the stats.
Fager Fan is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-20-2018, 11:40 AM   #152
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fager Fan View Post
But the BUSINESS of those sports doesn't revolve around betting and the importance of the stats.
The major sports leagues know that a lot of what drives interest is gambling. Not for everyone, but for many. Why else would the NFL have injury reports and fine teams for lying about them?
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-20-2018, 01:57 PM   #153
GMB@BP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by castaway01 View Post
If you believe this then you'd be amazed at the amount of data serious fantasy sports players look at, much less the guys betting thousands on an NBA game.
What is mind boggling is its this type of person that horse racing would surely appeal to, the data driven analysis, conclusions, etc.....but racing does its best to drive those people away rather then pull them in.
GMB@BP is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-20-2018, 02:03 PM   #154
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj View Post
The major sports leagues know that a lot of what drives interest is gambling. Not for everyone, but for many. Why else would the NFL have injury reports and fine teams for lying about them?
This is true but slightly misses the point. The NFL does this because it historically HATED gambling- they suspended Paul Hornung, a Hall of Famer, simply for being friends with gamblers, and made Joe Namath, the most popular player in the league, sell his nightclub for the same reason.

The NFL's injury report rules are intended to prevent teams from creating a pool of inside information that can be sold to gamblers.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-20-2018, 02:26 PM   #155
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj View Post
The major sports leagues know that a lot of what drives interest is gambling. Not for everyone, but for many. Why else would the NFL have injury reports and fine teams for lying about them?
Long before I ever gambled I was a stat junkie for all sports, be it baseball, basketball or football. They made the games and players more interesting. It helped create a lifetime bond to the sports.

The release of injury reports was not to accommodate bettors, although it did just that, it was to erase any perception that gambling controlled the outcomes of the games.
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-20-2018, 02:36 PM   #156
ultracapper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,943
Same as Andy, I was a baseball stats junkie. I loved the numbers. When I was introduced to the DRF, it had that same effect on me as the MLB boxscore. But the DRF was even better, you could easily place legal bets that you knew would be paid immediately upon completion of the race.

This may sound funny, but I'm not, by nature, a gambler. If it weren't for the belief that those numbers could tell me a story and help me determine the outcome of a race, I never would have started playing the horses.
ultracapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-21-2018, 11:09 AM   #157
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mc990 View Post
Agreed. I imagine anyone posting on this forum is savvy/experienced enough though to check will pays before placing any kind of bet. 90% of the complaining could be avoided by doing so.

Anyone who argues the multi race pools aren't efficient and aren't indicative should be jumping into them with both feet! Can't have it both ways

I wonder how much of it is a self fulfilling prophecy as opposed to separate pools coming to the same conclusion.

30 years ago I used an IBM clone to create a chart of win odds and corresponding fair exacta payoffs. I used to walk around the track with a notebook looking at exacta payoffs vs. the win odds and put my bets into the better pool. I was doing exactly what the whales are doing except I was trying to do it manually (and with smaller bets of course).

More money is in the double and other exoctic pools. Therefore, the assumption is the exotic pools are more efficient than the early betting in win pools. But that isn't necessarily so. As far as I know, there is no rule that says the double pool has to be more efficient just because it's bigger. Some people may be driving the win odds in that direction on the assumption they are getting value (and may not be) as opposed to independently agreeing. IMO, the only use for that information is what you are saying. It gives you a tool for predicting what people are going to do with the win odds.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"

Last edited by classhandicapper; 01-21-2018 at 11:21 AM.
classhandicapper is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-21-2018, 12:16 PM   #158
jay68802
Registered User
 
jay68802's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 15,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper View Post
I wonder how much of it is a self fulfilling prophecy.

30 years ago I used an IBM clone to create a chart of win odds and corresponding fair exacta payoffs. I used to walk around the track with a notebook looking at exacta payoffs vs. the win odds and put my bets into the better pool.

I was doing exactly what the whales are doing except I was trying to do it manually (and with smaller bets of course).

More money is in the double and other exoctic pools. Therefore, the assumption is the exotic pools are more efficient than the early betting in win pools. But that isn't necessarily so. As far as I know, there is no rule that says the double pool has to be more efficient just because it's bigger. Some people may be driving the win odds in that direction on the assumption they are getting value. IMO, the only use for that information is what you are saying. It gives you a tool for predicting what people are going to do with the win odds.



I have posted in other threads that one thing I pay close attention to is the double payout to my selection. The odds for that payout sometimes make the double a more attractive bet than a win bet in the next race. Most of the time the double payout does not indicate the win odds, but shows where my selection will be in rank. If the rank of my selection is higher than the morning line rank, it becomes a red flag. If it has a lower rank than the morning line, it is encouraging, and if it is the first or second lowest payout, I look at the double odds in hope of getting more value in that pool, than I will probably get in the win pool.

Yesterday at Gulfstream in the 3rd race, the eventual winner, All Go, was 5-1 when the gates opened. He broke well and the odds went to 7-2, his morning line. This horse was the second choice in the doubles from the previous race, the #2 horse in morning line. His odds in the last dump was 1-1, a correction in the win pool, that brought him back in line and even though it probably angered a few bettors, was predictable.

