Archives » Betting
All That Way
... to get DQ'd. Sounds like Bill Finley's Italian experience was more frustrating than the takedown of Admiral Bird last Friday, although for my money, the worst disqualification so far this year happened at Keeneland, April 12.
Posted by JC, Jul 9, 2008 11:45 PM
Slumming
What's a degenerate gambler to do when he's off on a Monday but his wife's working? Why, bet Finger Lakes and Fort Erie, of course!
Anyone reading who has tips for the Monday tracks (a list that also includes Delaware, Philly, Prairie, Colonial, Indiana, and Yavapai) please leave a comment.
Update: And so ends the Monday afternoon betting experiment. I played three pick fours and went 2/12. That's right, I managed just two winners among a dozen races. There was a race at Finger Lakes I went five deep in a field of seven, and the two horses I didn't use completed the exacta! Brutal day.
Posted by Ed, Jun 23, 2008 12:35 PM
It's a Mirage; I'm Tellin' Y'all it's Sabotage
After seeing what the pick four paid on Tuesday at Colonial Downs (races four through seven), I've decided to focus on the track in the hope of securing a similar overlay using two 9-to-2 horses and two favorites.
After taking care of my husbandly duties at home (e.g., walking/feeding the dog, laundry, starting dinner), I settled in with my Friday Colonial PPs, my Equineline account, and my Pilot G-2 05 blue pen to begin handicapping the twilight pick four.
Much to my dismay, some of the races aren't coming up on Formulator.
No matter, I'll just tackle that two-year-old MSW race (the sixth) by looking up some pedigrees and trying to unearth some juvenile and/or turf form. Whoa there, big fella! Nothing doin' there either. Equineline accepts my orders but cannot retrieve the actual information.
Clearly this is a bipartisan conspiracy (have you ever seen Democrats and Republicans get along as well as they did today at the Congressional hearing?) to keep people from participating in Thoroughbred racing.
Many of us saw/heard firsthand the horseplayer getting ignored during the hearing, and the subcommittee has already put its words into action by keeping us from handicapping our favorite tracks.
At the very least, NYRA heard I started my boycott of its signal over the takeout increase, and it has made all information to other tracks inaccessible to me.
Either way, I'm getting out my tin foil hat.
Seriously, though ... check out those charts I linked to (races four through seven) and tell me how that pick four returned $2,900+ for a deuce.
Posted by Ed, Jun 19, 2008 09:35 PM
Increase Takeout, Decrease Wagering
I can only assume that many of the people who populate the Thoroughbred racing corner of the blogosphere also wager on the product, so it was with some surprise that I surveyed the landscape and found that only Steve Crist mentioned (with appropriate outrage) that New York will increase the takeout on its bets to 1%.
As one commenter on the Cristblog noted, some mucky-mucks cited New York's "relatively low takeout" compared to other states. This holds true in the WPS pools and possibly in the two-horse wager pools (DD and exacta), but the trifecta, superfecta, and pick N pools were never a bargain at 25% and are even less so at 26%.
To me, an increase in takeout is far more grievous than Breeders' Cup Ltd. moving the female races to Friday or renaming the Distaff the Ladies Classic. I realize that both changes rubbed people the wrong way, but the change is made in the spirit of trying something new in the hopes of increasing interest.
A raise in takeout, however, is nothing but a spit in the face to the game's customers, the people who largely conduct the economic engine. I just plain don't understand why anyone would want to support that kind of treatment by funneling their hard-earned dollars into New York's wagering pools -- especially those with the 26% takeout.
The only thing I like more than horse racing is a good old-fashioned boycott, and I am already looking forward to focusing my summer wagering dollars on Arlington, Ellis, and Del Mar. That is, away from Saratoga.
Posted by Ed, Jun 17, 2008 08:15 PM
Nicanor's Odds?
I know it's nearly sacrilegious to discuss anything but the Belmont Stakes this week, but a hot debate has erupted in my office concerning what Nicanor's odds will be when he debuts.
For those who don't know, Nicanor is the late Barbaro's full brother. He's a two-year-old currently in training with Michael Matz at Fair Hill. The Blood Horse's Claire Novak has been maintaining a blog dedicated to the colt's development.
