Trying to explain all the weird betting on Preakness 2022

[biggestal99]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

"“You can’t have a horse be 80-1 in a $1 million double pool and 13-1 in the win pool and seriously think that’s a bunch of Joe Blows taking a flyer on a long shot,” he said. ”


Those are the words of just another idiot who can't comprehend that a bunch of Joe Blows have zero to do with a $1 million double pool, and that citing such a thing as evidence at all in this matter is clueless thinking.


DeRosa would sound more intelligent if citing Rick's Natural Star as a tangent to the way Preakness win wagering was distributed.

quite correct. just about zero joe blow dollars in the double pool (80-1)
a whole lot of joe blows dollars in the wps pools. (13-1)

apples to oranges. not derosa finest work (full disclosure: ed and i have had a few dust ups over the years regarding horse racing and betting)

Allan

[ranchwest]

It's Tuesday. Is NBC going to show the end of the race? I think Fenwick is rounding the far turn now.

Seriously, I can't think of ANY scenario where betting that horse would be a good idea.

[iamt]

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

Conspiracy theory alert

I don't buy the public did it for a second. Seems to me like the mega whales knew Epicenter wasn't a win candidate and bet several others in the field. I'd imagine they were getting crazy high rebates for the day to boost handle. If you know Rosario is gonna take back like that and that it would be slow pace............???????

This must rank up there with the all time absurd comments/theories.

Rebates for major days are less, not more.

Even if they were higher, and the whales got the whole takeout back they're still betting into absurdly low prices, with much better value in the exotic pools.

[Parkview_Pirate]

Yeah, the win odds for the Preakness itself never came close to matching up with the approximate win odds from the doubles, both the 12th-13th on Sat and the BES-Preakness doubles. That tells me the whales laid off the win pool in the Preakness itself.

Wish we could see more odds like that the rest of the year.

It was quite a shock to me to see those odds, since I was keeping an eye on the double payouts. 5-1 on Early Voting seemed almost too good to be true, especially the way the track was playing.

[iamt]

The only way the win prices end up as they did, is if the whales were incredibly inactive in the win pool.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by iamt

The only way the win prices end up as they did, is if the whales were incredibly inactive in the win pool.

This makes sense.

[Suff]

[Suff]

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

Excerpt:

HRN’s Ed DeRoss.

I read his tweet..the one where he staked his life and reputation the pools weren't reflecting comingingled money with 25mtp. He implied it was intentional and nefarious.

Then I read his apology.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by iamt

The only way the win prices end up as they did, is if the whales were incredibly inactive in the win pool.

It's hard for whales to manipulate a win pool in a Triple Crown race. There's too much money in the pool AND the odds are constantly tracked. They certainly could mess around in the exotics though.

I'm reminded of the time a betting coup ended up on national television at Santa Anita. Urgent Request should have been 15 to 1 in the Santa Anita Handicap, but took a huge amount of late money (including some bets from the owner) and dropped all the way to 3-1. He then went out and won the race for fun.

The thing is, ABC was televising the race, so the whole thing ended up on national television and got a lot of attention.

I would imagine that someone engaging in shenanigans in the win pool of a TC race would get noticed and this would result in a lot of scrutiny- and these folks often don't want scrutiny.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

It's hard for whales to manipulate a win pool in a Triple Crown race. There's too much money in the pool AND the odds are constantly tracked. They certainly could mess around in the exotics though.

I'm reminded of the time a betting coup ended up on national television at Santa Anita. Urgent Request should have been 15 to 1 in the Santa Anita Handicap, but took a huge amount of late money (including some bets from the owner) and dropped all the way to 3-1. He then went out and won the race for fun.

The thing is, ABC was televising the race, so the whole thing ended up on national television and got a lot of attention.

I would imagine that someone engaging in shenanigans in the win pool of a TC race would get noticed and this would result in a lot of scrutiny- and these folks often don't want scrutiny.

Good points.

When win pool opened, it was similar looking to pool manipulation ( this triggered some on social media ), but larger scale and the prices actually did behave mostly that way, save some extra money on Epicenter.

I doubt someone actually 'seeded' the pools with money on no-hopers to help players.

It's hard to believe that Giacamo Syndrome or Rich Strike itis caused such a significant behavior either. Any such examples after Giacomo? Interesting/Puzzling market

[iamt]

The whales aren't manupulating pools, or engaging in any shenanigans, they are just betting very aggressively and very late when they see an overlay.

If they identified something in the Preakness they would have bet, either placing multiple bets over a sustained period or fiting something decent in late.

The fact they didn't suggests they didn't identify an overlay in the race, with the shorter odds runners all around their perceived fair price.

[cj]

Originally Posted by iamt

The whales aren't manupulating pools, or engaging in any shenanigans, they are just betting very aggressively and very late when they see an overlay.

If they identified something in the Preakness they would have bet, either placing multiple bets over a sustained period or fiting something decent in late.

The fact they didn't suggests they didn't identify an overlay in the race, with the shorter odds runners all around their perceived fair price.

That seems impossible with the two worst horses in the race being ridiculous underlays.

[iamt]

They still didn't cover the takeout, between them and a rebate it was probably close to square bet wise at that point. It could jave just fallen there were no great opportunites in the win pool at that point.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by iamt

They still didn't cover the takeout, between them and a rebate it was probably close to square bet wise at that point. It could jave just fallen there were no great opportunites in the win pool at that point.

I’m not buying that.

If they are often finding overlays and betting “win” on the typical race on the typical day, they had to see opportunities in that race at those odds. Those odds were insane.

I suspect the pool was large and heavily weighted to unsophisticated money. So it takes more money to move the odds. Maybe they weren’t quite that active for some reason.

[PalaceOfFortLarned]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I’m not buying that.

If they are often finding overlays and betting “win” on the typical race on the typical day, they had to see opportunities in that race at those odds. Those odds were insane.

I suspect the pool was large and heavily weighted to unsophisticated money. So it takes more money to move the odds. Maybe they weren’t quite that active for some reason.

Not buying it either.

There were 5 horses in that race that had to either fall down, or run their worst absolute career race by a massive margin in order for Fenwick to beat them.

There was no reason for him to be under 40/1, much less under 20/1. This was a horse that was 6(1-1-0) coming in and had passed a single horse in 6 lifetime starts. His lone career win was 1M40yds in 1:40 and change. Fenwick being at 13/1 and Early Voting being at nearly 6/1 is one of the craziest odds lines in a race of that magnitude that I can recall.