In the 5th race the eventual winner, Lead By Example, was 12-1 when the gates opened. He broke well and the odds went to 6-1, 6 points below his morning line. This horse was the 8th choice in the doubles pool from the previous race, and the 7th choice in the morning line. His odds in the last dump was 7-2, a correction in the win pool that defies logic. This is the odds swing that make me believe that the playing field is not level.
jay68802 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-21-2018, 12:21 PM   #159
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by jay68802 View Post
[/B]

I have posted in other threads that one thing I pay close attention to is the double payout to my selection. The odds for that payout sometimes make the double a more attractive bet than a win bet in the next race. Most of the time the double payout does not indicate the win odds, but shows where my selection will be in rank. If the rank of my selection is higher than the morning line rank, it becomes a red flag. If it has a lower rank than the morning line, it is encouraging, and if it is the first or second lowest payout, I look at the double odds in hope of getting more value in that pool, than I will probably get in the win pool.

Yesterday at Gulfstream in the 3rd race, the eventual winner, All Go, was 5-1 when the gates opened. He broke well and the odds went to 7-2, his morning line. This horse was the second choice in the doubles from the previous race, the #2 horse in morning line. His odds in the last dump was 1-1, a correction in the win pool, that brought him back in line and even though it probably angered a few bettors, was predictable.

In the 5th race the eventual winner, Lead By Example, was 12-1 when the gates opened. He broke well and the odds went to 6-1, 6 points below his morning line. This horse was the 8th choice in the doubles pool from the previous race, and the 7th choice in the morning line. His odds in the last dump was 7-2, a correction in the win pool that defies logic. This is the odds swing that make me believe that the playing field is not level.
When was the last time that the odds dropped noticeably on a horse that DIDN'T break well?
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-21-2018, 12:29 PM   #160
lamboguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston+Ocala
Posts: 23,655
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
When was the last time that the odds dropped noticeably on a horse that DIDN'T break well?
what do you think a guy that is calling the break is going to bet the horse that breaks last? for your information, they are going to call the horse that breaks on top 99% of the time. the other 1% are the ones they call because they are not wearing full power eye glasses.
lamboguy is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-21-2018, 02:27 PM   #161
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper View Post
I wonder how much of it is a self fulfilling prophecy as opposed to separate pools coming to the same conclusion.

30 years ago I used an IBM clone to create a chart of win odds and corresponding fair exacta payoffs. I used to walk around the track with a notebook looking at exacta payoffs vs. the win odds and put my bets into the better pool. I was doing exactly what the whales are doing except I was trying to do it manually (and with smaller bets of course).

More money is in the double and other exoctic pools. Therefore, the assumption is the exotic pools are more efficient than the early betting in win pools. But that isn't necessarily so. As far as I know, there is no rule that says the double pool has to be more efficient just because it's bigger. Some people may be driving the win odds in that direction on the assumption they are getting value (and may not be) as opposed to independently agreeing. IMO, the only use for that information is what you are saying. It gives you a tool for predicting what people are going to do with the win odds.
I think exotic pools are less efficient because so many bettors don't know the odds.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-21-2018, 03:29 PM   #162
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper View Post
........More money is in the double and other exotic pools. Therefore, the assumption is the exotic pools are more efficient than the early betting in win pools. But that isn't necessarily so. As far as I know, there is no rule that says the double pool has to be more efficient just because it's bigger.....
In California the DD pools are rarely as big as the win pools. Looking at the probables after the first leg is probably not the least bit helpful, especially if a longer price has won the first leg.
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-21-2018, 04:52 PM   #163
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
In California the DD pools are rarely as big as the win pools. Looking at the probables after the first leg is probably not the least bit helpful, especially if a longer price has won the first leg.

With doubles you can get the probable for every combo, you don't need the will pays.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-21-2018, 05:01 PM   #164
iamt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by jay68802 View Post
[/B]

I have posted in other threads that one thing I pay close attention to is the double payout to my selection. The odds for that payout sometimes make the double a more attractive bet than a win bet in the next race. Most of the time the double payout does not indicate the win odds, but shows where my selection will be in rank. If the rank of my selection is higher than the morning line rank, it becomes a red flag. If it has a lower rank than the morning line, it is encouraging, and if it is the first or second lowest payout, I look at the double odds in hope of getting more value in that pool, than I will probably get in the win pool.

Yesterday at Gulfstream in the 3rd race, the eventual winner, All Go, was 5-1 when the gates opened. He broke well and the odds went to 7-2, his morning line. This horse was the second choice in the doubles from the previous race, the #2 horse in morning line. His odds in the last dump was 1-1, a correction in the win pool, that brought him back in line and even though it probably angered a few bettors, was predictable.

In the 5th race the eventual winner, Lead By Example, was 12-1 when the gates opened. He broke well and the odds went to 6-1, 6 points below his morning line. This horse was the 8th choice in the doubles pool from the previous race, and the 7th choice in the morning line. His odds in the last dump was 7-2, a correction in the win pool that defies logic. This is the odds swing that make me believe that the playing field is not level.

Neither of these horses broke that quickly, or established an obviously better position that quickly in the race. Lead by Example particularly bettered only 3 or 4 horses out of the gate and was 4th/5th 3 wide when the updated odds first displayed.
iamt is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-21-2018, 10:04 PM   #165
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj View Post
With doubles you can get the probable for every combo, you don't need the will pays.
My message wasn't very well written. I am aware of the probables I was just countering the notion that DDs had a larger pool than the win pool.
AndyC is online now   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 04:24 PM.


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.