Talk all over about these giant bets on chalk and longshots alike that are coming in then cancelling.
Been seeing strange goings on in the pools for a while, but this obvious stuff in the win pool is getting the Hoi polloi riled up and its bad for the game .
What, they\'re powerless to put a stop to it?
Do you think it should be stopped? Isn\'t it my right to cancel a bet I made?
One theory I have is that trifectas, supers, multi-horizontals are overbet with the favorite and if I bet $30k to win on a hopeless longshot I can entice DUMBBB bettors to include this \"favorite\" in all these bets to increase my odds with legitimate contenders in those bets?
But I have always thought the bettors in last five years are far more sophisticated than before so this wouldn\'t work. Others thoughts?
The situation in the 7th at Hollywood today drove me nuts. Not sure what other things have happened. If this is allowed to go on, it is really easy to just manipulate the pools for your own good. For example, let\'s say you really like a 5-1 shot but you want to bet $10,000 and you think it will move the odds. well, one thing you can do is just put $50,000 on the horse to win, make the horse 1-9 for most of the betting. Not only will nobody else bet on your horse, but they will bet plenty on the other horses....then, as you watch the horses loading, you cancel $40k of your bet.....voila.....you got $10k down on your horse and you preserved your price. if this keeps up, it will kill win betting because nobody will feel confident about what prices they will get. Somebody cancelled a $30,000 bet at Hollywood with 2 minutes to go to post, so this is not far-fetched.
The problem here is that it\'s happening too often.
I have no problem with being able to cancel a mistake, I wouldn\'t want to have to eat a big bet because of a typo. But I\'d like to think the people in charge of pool integrity are looking into this and finding out where this is all coming from, and if it\'s legit or not.
I wouldn\'t do it. And i believe in honesty and integrity. But I think this is a legitimate way to play with people\'s bets and pools. I truly do. If you want to do this, all power to you. It\'s not me, but it\'s part of the game that I don\'t care if you bet a hopeless 30-1 shot....
And Nick Zito....guess miff believes he just doesn\'t get the horses other people do. I disagree....held off on this for a few days but had to say it. He gets decent horses....just not as \"capable\" as Pletch, brown, etc.
I read on Paulick that the CHRB investigated and traced it to an XB Select customer who bets big and is prone to changing his or her mind.
No one decides to bet 30k, stupid and sloppy, on a 30-1 shot and then changes their mind. Can\'t imagine that was the storyline.
And no , its not fair or acceptable to make large bets that you intend to cancel. You can BET anything you like, anytime you like, on the open or at the bell, but the cancelling is total bs.
Just reinforces an old truism.
The biggest BS line in racing is: \"Bet early, and avoid being shut out\".
The truth, of course, is: Bet as late as you are able, to avoid getting snookered on your price.
Applies to straight betting, of course . . .
if its a misclick it would be cancelled right away.not 5 minutes later
Didn\'t say it made any sense. Just repeating what Paulick reported:
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/the-biz/chrb-cancelled-wagers-not-part-of-scheme-to-manipulate-odds/
I also saw on Twitter yesterday that Paulick asked David Israel of the CHRB if this sort of thing was acceptable, and Israel\'s reply was \"no, stay tuned\". So, perhaps there is more to come.
My guess is that many people believe this is wrong because it appears to be manipulating/playing with the pools because some of these bets are on hopeless horses to win. But what if I have $30k to win on Life at Ten, the announcers are telling you that something is clearly amiss, that Johnny V thinks something isn\'t right and it is two minutes to post? I should be able to cancel that bet with that information shouldn\'t I? You can\'t make these a \"case by case\" basis saying \"Oh that\'s different, we will allow that bet to be canceled.\" If I bet $30k and decide I want to cancel before the race begins for whatever reason or whim that should be my right until the gates open.
Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My guess is that many people believe this is wrong
> because it appears to be manipulating/playing with
> the pools because some of these bets are on
> hopeless horses to win. But what if I have $30k
> to win on Life at Ten, the announcers are telling
> you that something is clearly amiss, that Johnny V
> thinks something isn\'t right and it is two minutes
> to post? I should be able to cancel that bet with
> that information shouldn\'t I? You can\'t make
> these a \"case by case\" basis saying \"Oh that\'s
> different, we will allow that bet to be canceled.\"
> If I bet $30k and decide I want to cancel before
> the race begins for whatever reason or whim that
> should be my right until the gates open.
Well, all this does is make the game more and more unappealing for people to participate in.
The problem is that the events that have happened recently are not somebody getting a new piece of information. These events are very clearly somebody trying to mess with other people and it stinks and it is extremely unpleasant. It is obvious that this is what people are doing and if the people in charge do not agree that it is obvious, then they do not belong in positions of responsibility.
This game is already dying because of so many problems....all it needed was another thing to make it unattractive.
Fair mount,
Sorry but your posts are as clueless and out of touch as the Paulick report \"findings\"
Manipulation of the pools and the perception that this dying game is fixed, is only going to accelerate its demise.
Some jerkoff putting 30k on a horse that had less than a 1 percent chance to win, then let his bet stand for 20 minutes till 2 minutes to post, was intended to manipulate wagers. It was no mistake. Or change of his mind.
This kind of crap, along with odds changing during the race, is why nobody plays this game. (And of course drugs) The average horse bettor is maybe 60 years old. The next generation has no interest in this game. Dismissing all this as \"part of the game\" is being blind to the bigger picture
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fair mount,
>
> Sorry but your posts are as clueless and out of
> touch as the Paulick report \"findings\"
>
> Manipulation of the pools and the perception that
> this dying game is fixed, is only going to
> accelerate its demise.