In discussing Novak's most recent entry, I said to a coworker that I am enjoying the hype because it will lead to Nicanor being the "bet-against of the millennium" when he finally debuts. My coworker disagreed saying that the public does not necessarily hammer pedigree plays first-time out.
To me, though, this is not a pedigree play so much as a hype play. The Green Monkey is the primary example of this. He was 1-to-2 in his debut despite the fact that it took 1 1/2 years for him to start following his record sale. His workouts were excruciatingly slow, and the backstretch whispers indicated that he couldn't beat any of trainer Todd Pletcher's most inferior workmates.
Still, the $16-million horse was finally in a race, and he was 1-to-2 when finishing third by seven lengths. He started twice more and was favored both times.
This is not meant as a commentary on what level of success Nicanor can achieve. Good horses run to or even out run their odds many times. For every Big Brown, who paid $29.40 when he won his debut, there is a Casino Drive, who was 1-to-5 when he won his debut.
I say Nicanor couldn't possibly be higher than even money when he runs, and if he debuts at Laurel or Delaware then 1-to-2 is probably the ceiling. My coworker says that no one could possibly make the projection without seeing how he's been training, who else is in the race, etc.
What say you?
Posted by Ed, Jun 4, 2008 10:21 AM
Double Will-Pays
Pimlico Special-Preakness double will-pays from Ed.
The daily double wager linking the Pimlico Special Handicap (G1) with the Preakness Stakes (G1) provided few surprises in how the betting will go for the middle jewel of racing's Triple Crown on Saturday, as the double with Special winner Student Council and Big Brown would pay $20.20.
Student Council paid $16.40 to win, which translates to a 1-5 price on Big Brown. The second choice was Gayego, the only other Derby starter to enter the Preakness, at $235.80, which is about 14-1.
Special-Preakness double will-pays:
| # | Horse | Will-Pay | Win Odd Equiv |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Macho Again | $569.80 | 37-1 |
| 2 | Tres Borrachos | $1162.80 | 78-1 |
| 3 | Icabad Crane | $587.60 | 38-1 |
| 4 | Yankee Bravo | $410.20 | 26-1 |
| 5 | Behindatthebar | SCR | SCR |
| 6 | Racecar Rhapsody | $391.20 | 25-1 |
| 7 | Big Brown | $20.20 | 1-5 |
| 8 | Kentucky Bear | $287.60 | 18-1 |
| 9 | Stevil | $915.40 | 59-1 |
| 10 | Riley Tucker | $567.40 | 36-1 |
| 11 | Giant Moon | $544.80 | 35-1 |
| 12 | Gayego | $235.80 | 14-1 |
| 13 | Hey Byrn | $572.20 | 34-1 |
| Equivalent win odds = approximately 119.3% | |||
Related: Steven Crist has fun with the numbers, reworking the odds without Big Brown.
Posted by JC, May 16, 2008 09:00 PM
The Tickets
With Jessica and I both bullish on the Arkansas Derby, it only makes sense that we would combine our efforts in the hopes of hitting the tri.
We're playing Gayego w/ Colonel John and Z Fortune w/ ALL and Gayego w/ ALL w/ Colonel John and Z Fortune.
We'll also back those tickets up by playing Colonel John and Z Fortune on top with Gayego keyed in the second and third spots. We're betting $60 each on getting Gayego plus at least CJ or Z Fortune to hit the board, but when two people share an opinion on a 20-to-1 horse you gotta hammer it, right?
19 w/ 6, 10 w/ ALL ($36); 19 w/ ALL w/ 6, 10 ($36); 6, 10 w/ 19 w/ 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18 ($24); 6, 10 w/ 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18 w/ 19 ($24)
We're tossing Big Brown.
Posted by Ed, May 3, 2008 01:04 PM
Appetizer
There's 33 races scheduled between now and 7 p.m. Saturday, but to hell with patience. I'm heavily invested in #8 Baladeva in here.
He took money sprinting on the turf at Gulfstream and got into trouble when hitting the gate, but still came home in a snappy :11.40.
