Interesting Robotic Wagering discussion started by Frank Angst

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by odbaxter

Can someone please post a couple of links to these types of CRW's? I'm not necessarily going to give up the experience that picking my own winners brings, but not looking into this seems to be sticking my head in the sand.

Haven't seen where the CRW's have ever made that public offering opportunity suggested in Jagow's piece.. Having a discussion with Maury Wolff this afternoon to get the best understanding possible of the topic in its' entirety. Will find out.

[JolyB]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Having a discussion with Maury Wolff this afternoon to get the best understanding possible of the topic in its' entirety. .

This topic could make for a very interesting interview on ATR.

Will there come a point at which the CRW's ruin the assumptions of the other CRW's if too many of them are in the mutual pool at the same time?

[Port Conway Lane]

There is something that doesn't add up about the assumption, or the given that these programs are privy to the "final" odds and then have the ability to wager accordingly. The split second their last wager is placed the "final" odds change yet again.

While I understand that the return to a bettor who may have had the $20 winner may have been diminished by 15% in one circumstance, in another race the return on an $11 horse may have been 15% more than he would have had without the benefit of the CRW.

[Benny]

http://www.harnesslink.com/News/Inte...-gambler-79610

* sorry viideo links dead

Try this Oaklawn article http://swtimes.com/sports/sports-col...g-horse-racing

... “They’ve tried to sneak into our pools on multiple occasions … but we constantly monitor our pools for the activity,” he said. “WE ALWAYS CATCH THEM. The practice is so egregious and unfair to the other patrons in the pools that is impossible to disguise.”

- See more at: http://swtimes.com/sports/sports-col....4iTVPWiH.dpuf

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

...
While I understand that the return to a bettor who may have had the $20 winner may have been diminished by 15% in one circumstance, in another race the return on an $11 horse may have been 15% more than he would have had without the benefit of the CRW.

If someone is routinely breaking even, then the rest of the bettors must be doing worse than the track takeout. There's nothing abnormal or intrinsically unfair about that. The question here is whether the people who are breaking even have an unfair advantage given to them by their access to digital pool information and ability to bet after everyone else.

[Port Conway Lane]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

If someone is routinely breaking even, then the rest of the bettors must be doing worse than the track takeout. There's nothing abnormal or intrinsically unfair about that. The question here is whether the people who are breaking even have an unfair advantage given to them by their access to digital pool information and ability to bet after everyone else.

It would be an unfair advantage if they had up to the second updates and I didn't. But that info would't help me unless I knew what their wager was first. Even if I know what the final odds are, I still have to pick the winner.
If everyone had set odds the only thing that changes is the reshuffling of decision making. The same amount of money is lost by all horseplayers.

They're trimming the top end of payoffs and raising the lower end.
My job is to select the winner.
I have to accept the payoff and know that sometimes I will get more than I expected and sometimes less.

It should be a live ticker for everyone. Even if it was I'm responsible for my decision making. I struggle with it all the time. Do I bet the 5-1 or the 6-1 or both. Maybe I should pass the race.

They're betting every horse in the race, correct? You can't bet all of them, or can you? Money flows in on who they believe are the best values and on everyone else to a lesser degree to minimize losses. Am I wrong about this?
Shouldn't we just get the rebates they get?

I welcome their money. I would like to know why pool info isn't similar to a stock ticker with time and sales.

[tanner12oz]

I dont have an issue with crw. Its simply a sign of the times and is happening in every other financial, gambling market. Smart people with big wallets taking advantage of a situation..i applaud them

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by tanner12oz

I dont have an issue with crw. Its simply a sign of the times and is happening in every other financial, gambling market. Smart people with big wallets taking advantage of a situation..i applaud them

Really?

Where in a casino is one gambler given access by the casino to information that is not available to all other players?

Where in a casino can one gambler gain a clear advantage by being the last to bet.

As I mentioned, poker players have an advantage when they are the last to bet. That's why in Hold'Em the dealer button passes on every round. A blackjack card counter gets an advantage by being the last to play his or her hand, but any gambler who wants that position can sit down and take it. It is not reserved for favored customers or those with fat wallets.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by JolyB

Will there come a point at which the CRW's ruin the assumptions of the other CRW's if too many of them are in the mutual pool at the same time?

Yes.