>
> Some jerkoff putting 30k on a horse that had less
> than a 1 percent chance to win, then let his bet
> stand for 20 minutes till 2 minutes to post, was
> intended to manipulate wagers. It was no fucking
> mistake. Or change of his mind.
>
> This kind of crap, along with odds changing during
> the race, is why nobody plays this game. (And of
> course drugs) The average horse bettor is maybe
> 60 years old. The next generation has no interest
> in this game. Dismissing all this as \"part of
> the game\" is being blind to the bigger picture
You said what I meant better than I did.
How about we knock off the insults. Agree on the larger picture, though I don\'t think we know what happened in that specific case.
I\'m a lot more concerned about the pick 6 will pays Friday at Aqu. Despite the carryover, they averaged about 75% of the parlay. The one that came in (a very bad beat at the wire for me) paid less than half the parlay.
Fairmount, the Life at Ten situation or even an example like Barbaro breaking through the gate are completely different than what this bettor was doing, they are apples and oranges. Nobody would question a large refunded bet on Life at Ten (or Barbaro in the Preakness), but this situation had no similarities to LAT or some horse breaking through the gate, it was just a guy betting a large amount on a horse with very little chance to win while having no intention of keeping the bet.
And the knuckleheads in charge wasted over a year worrying about getting rid of Lasix because that\'s what the \"public\" wanted! Yeah right!!!
Integrity of the pools should be at the top of the list of everyone that makes decisions in this game, imho.
Has anyone ever checked to see if the odds on the betting exchanges adjust to reflect those in the local pool when these situations occur?
I\'m wondering if bettors on Betfair might be seeing the big difference in odds and rushing to bet these horses accordingly, based on the view that the \"smart money\" is talking and they\'re getting a huge overlay on the exchange. If so, a veritable fortune could be made by the perpetrator if he had access to the exchange himself.
After placing his big bet, he could simply lay the horse on the exchange after the odds adjust and back all the others in the field. After he cancels his bet and the odds on Betfair adjust back, he could then cover all his bets on the exchange and lock in a huge profit without having to even run the race.
I\'m not sure if there\'s enough liquidity on Betfair to pull such a scenario off, but if so, and if the bettors there respond accordingly to changes in win odds in the local pool, it\'s the ultimate risk-free arbitrage.
The particular horse is question was hopeless going in so unless exchange bettors are neantherthals, they are not biting.This is playing out more like some ego driven trust fund millionaire looking for attention.A similar ego fool, Richie the mad bomber, was making huge opening flash plays in NY some years ago but did not cancel(lost $2 million,went to jail for embezzling a big union fund)
If this player is in the exotics, he could screw up and trigger the computer program players if he cancelled at the last second.If this player even contemplated betting $30k on that hopeless slug, we should all be happy to have a stone sucker betting against us.
Still think it\'s an attention grabbing thing rather than an attempt to manipulate the pools.
Mike
I witnessed the whole thing on TVG. Horse in question (#6) was 30-1 ML opened at 8-5 and finished last. The winner (#5) was the postime favorite and won. Why can\'t this just be a screwup on the part of the bettor (bet the wrong horse and corrected it when he/she found the mistake)??
Now if you want to talk about Mountaineer, that\'s a different story.
According to someone in Cali mutuels, the cancelled bet was not re-bet on another horse. The 30k disappeared from the win pool.This was no mistake that the bettor \"caught\" with 2 minutes to post.
What the bettor was trying to do only he/she knows but a mistake is unlikely.The fact that it happened before with the same bettor confirms the Clueless Clowns turned a blind eye so not to lose this players volume.
Tough to separate legit mistake from someone trying to manipulate.
All but 3 horses (the winner, the last place finisher and the #4 horse) went off at odds higher than the ML, with 2nd place finisher at 27-1 - up from 10-1 ML. I see your point, Miff.
DRF.Com › Hollywood Park: California Horse Racing Board looking into possible odds manipulation
11/11/2013 3:57PM
Hollywood Park: California Horse Racing Board looking into possible odds manipulation
By Steve Andersen
DRF:
INGLEWOOD, Calif. – The California Horse Racing Board is looking into several large win bets made at Southern California Thoroughbred tracks that were withdrawn in the minutes before post time.
Racing board spokesman Mike Marten said officials had been in contact with Xpressbet about a win bet of approximately $30,000 made through the account-wagering service and removed from the pool in the minutes before Saturday's seventh race at Betfair Hollywood Park.
"We've been in contact with Xpressbet and we don't expect a recurrence," Marten said.
An Xpressbet spokesperson said his organization was working with the racing board "to limit this type of behavior from occurring going forward."
"We're taking measures to prevent this," said the spokesperson, who did not wish to be named.
Saturday, the $30,000 win bet was made on Ekahi in a $16,000 claimer over seven furlongs. The bet made Ekahi the 3-5 favorite with 13 minutes to post. With six minutes to post, Ekahi was the even-money favorite.
The bet was withdrawn from the pool with approximately three minutes to post, causing Ekahi to drift to 27-1 by post time. Ekahi, listed at 30-1 on the morning-line, was last of nine throughout the race. The race was won by Cast a Doubt, the 5-2 favorite.
A similar situation occurred twice in the same race at the Santa Anita autumn meeting on Oct. 20. The bets were withdrawn before the race was run
Nice to see they aren\'t completely brain dead. Gives one hope.