Baird sticks around, Ward can fire second start, and he gets a drop in class. There's some negatives, but 2-to-1 is fair value on this one to me, and he's 5-to-2 now. Let's get this pick four single home!
Well, that sucked.
Posted by Ed, May 1, 2008 12:44 PM
Record Handle Recorded
- Through the Oregon wagering hub, and this in a year of upsets and disruptions across ADWs:
- Doubts about the times for Dubai World Cup races run after the Godolphin Mile have been raised by the Racing Post, whose clockers came up with discrepancies of almost a second in five races, including the Duty Free, in which Jay Peg was credited with a track record:
Emirates Racing Authority has removed fractional times for the races from its web site and is conducting an inquiry.
Posted by JC, Apr 4, 2008 10:00 AM
Betting Monitor Needed
In two years, eight instances of past-posting involving New York races. In one test of live data from three races in 2007, a series of bet cancellations after the break in one. Last fall, past-posting at the Fair Grounds, as reported by bettor Mike Maloney. Since September 2007, analysis of pool data from 40 tracks reveals patterns suggestive of suspicious activity. Yes, I'd say it's time for an independent wagering monitor and a modern tote system.
Posted by JC, Mar 26, 2008 11:25 PM
Laurel Play #3
- Race 1, 5 furlongs, maiden special for two-year-old fillies. Trainer Michael Trombetta debuts Moon Jumper, a daughter of Malibu Moon, off a string of steady works. He's 20% with two-year-old firsters in the past year and post-time odds on the filly will probably be around 5-2/2-1. She's a likely winner, but I'm leaning toward another possibility: Kosmo's Buddy, making her second start for trainer Timothy Salzman. The filly finished fourth in her debut at Pimlico on May 31 at 3.40-1 odds; show horse Extra Sexy Psychic came back to win her second start, a maiden special at Pha, with a 73 Beyer. There are a couple of gaps in her works since that start, but she did breeze four furlongs in :49 on Saturday. If odds are 3-1 or better, I'll play $20 to win.
- Feature race at Saratoga today is the Adirondack Stakes, which drew a deep field of nine. Likely favorite is More Happy, who was visually impressive winning her Del Mar debut. Sky Mom jumps out with her big 94 Beyer over the Churchill strip two back and Passion for the ease of her debut win at Arlington, and A to the Croft is intriguing, if only because Churchill horses have been doing so well at the Spa. I'm still thinking about how to play this one ...
Posted by JC, Aug 15, 2007 07:15 AM
Laurel Play #2
No Laurel play for me yesterday, with Gust and others scratched from the eighth after Friday's races were taken off the turf. I'll try again today, in the sixth, a six furlong maiden special for babies with a standout firster in X Rated Cat, who debuts for trainer Timothy Salzman off a string of strong workouts. X Rated Cat is by prepotent sire Storm Cat and out of champion filly Xtra Heat, whose first foal to race, Southwestern Heat, won first out for Salzman in April and then went on to place behind Street Magician in the Hirsch Jacobs Stakes on the Preakness undercard. Play: $20 to win if odds are 2-1 or better, and I'll try for the exacta using X Rated Cat, Wonder Mon and Take a Leap ...
Posted by JC, Aug 11, 2007 12:45 PM
Laurel Play #1
Laurel's "noble experiment" begins Friday: For the track's 10-day summer mini-meet, takeout is 11.4%* on all wagers. No exceptions, no catches. It's a beautiful, horseplayer- friendly gesture, and I've resolved to do my bit to make it a success with a Laurel play of the day. The first: Race 8. A field of 11, 1 1/8 miles on the turf. I'll go with Gust, one of two lightly raced maiden winners stepping up into allowance company entered here. A three-year-old colt trained by Graham Motion, Gust starts off a debut win at Colonial on July 3 in which he came from well off the pace to split horses in the stretch. He's 5-1 on the morning line, trainer and jockey are 47% for 2006-07, and he's had three fine works at Fair Hill since that first start. Play: $20 to win.
*I should have written, takeout averages 11.4% on all wagers, since takeout actually varies from 10.75% to 12% depending on the bet.
