Robo Betting

[razzle]

Rocky,
Has your analysis allowed you to form an opinion about the integrity of the pools you observe?

[plasticman]

Raz, this is a great question for rocky about pool integrity. If someone is betting after the start (similar to what Drexel boys did) in to the So Cal pick 6s, it would sort of show an anomaly in the prices. Would love to hear Rocky\'s take on this.

[Mathcapper]

Raz – From what I've observed, the vast majority of late odds changes after the gates open is simply the win odds getting into line with those I've estimated from the DD pools. That doesn't mean I don't think past-posting isn't still happening though.

What needs to be done - and I haven't done this yet – is to see if there is a correlation between horses that get the early lead and their win odds being less than those established by the DD pools, however minor the effect might be, because that's where these guys are most likely focusing.

Steve Klein examined over 200,000 races in "The Power of Early Speed," and he found that just by betting on the horse that has the lead after the first call, you can achieve a whopping 66% ROI. With that kind of expected return, a careful cheater can make a pretty good living without even affecting the odds very much.

Mike Maloney, the VP of Regulatory Affairs at HANA, has been a pretty strong advocate in this area. He shared an interesting anecdote at the 34th Symposium on Racing & Gaming back in '07 (see attached pp.18-21) about how he himself was able to bet a race long after the race had started. He railed against the lack of upgraded modern infrastructure to protect the integrity of the pools back then, and I have no reason to believe much has changed since.

Once I gather enough data to make a statistically significant conclusion about frontrunners and the correlation of their final odds with DD pool estimates I will share it with everyone.

Best,

Rocky
34th Annual Symposium on Racing & Gaming

[razzle]

Thank you.  I remember the Maloney story.  I look forward to more from your research.

[plasticman]

Rocky, i think something that could also be researched is to see if there\'s also any association between higher than normal win prices and horses who break 1 or 2 lengths \"slow\". That would show that there\'s some money coming off those runners after the bettor or bettors see one or two jumps of the race. Betting on speed horses after seeing a few steps is not as easy to accomplish than getting refunds on slow starters.

[TGJB]

Raz-- if you want to do a public service, and since you presumably got the survey yourself by email, you might want to point out to Sherman (who did not read the survey) that the article he posted a link to (written by someone who also didn\'t read the survey) misquoted the questions. There was no \"are drugs bad\" question, and the questions re betting gave a choice of no difference, more or less. I wrote that one myself. It was not \"do you bet less\".

I let TDN know that when I have some time I\'ll be writing a letter to the editor about the public reaction to the Round Table. Which has been f______ shameful. To say nothing of dangerous.

[Boscar Obarra]

Nothing I\'ve seen at the majors would imply any past posting in any pool.


 Unless they are going out of their way to bet losers.

[Boscar Obarra]

You\'re right, being able to cancel a bet on a slow breaker would be an \'edge\' , but again, I\'m not seeing it.

 since so much money is bet late, if the bet was not in the high 1000\'s, any \'cancel\' would be near impossible to detect without access to the internal tote records.

[richiebee]

JB:

Is it true that the survey was limited to HANA members and T-Generates? 800 plus
people total?

I am aware that there were time constraints, but, in my opinion, for this survey
to have more influence, it needed to be much larger. Go to racetracks and
simulcast facilities all over the US, distribute 20,000 surveys, give out a $3
betting voucher for each completed survey.

I do not want to belabor this but there are two distinct groups: The Jockey Club
does not really represent horseplayers; it represents breeders, owners, people
who rely on racing and breeding to make a living. The Jockey Club is supposed to
be dedicated to the improvement of the breed and the preservation of the Sport,
and partially because of drugs but mostly due to greed and short sightedness, it
has not been very successful.

Horseplayers quitting the game because of the abuse of performance enhancing
materials? I know horseplayers who quit when they tapped out, when they got
married, when they found a hobby they enjoyed more, but the same horseplayers
who say they will quit the game because of the unlevel playing field will be
saying the same thing in five years. Am I wrong?

Not to paint with broad strokes, but the HANA group seems takeout obsessed, so
if the takeout was cut in half and the permissible level of bute was doubled, I
think everything would be OK. And before some HANA member goes off on me, my
tongue is somewhere inside my cheek, which some might believe difficult as my
foot is very close to my mouth right now.

Trainers/Owners/Breeders getting out because they can\'t compete with the cheats,
I am sure it happens all the time.

[razzle]

I did take the survey, and I liked it.  I have not seen the results, nor had I read Ken\'s post until you mentioned it.  I don\'t think Ken uses either product so I doubt if further comment would be of use.
No poll is perfectly free of bias.  Therefore all polls are vulnerable to criticism, whether informed or not.  A quick read of the write-up Ken cited reeks of the uniformed naysayer variety.  
I think it is an unfortunate paradox that those who use the patterns of TG or Rags as a primary handicapping tool are likely to be more sensitive to the effects of enhancers, yet, if one samples TG and Rags users, one introduces selection bias.
Similarly, if it were a poll about the integrity of the pools, or costs of ownership, capturing my responses in an attempt to broaden the survey base would be detrimental since I do not focus enough on either to have a useful opinion.  
Where are the full poll results posted?  Can anyone access the poll questions now?  
Sent from my iPad

[TGJB]

Richie--

1-- I have only dealt with the JC since 2008, so I can\'t speak to before that. But they do not \"represent\" breeders or ay other group. Sure, there are breeders among them, and I am not naive enough to think nobody has an agenda. But from dealing with the last two top guys (Marzelli and Gagliano) I can tell you their concern as an organization is the overall welfare of both the sport and the industry.

2-- They were looking for serious horseplayers who bet serious money-- customers. They wanted to show that there was a real price to pay for inaction. They came to us for the same reason Willie Sutton robbed banks.

Hegarty, who has had a h_____ for me for a long time, took a shot because he could. The people who bet serious money are sophisticated and watch closely because they have to, and they see the jumpups and draw conclusions. A lot of sophisticated players also use TG. So there is overlap-- that\'s why they think what they do, not because I talk about it here.

3-- The issue is not whether horseplayers quit. It\'s whether they avoid races or bet less because of drugs. I know I do.

[TGJB]

http://www.jockeyclub.com/roundtable_replay_2013.html

Yes, the poll was trying to prove a point. But the article Sherman posted wasn\'t just uninformed, it was a blatant misrepresentation. The guy who wrote it (not Sherman) can\'t be considered credible going forward.

[Mathcapper]

Boscar Obarra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nothing I\'ve seen at the majors would imply any
> past posting in any pool.

After tracking the late wagering shifts at the major circuits for the past couple of weeks, I have to agree with Boscar, I\'m just not seeing any evidence of it.

Almost all of the late shifts in win pool odds are in the direction of those already established by the DD Will Pays, whether it relates to a frontrunner or one that\'s stumbled from the gate.

If it\'s going on, the cheaters are smart enough to keep their bets small enough so that it\'s not readily detectable on the toteboard.

[miff]

Math,

Pool integrity way more complicated than tracking the late money.In NY there is a review of a large wager cancelled AFTER the bell when a very short priced horse broke bad and went from 1-2,in the gate,to 4-5 after the race began,unheard of as no other runner got a large bet to drive up the price.

The cancel feature at a rebate shop may be the culprit and highlights the danger of a select few having remote access to the live pools.If any one thing could ruin the game it is pool manipulation/integrity yet the Clueless Clowns rarely speak of it.New software to deal with this coming in November yet very little is published about it.Spoke to former NYRA CEO Charlie Hayward about this back a few years and he swore the systems and checks were rock solid and past posting was impossible.I\'m not certain.


Mike