Maybe I misunderstood your question.

But the point is that the whales bet ZERO money early enough for it to be viewed on the toteboard while you could still make a bet.
___________________
Without explaining the math - which is a bit rigorous - here are a few key points.

The higher the rebate, the higher the percentage of whale money at the track.
About 34% of total win pool at tracks like MNR, CT, DED, etc.
About 10% of total win pool at tracks like SA, CD, etc.

The higher the rebate, the greater the percent of pool that shows up after the gate opens.
About 60% of total win pool at tracks like MNR, CT, DED, etc.
About 45% of total win pool at tracks like SA, CD, etc.

Using that math, for every $100 wagered "late"
$57 will be whale money at tracks like MNR, CT, DED, etc.
(34 / 60 = 56.7%)
$22 will be whale money at tracks like SA, CD, etc.
(10 / 45 = 22.2%)

CONCLUSIONS
The pools at high rebate tracks have 2.6x the percentage of whale money LATE!
($57 / $22 = 2.59)
Since that money is (effectively) in the hands of JUST FIVE BETTORS, the pool swings will be FAR MORE VOLATILE at higher rebate tracks.
(Meaning: When they agree, you can easily see 4/1 become 4/5.)

Hope this helps.

What percentage of that final wagering amount do you think might be "whale "money and how much is due to late betting from online ADWs & OTBs ? — William Zayonce

None of it.

All the whale money shows up AFTER the gate is open.

Just like yours and mine.

I agree with what you've written.

Value today is a challenge, that's for sure.

Most people confuse Price with Value anyway.

My Dog, I hope I'm not getting dyslexia! — Tom

LOL

What is the address for the store? — Tom

https://store.pacemakestherace.com/

The All Button

A viable idea!

This caused me to add a handful of columns to the AI engine in the new software: the All Button.

It was released weeks ago.

ThoroBrain is coming back in this new software.

You and I will be discussing that on Thursday.

I think what you're looking for are the booking percentages.

Pct = 100 / (odds + 1)

Thus...
3/1 = 100 / (3 + 1 ) = 25%
2/1 = 100 / (2 + 1 ) = 33%
3/2 = 100 / (1.5 +1)= 40%

So, a horse who was bet down from 3/1 to 3/2 would see an increase in percent of pool of 15% (i.e. 40 - 25 = 15).

Hope this helps.

Ah.

Prices could be high.

And nobody off a layoff?

One thing I am seeing so far is a good way to just say a race is not worth the rest of the work and move on. — Tom

How do you arrive at that?

Please tell me it's not about all questionable horses, because those are the BEST races to play.

Wow!

A trip down memory lane.

Form Cycle has its own page in HSH. It's in the Pace Module.

Dick Schmidt used to refer to that page as Those Sheet-Like-Things.

The concept still works much as it did back over a decade ago, but the prices have changed drastically.

Basically, today it points to 2 different kinds of horses:

• In form at 5/2 or below
• In form at long odds but severely out-classed.

It is pretty rare to see an out of form horse bet down into the low odds ranges.

Probably the best use is to confirm longshots that you liked a little anyway.

The first disadvantage is the takeout is higher when you parlay.
Sure, the takeout is lower in the win pool, but if you're betting a 3-horse parlay instead of a P3, you get taxed THREE TIMES instead of once.

More importantly (to me), as @William Zayonce said, the inability to change your bet or even pass, is more important.

I'll ask him.

I've considered rebuilding it, but the data capture is an issue. — Dave Schwartz

A friend sent me 10 years of NBA data in exactly what I wanted.

Alas, not high on my priorities, but at least I can think about it.

Wow. Imagine 1988 and you had 2022 sports betting on your iPhone with live in-game wagering. Making wagers during the game with this software would have been fun. — Jim Pommier

I've considered rebuilding it, but the data capture is an issue.

Funny thing... When they got the software, they said, "Now we have too much information!! What can you do TO HELP US?"

What I had them do was:

• Categorize each team on an ABCDE grading system for Offense & Defense.
• Then I built IVs for Win% vs Spread in all categories.

Imagine the Lakers were playing the Pistons in Detroit.
They'd query the system

• What is the IV for Lakers vs a team Like the Pistons on the road?
• What is the IV for Pistons vs a team Like the Lakers at home?

Considering offenses and defenses, there would be 4 IVs - 2 for defense & 2 for offense.
(Same for totals)

When both sides agreed... I think they were looking for 1.50 vs 0.67, (i.e. Lakers and pistons were opposites; one side says we lose and the other says we win) they had a play.