Posted by JC, Aug 9, 2007 10:30 PM
Wagering Securely
Bettors, don't worry about past-posting or outdated tote system technology: Late odds changes, like those that had Any Given Saturday dropping from 2-1 to 9-5 and Xchanger rising from 29-1 to 32-1 as the Haskell field headed into the clubhouse turn, are your fault:
That's TRA vice president Chris Scherf, in a letter to the editor written in response to a Steven Crist column about bettors' wagering security concerns. Scherf assures us that TRPB is monitoring wagering patterns and on the lookout for anything nefarious. I don't doubt that, and trust the system is secure. But that doesn't make the late odds changes any more acceptable (especially when they're bigger than $0.20 of a projected payoff) and the TRPB's monitoring system doesn't address issues of control or transparency, which are also vital to system integrity.
The industry has actually come up with a great system that would fix many of the problems associated with the current tote system. The Wagering Transmission Protocol (PDF), in development for nearly four years, will put host racetracks in control of validating and accepting wagers; allow off-track wagers to mingle directly into pools instead of waiting until the final cycle; assign unique identifiers to all wagers, allowing for instant and easy tracing; and generally make the system more secure and transparent. But implementation lags: WPT will be tested for 30 days at one racetrack sometime in 2007, then rolled out across the industry over the next couple of years. We just have to wait, and trust, until then.
Posted by JC, Aug 6, 2007 09:00 AM
All Quiet Re: Ellis Pick 4
My guess? Because it's Ellis Park, and it's one wager. If Del Mar announced lower takeout on the pick six or NYRA on all exotic plays, there'd probably be more buzz.
Pricci's right though that Ellis took a big step, and that lowered takeout, along with expanded wagering options, are necessary for the industry to climb past the $15 billion handle plateau it's been stuck at since 2000. T.D. Thornton briefly mentioned P2P platforms and betting exchanges in his Blood-Horse chat last month, only two weeks after an article applying "The Long Tail" to racing appeared in the magazine. The ideas are percolating; their implementation will be slow. That's the way of things in racing, where any innovations, particularly those that are technology-based, are approached gingerly, considered threatening to the business models that have stood largely unchanged for 80 years, rather than embraced as opportunities for tremendous, exciting growth. Other industries, such as music and print media, have been just as wary, but they haven't had the luxury of ignoring technology's disruptive effects and doling out changes on their terms to customers. What racing needs is a similar sort of pressure, a few good start-ups shaking up content and wagering models. That's when horseplayers and racing fans will start to get what they want, at the prices they're looking for.
More on the Ellis Park Pick 4: "For the first time ever, horseplayers now have a positive expectation on their investment" (MSNBC).
Posted by JC, Jul 10, 2007 06:00 PM
More Jackpots, More Fun
"It is easy to cite evidence that American thoroughbred racing is in moribund condition.... But anyone who paid attention to the events at Hollywood Park on Monday -- as most horseplayers did -- would come to a different conclusion about the health of the racing industry. Bettors wagered a record $7.59 million on the Pick Six and a total of $18.4 million on a routine eight-race program -- figures that would have been inconceivable in an era when the sport was supposedly healthier.... For any horseplayer with a pulse, Monday's pick six was irresistible" (WashPost).
Posted by JC, Jul 3, 2007 10:30 PM
Favorites Dominate Pick 6s
Horseplayers hit the pick six at Belmont, Churchill, and Hollywood, which were all offering sizable carryover pots on Wednesday, but favorites dominated the sequence at each track. At Hollywood, the longest price was $9.40 on Charisma Matters in the sixth, and the payout $5,193. Belmont players were saved from an even smaller return when 3-1 Our Top Cat was disqualified and placed second, behind 19-1 Karakorum Thunder, in the day's finale. Disqualifications are always controversial, and this one was no exception, but Left at the Gate makes a pretty good case that it was justified. Belmont paid $14,026. Churchill players did the best, with a payout of $41,722, largely thanks to longshot Unforgotten in the sixth, who paid $38 to win.
Posted by JC, Jun 21, 2007 08:45 AM
Hollywood Pick 6
You have to feel sorry for whoever it was holding the lone live pick six ticket going into the ninth race at Hollywood on Sunday. That was one bad beat, losing the chance to take down the entire pool when Candygram finished a head behind Warren's Kitten. But not too sorry, because now there's a giant two-day pick six carryover of $850,466 at the track for the rest of us to take a shot at. Let's take a look at the sequence ...
