In the news today

[accountinquestion]

Not sure if anyone mentioned this in all of the above stuff, but races are far too easy to fix. From risk managment perspective, there is no way you could have traditional odds. It is one thing to get a sports team to collude .. or even a real world-class athlete who spent his life to get where he is to take a dive. It is another thing to get a jockey the public doesn't know to lay off on the big favorite. If horse-tracks used straight odds like normal sports, they'd be hammered by this sort of crap far too often.

[accountinquestion]

I probably should have used a moneyline sportsbet as my example rather than the Eagles +7.5 (where vig comes into play). Let's change the example to a bet on Eagles at +280 when placed and it moves to +135 by game time.

Nobody would stand for that. Your wager is based on the odds at the time of the wager and those odds are based on what has been bet up until that point. I don't see why horseracing shouldn't be the same way. Why should wagers and the betting pool made after your wager effect your wager?

You really are a Fucking Idiot.
I don't understand how you can count Two Tables and make Millions of Dollars in Blackjack but you can't understand the difference between Sports Betting and Race Betting.

Well, it isn't that he didn't understand them, he just didn't know them. It appears he never really spent any time at a horse-track... it is a weird thing to be a pro-gambler of 10+ years and have these sort of thoughts, but whatever, if you just stick with BJ counting I guess thats what happens. Watching and betting on the horsies was something I've done a few times before the local track closed. Was always fun. Didn't know WTF I was doing, but I did learn paramutual pools.

[kewlJ]

I probably should have used a moneyline sportsbet as my example rather than the Eagles +7.5 (where vig comes into play). Let's change the example to a bet on Eagles at +280 when placed and it moves to +135 by game time.

Nobody would stand for that. Your wager is based on the odds at the time of the wager and those odds are based on what has been bet up until that point. I don't see why horseracing shouldn't be the same way. Why should wagers and the betting pool made after your wager effect your wager?

You really are a Fucking Idiot.
I don't understand how you can count Two Tables and make Millions of Dollars in Blackjack but you can't understand the difference between Sports Betting and Race Betting.

Well, it isn't that he didn't understand them, he just didn't know them. It appears he never really spent any time at a horse-track... it is a weird thing to be a pro-gambler of 10+ years and have these sort of thoughts, but whatever, if you just stick with BJ counting I guess thats what happens. Watching and betting on the horsies was something I've done a few times before the local track closed. Was always fun. Didn't know WTF I was doing, but I did learn paramutual pools.

First, I created this thread for a different purpose, but then decided not to bring that discussion here, but unfortunately you can't delete an original post, you have to post something, so I posted "delete".

Monet brought this discussion here, which I started on another forum. I know HOW horse racing works! I just was expressing an opinion that it is kind of weird that you are not locked into odds when you place your bet. There is NO other bet like that.

The comparison is what if they did that on sports? The bet you place, say Alabama -120, turns into Alabama -230. You probably wouldn't have bet it at that line. Same with horse racing. If the odds posted when you bet are 4-1, you should get 4-1. Ridiculous that you can bet a horse at 4-1 and end up with 6-5 odds, when you probably wouldn't have been interested in those odds.

It was just a topic of conversation (on another forum), not a declaration that I don't know how it works. Is there any other wager that a person makes, casinos games ect, where they make a wager at one odds and and receive much less odds later?

[coach belly]

Ridiculous that you can bet a horse at 4-1 and end up with 6-5 odds, when you probably wouldn't have been interested in those odds.

Early betting can skew the odds, when there's far less money in the pool.

Betting early on weaker horses would artificially raise the odds of the stronger horses.

If bettors could manipulate the odds like that, they would lock strong horses in at long prices and crush the makers.

[redietz]

I probably should have used a moneyline sportsbet as my example rather than the Eagles +7.5 (where vig comes into play). Let's change the example to a bet on Eagles at +280 when placed and it moves to +135 by game time.

Nobody would stand for that. Your wager is based on the odds at the time of the wager and those odds are based on what has been bet up until that point. I don't see why horseracing shouldn't be the same way. Why should wagers and the betting pool made after your wager effect your wager?

You really are a Fucking Idiot.
I don't understand how you can count Two Tables and make Millions of Dollars in Blackjack but you can't understand the difference between Sports Betting and Race Betting.

Well, it isn't that he didn't understand them, he just didn't know them. It appears he never really spent any time at a horse-track... it is a weird thing to be a pro-gambler of 10+ years and have these sort of thoughts, but whatever, if you just stick with BJ counting I guess thats what happens. Watching and betting on the horsies was something I've done a few times before the local track closed. Was always fun. Didn't know WTF I was doing, but I did learn paramutual pools.

There's no reason for kewlJ to be familiar with pari-mutuel odds or horse racing. They're outside his area of expertise. He's not some degenerate who thinks he can conquer all aspects of something called "gambling." That kind of arrogance is for addicts and idiots.

[MaxPen]

100% on the fixing. The jockeys in Maryland at the harness track used to meet pre race and decide a number of races in advance. It was in their interest because of the way they got paid. This was back in the early 90's.
I wish I knew then what I know now...:-(

[The Boz]

100% on the fixing. The jockeys in Maryland at the harness track used to meet pre race and decide a number of races in advance. It was in their interest because of the way they got paid. This was back in the early 90's.
I wish I knew then what I know now...:-(

It goes back ever further. At Penn National, which RED knows, it was a complete fix. There was more money to be made betting on the horses compared to winning races. There was always collusion between owners, trainers and jockeys and the players reading the Racing Form and betting were the suckers.

You have to remember in those days Horse Racing was huge and the only game in PA. Nightly crowds on a weeknight measured in the thousands. And the simulcast rooms in AC were busy.

Anyways, I do remember a scandal after a few were charged with fixing but it was almost covered up with only a few jockeys and trainers banned from PA tracks. The true scam was far larger.

[regnis]

Pennsylvania racing is still a cesspool. An absolute joke in the industry. Anything goes and the officials let it go.

[redietz]

Pennsylvania racing is still a cesspool. An absolute joke in the industry. Anything goes and the officials let it go.

Not much to add. Old Wise Jungle saying: a 4/5 favorite at Penn National is an oxymoron. Or a snipe hunt.