I recall the head guy saying to me, "Are you telling me we DON'T CARE WHAT THE SPREAD IS? How is that even possible?"

:100:

They kicked ass!
63% with 4 plays a day until the All-Star break. Then it flattened, which I warned them it would do.
NOBODY sustains 63% and 4x per day.

They finished the year at 58%, which is pretty remarkable.
(They never bet the playoffs, BTW.)

Patterns to specific scenarios. I think that it's something that's been overlooked. — Jim Pommier

There's a fellow I know who was very statistical when it comes to his sports betting.
I wrote him some software, with an early AI engine (for me; 1988). They used it for NBA & NHL, the two sports that supported them.

He asked me if I had any unique ideas about it - especially on pattern of trends & tendencies that were not currently in use.

I pushed him towards "Pace Handicapping."
Specifically, that was to see the quarters of the games as calls in a horse race, and build the factors we pace handicappers know and love.

NBA Fractional Pace Factors

The Calls

• F1: Q1
• EP: (Q1+Q2) / 2
• SC (Q1+Q2+Q3) / 3
• FT: (Q1+Q2+Q3+Q4) / 4
• SR: (Q3 + Q4) ) / 2

The Specialties

• SP (EP + SR * 2) /3
• FW (EP * 2 + SR) /3
• FX (Q1 + Q4) / 2
• LP (Q1 + Q2 + Q3) / 3
• HF (Q2 + Q3) / 2

The Fractions
The individual Quarters

• F2 (Q2)
• F3 (Q3)
• F4 (Q4)

The Energies
Percent of All Points in the game

• F1%
• EP%
• SC%
• SR%
• SP%
• FW%
• FX%
• LP%
• HF%

A complete set for Overtimes

• OT1
• OT2
• OT3
• OT12
• OT123
• OT23

A few notes:
(Each factor contains...)

• Offense Points
• Defense Points
• Total Points
• Possessions
• Turnovers
• Fouls for
• Fouls Against
• In Bonus (Off)
• In Bonus (Def)

Note: The above horse racing examples are fictional. Seems would need a lot of personal system programming to track trends like this. Just curious. Not sure if it would work in horse racing. — Jim Pommier

Great idea for discussion.

It has been a main part of my handicapping for over 20 years, but probably not quite what you'd expect - and possibly not what you mean.

Most people see "trends" as a synonym for "patterns." There's a lot of jumping at shadows with that - seeing patterns when there really isn't one.
___________________
Howard Sartin once told me something really profound:

• "Most changes in the BIAS are perceived rather than real."

That one was HUGE!
___________________
We were discussing keeping Winner models.
Specifically, the current model at SA, 6-furlongs, dirt.

One of his clients, Milt, a Reno dentist, had loudly proclaimed that the bias had clearly changed because 3 winners in a row had run from off the pace, when the bias had been early for a couple of weeks.

I explained how I kept 4 models at each track-surface-distance, based upon how many 7/8 point horses there were.:

• 3 or more (type 3+)
• 2 (type 2)
• 1 (type 1)
• 0 (type 0)

Those particular 3 races had all been types 0 or 1.

Sure, there is at least one front runner in every race - after all, somebody's got to be on the lead. But those wanna be closers who often find themselves on the lead are why you see turf miles in AUS go 52+ seconds to 4 furlongs: NOBODY REALLY WANTS THE LEAD!
(Aren't you glad you asked this question? LOL)
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
THE POINT
Trends are huge for me - but usually they really are PATTERNS that are attributable to SPECIFIC SCENARIOS that repeat themselves with great regularity.
__________________________________________
__________________________________________

Back to BASKETS.
Do you recall the angle called Win & Travel?
That's where a team wins at home and plays the next night on the road.

For YEARS that was a dead-bang winner back in the 80s as a bet against play.
(I actually wrote NBA & Hockey software for a private group back in the late 80s.)

It continued to work well into the 90s, even though it was well-publicized. Then, all of a sudden, some big players started to bet the angle huge and the line moved accordingly. Overnight it died. Maybe like 1993 or so.)

Another was how a team beats the spread for the first two games after a big star is injured or has limited playing time coming up. The belief was that it was caused by the other players get really pumped about having a game or 2 without playing in the shadow of the super star.

Typically the advantage went away after 2 games.
____________________________
Anybody else have thoughts?

I use the ranks of the 7 primary Sartin factors. — RanchWest

What are those these days, please?