Race 3: 1 1/16m, turf, starter allowance, 3YOs and up. Casual Thunder makes his second start off a layoff, finished third against similar last month ... Lisa Lewis sends out Duty Roster, a deep closer stretching out from six furlongs ... Rival Islands seemed to like the surface and distance changes he got in his last, where he finished ahead of Casual Thunder by 1 1/2 lengths.
Race 4: 5f, synth, maiden claiming, 2YO fillies. Christopher Paasch, who does pretty well with first timers, sends out Steel Kitten. She's by Pine Bluff, who bequeaths some class but only scores with around 8% of his firsters ... King City Kitty, by freshman sire Gotham City, has shown some speed in the morning and has a solid workout record ... Skipper Mike finished second in her debut at the same level and gets blinkers, but has had no works in three weeks ... Clever Lady is the most experienced of the bunch and drops from the maiden special weight level.
Race 5: 1m, turf, allowance N1X, 3YOs. Robbos Courage was scratched from Sunday's Laz Barrera for this softer spot. Finished by less than a length to Euroglide in his last and is making a second start off a layoff. May be the speed in what looks like a paceless race ... Bernasconi makes his second US start for trainer Pat Gallagher. Finished third in his last, which was won by Silent Soul (second in the Will Rogers to Wordly). Probably has the most upside ... Unusual Suspect looks a cut below, but he's another making a second start off a layoff and figures to like the distance and surface.
Race 6: 1 1/16m, synth, maiden claiming, 3YOs and up. Bob Baffert sends out Lotta Gamble, who's making his third career start and dropping from $75,000 to $32,000 here. Flashed a smidge of speed in his last. Could improve ... Headcoach is another taking a class drop after disappointing as the favorite in his last start.
Race 7: 6f, synth, allowance N1X, 3YOs and up. Idiot Proof makes his third start off a layoff. Finished fifth in the San Pedro on April 8 after setting the pace, which he'll likely do here as well. He'll be tough to beat ... Saintly Son goes out for Jeff Mullins, gets a jockey switch to Richard Migliore ... Pick Vic will take money off his big Beyer maiden win.
Race 8: 6f, claiming, 4YOs and up, state-bred fillies and mares. O Bee Naki drops to $10,000 from $20,000 after proving herself uncompetitive at the higher level lately. She did win a starter allowance at the distance last November though ... Jimmie Pong and Sexy Operator will likely figure in the early pace but I wouldn't look for either at the end ... Star Quality, claimed for $25,000 in February, seems to have found her level at a lower price. She came in second in her last, her first in the money finish in five starts.
---
Wednesday's pick six pool climbed past $4 million, without my help. I was looking for a way to play until the early afternoon, when I just had to admit my options were a conservative $32 ticket or a big $576 ticket, and I didn't feel that great about either one. I added the pick six to my repertoire early this year, after circling around the wager for a while. My bankroll isn't huge, but when I looked at my wagering records last year, it became pretty clear that I do best with wins, exactas, and multi-race exotics. Playing an occasional pick six actually made sense. But I'm rigorous about the plays -- I like to there to be no more than one race I'm going into deeply because it looks chaotic and I prefer one solid single. I've had a little luck with the approach, and on Wednesday, it saved me some money when I had to concede that there just wasn't a good play for me. If I'd gone with the $32 ticket, I'd have hit 3-for-6. With the $576, 4-for-6. Ouch.
Posted by JC, May 22, 2007 05:30 PM
Shut Out
- Fleetheart wins, pays $4.80. I make nothing. My online betting service is an AmericaTab outlet and I'm shut out of Southern California and New York, the two circuits I play with any seriousness, thanks to the TrackNet-ADW mess, until -- like a lot of other players -- I go through the bother of opening and funding a second acount. So, all I could do last night was admire how the four-year-old filly dueled for the early lead and then rebuffed a game Lochinvar's Gold in the stretch to win by half a length, and console myself with the thought that I really didn't want to play a 7-5 shot, even one who looked as much like a sure thing as she did.
- The champ is back! In his first work since winning the Dubai World Cup, Invasor breezed four furlongs at Belmont on Wednesday morning (NYRA). Invasor is scheduled to start next in the Suburban on June 30.
Posted by JC, May 10, 2007 08:00 AM
Polytrack Unfair, Punters Claim
Trainers, owners, and jockeys have lots of praise for Polytrack, but British horseplayers are less than happy with race results on the synthetic surface:
Seems that since Polytrack was installed at the first British racecourse four years ago, the percentage of favorites at that track winning races has dropped from 36% to 30% and that of horses with odds greater than 10-1 winning has increased from 19% to 23%, which apparently has reduced wagering "to the level of a lottery, almost." It's that "almost" that kills the complaint. I haven't played Turfway, which is the only American track with the surface, but my understanding of Polytrack is that it eliminates track biases, allowing horses with different running styles to win. That's the kind of change that would seem to make handicapping and betting a lot more interesting -- which is exactly what the numbers cited above suggests, as does the 82.5% increase in handle that Turfway has seen since January 1 -- if horseplayers are willing to change their approaches to handicapping.
Anyone who plays California regularly will have to adjust to Polytrack starting in 2008. The state racing board passed a motion a few weeks ago mandating the state's racetracks install Polytrack or another synthetic surface by the end of 2007, which has Andrew Beyer fretting about "uniformity":
Beyer is specifically concerned that California tracks, "the only place in the racing world where horses regularly speed a half-mile in :44 flat or faster and keep running," will lose their distinctive speed-favoring qualities. Patrick of Pulling Hair and Betting Horses posted a pretty good response to Beyer's worry: "The surface is fair ... that means good speed will still kill in racing, and cheap speed will set up for stalkers, and ludicrous speed will be used on ships in Spaceballs and set up for closers."
More: Jennie Rees reports that all running styles are faring well on the surface, with speedy front-runners still winning a good percentage of races:
Posted by JC, Feb 28, 2006 12:00 PM
When the Board Talks
I read Brad Free's column on tote board action earlier this week with much interest. The concept of smart money is ridiculous, he argues. Yet, "It is downright stubborn ... to ignore unusual betting action without considering the possibility the action is meaningful" (Daily Racing Form -- sub. req.). True. But what I'm wondering about, and what Free doesn't really address, is how do bettors determine if the action is meaningful? The answer, I suspect, lies in the pattern of odds action.
I can think of three races in the past year where I observed truly unusual odds action that ended up pointing to the winner, and in each case, I dithered over whether what I was seeing was significant and whether I should incorporate it into any bets I made (I didn't, to my regret). But I can also remember races where actual odds differed from the morning line in a way that indicated the "possible existence of factors not previously considered" and ended up pointing to nothing.
The difference lay in how the odds action played out: What was noticeable in the three races I recall with unusual action that was not apparent in the odds action of other races is that in each of those three races, the odds changes were sustained and balanced.
In last year's MassCap, for example, Offlee Wild had a morning line value of 15-1, which he opened at. With the next flash of the board, his odds plunged to 6-5, and then stabilized at 3-1, which is where they remained until post time. Funny Cide, expected to be the overwhelming favorite at 8-5, drifted up to 2-1 -- which might not seem significant, except that the MassCap crowd was made up of many casual fans who intended to bet Funny Cide regardless of any other factors. Neither horses' odds fluctuated greatly after their new values were set, and the odds of other horses on the board hewed pretty close to the morning line. It was an instance of meaningful action on the tote board. And for anyone paying attention, it was a chance to cash a ticket.
Posted by JC, Mar 31, 2005 11:00 PM
Too Confusing
Paul Daley drove to Rockingham Park last Saturday looking forward to placing a Kentucky Derby future wager, only to be told by a teller that he couldn't -- the track wasn't taking any pool two wagers, even though they had taken pool one bets. "Churchill Downs uses United Tote as its wagering system and we use AmTote, and we felt that the tickets, which would say 'Oaks/Derby Future,' would have been too confusing for the bettor. As the races will be run eight weeks from now, bettors may not remember whether they had a Derby or an Oaks ticket and that the winning number on one ticket may be different than the one on the other ticket," explained Rockingham general manager Ed Callahan. Too confusing? May not remember? Thank you, Rockingham, for watching out for cognitively-challenged bettors. We need all the help we can get. (Lowell Sun)
Posted by JC, Mar 16, 2005 10:55 AM
Four Minutes Work
The appealing life of a pro punter who's very good at what he does: "After the first race at Plumpton on Monday, I was all for chucking in my job. I was at the course with Dave Nevison, ace punter, the faces' 'face', and he had just turned the 2.00 race, a low-grade hurdle, into a punting procession, pocketing £1,850. He had made more in four minutes than I could make in a fortnight, and all without the inconvenience of tax and National Insurance." (Guardian)
Related: A professional player at home: "The bettor, who asked to be unidentified, has Internet access to real-time odds, accounts at betting exchanges and rebate shops, live races on HRTV and TVG, and a high-speed printer that spits out Daily Racing Form past performances and workout reports from local clockers." (Daily Racing Form -- sub. req.)
Posted by JC, Feb 16, 2005 09:40 AM
About These Rebate Shops ...
Bill Finley's recent column on rebate shops, in which he argued that their existence was win-win for all of racing, had me about 75% convinced that rebate shops were forces for good. I took exception only to this section:
"At the very worst, the three rebate shops involved in the indictment, none of which have been charged with any crimes, are guilty of nothing more than accepting bets from some allegedly disreputable characters without going to lengths to identify them. When the individuals opened accounts and apparently started betting huge amounts the three shops involved, Lakes Region Greyhound, Euro Off-track and one run by the Tonkawa tribe, didn't ask many questions. Who would have? There's not a racetrack in America that would have turned that level of business away or had any reason to do so."
What Finley seems to be suggesting here is that if enough money is involved, there's no need for ethics: If a bettor or a bunch of bettors all using the same social security number throw hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars at a rebate shop, there's no reason to verify their identities or ensure that everything is on the up and up. Actually, doesn't the shop have more of an obligation to check out these customers?
A couple of recent mentions (Left at the Gate, Derby List) of Oaklawn mutuel manager Bobby Kreiger's remarks on the Del Mar forum site last summer have me rethinking the issue of rebate shops as a whole.
Finley basically argues that rebaters work for racing because they've substantially increased handle. What Kreiger says is that rebate shops create conditions that aren't fair to all players, which is why Oaklawn cut them off during the 2004 meet. Two things stick out in his comments: Bets from rebaters do drive up handle, but none of that increased handle goes to purses; and,
"Direct access to the wagering network enables the computer player to electronically scan and analyze wagers placed by all other players. Just prior to the start of a race, the 'linked' computers comb pools seeking underplayed wagering combinations relative to the merits of the horses. The program pays special attention to exacta combinations; it can look at all of them in a blink.
"When the program robotically pulls the trigger, a complex array of wagers, mostly exotics, is spread over the underplayed combinations. Essentially claiming all overlay value the pools for that race had to offer. They are taking the cream off the top.
"Getting this electronic 'last look' enables the computer program a consistent win of 97-cents on each dollar wagered. That's a steady loss of three cents on the dollar.
"However, add the ten cent rebate and it's a seven cent winner on the dollar. Consistently!"
Oh my. That's great news for a big bettor, but bad news for the industry.
Posted by JC, Feb 8, 2005 11:40 AM
OTB Future Looks Dire
The New York City OTB is considering "several doomsday plans" to halt the flow of red ink, including closing up to half of its betting parlors, merging with other betting outfits, and laying off employees. "Records show that OTB turned a profit of $123 million last year but still ended up $9.5 million in the hole, after NYRA and others in the state racing industry took $95 million, the state and city took $35 million, and more than $2 million was spent on miscellaneous expenses." (New York Daily News)
Posted by JC, Dec 23, 2004 04:25 PM
Playing the Market
Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban has a new venture: "I've decided to start a new hedge fund. However, this hedge fund won't invest in stocks or bonds, or any type of business. It's going to be a fund that only places bets. A gambling hedge fund.
"It won't be me figuring out what bets to place, or what games to play. This is a fund. I will find the best and the brightest, with a confirmable track record and hire them.
"It's an idea whose time has come." (BlogMaverick.com)
More: "Cuban to gamble on fund that could target racing" (Thoroughbred Times)
Posted by JC, Dec 3, 2004 08:45 AM
Windfall
The 2003 Breeders' Cup was a very lucky day for South Dakota resident Graham Stone, who, with his business partner Will Dixon, held the sole winning Pick 6 ticket. "The Stones were renting their house and now they own one about a minute away. They bought an SUV. Took the first family vacation in 17 years. He hasn't repaired any jewelry in six months and is thinking about what else might be out there for him. Amazing what you can do with $8." (New York Daily News)
Posted by JC, Oct 27, 2004 09:22 AM
An $8 Return on a $20 Bet
That's the best Keeneland's new Mutuel Fun wager did over the weekend. (Courier Journal)
Posted by JC, Oct 12, 2004 10:10 AM
Catskill OTB Failed to Comply With Law
A Daily Racing Form inquiry into the 2002 Breeder's Cup Pick 6 scandal "shows that Catskill routinely and consistently evaded state law by failing to send many statutorily required documents to the [New York State Racing and Wagering] board." The situation isn't much better now: "Even today, the relationship between Catskill and the board is hardly based on the letter of the law," reports Matt Hegarty in this lengthy investigative article in the DRF.
Posted by JC, Aug 15, 2004 12:15 PM
Watching Yet Another ...
Favorite win at Suffolk on Saturday had me wondering: Do favorites win more races at the East Boston track than the oft-cited 30% average? It wasn't the first afternoon I thought I perceived a high percentage of favored ponies win. A quick check of last week's results does show an above average number of races won by favorites (WBF):
| Suffolk Downs | ||||
| Dates & Races | % WBF | Average Odds | Bets | Winnings |
| 6/21: 9 | .67 | 1.50 | $18 | $30 |
| 6/22: 9 | .33 | 1.67 | $18 | $16.02 |
| 6/23: 9 | .44 | 1.33 | $18 | $18.64 |
| 6/26: 11 | .55 | 1.37 | $22 | $28.44 |
| Total: 38 | .50 | 1.45 | $76 | $93.10 (+23%) |
For comparison, Belmont during the same period:
| Belmont Park | ||||
| Dates & Races | % WBF | Average Odds | Bets | Winnings |
| 6/23: 9 | .44 | 1.64 | $18 | $15.84 |
| 6/24: 9 | .22 | 1.38 | $18 | $9.50 |
| 6/25: 9 | .22 | 1.28 | $18 | $9.10 |
| 6/26: 10 | .30 | 1.02 | $20 | $12.10 |
| Total: 37 | .30 | 1.35 | $74 | $46.54 (-37%) |
This is a small sample size. Too small, really, to draw any significant conclusions from, but the results suggest a bettor might have to work a bit harder to find wagers with value at a small track such as Suffolk.
Posted by JC, Jun 27, 2004 01:30 PM
Handicapping 101
If only I'd had Brad Free's excellent "Handicapping 101" (DRF Press) when I started trying to learn this game. The chapter on form alone elicited many, many aha! moments. My only quibble (and it's one I have with almost all handicapping books) is with his disdain for place and show betting. "Wagering to place and show is futile," Free writes. Oh, but such bets can be part of a sound wagering strategy. When judiciously made, they can pay off quite nicely. Example: In race two at Suffolk Downs on June 15, the favorite, Brickaback, was at 1-1 on the board, despite his listless appearance in the paddock. But Got a Ticket looked lively and had odds of 18-1. A quick perusal of his past performances showed there was no way he would win, and he wasn't a too likely second, but he was a very reasonable third, which is exactly what he ran, paying a lovely $17.80 -- making a show bet in this race a better investment than a win bet on the second favorite, Metfleet, who returned a mere $8.80.
Related: Steven Crist explains why a place bet on Smarty Jones in the Belmont would have made sense (Daily Racing Form).
Posted by JC, Jun 17, 2004 08:30 AM
