08/19/2014 2:52PM

Another possible pool manipulation at ThistleDown


A bettor or group of bettors who have targeted races in Ohio to cash wagers at non-pari-mutuel bookmakers appear to have struck again on Sunday at ThistleDown Racetrack.

The responsible party made last-second pari-mutuel win wagers on every horse but the odds-on favorite in the fifth race that day at Thistledown, driving up the favorite’s price from 1-2 to 3-1. The favorite, Missjeanlouise, won, paying $8.20.

The strategy has been used in the past at ThistleDown, including a highly publicized case at the track in the summer of 2012. Betting experts have said that the group is using the tactic to boost the price of the favorite while making a large win bet on the same horse with a bookmaker or bookmakers that pay track odds.

In the latest case, the responsible party made five separate $4,000 bets on the five other horses in the race, for a total outlay of $20,000, boosting the win pool to $45,855. To make a profit on the race, the party would need the favorite to win and to bet at least $6,500 at a bookmaker that does not send its bets into the pari-mutuel pools.

The tactic is not illegal, but it is not without risk. If the favorite had lost, then the party would have likely cashed for an amount that was less than the total outlay for the race through the pari-mutuel pools and the bookmaker, by claiming the win payoff for a horse whose odds were driven down by the last-second bets. In addition, many bookmakers take a dim view of manipulating the odds on a race, if they do not have an outright rule nullifying any wager on a bet in which the odds appear to have been manipulated.

Ray Sousa More than 1 year ago
here's the part some are missing these guys are not going to try and raise the odds on any horse and risk having that horse loose. And yes favorites loose 67% of the time statistically and its even higher at tracks like thistledowns. for this to work they have to be sure that horse will win .and for that they need to have a few jockeys and trainers in on it. at 2/1 they would have to be right every 2 bets to break even .and i can tell you that even 1/2 shots loose more often than that at small tracks and even at saratoga.. so its obvious some manipulation of the race itself goes hand in hand with the pools manipulation.and i suspect when they decide to bring in a longer odds horse they don't go for the win polls but for the exotics.and its not just at thisle charlestown mountaneer and others are just as bad or worse.
Chuck Seddio More than 1 year ago
love it,screw the bookmakers and loan sharks, it didnt hurt the public it helped all those who were at thistle and bet the winner. this practice has been done many times before,you have to find a track with a small win handle and greedy bookmakers who will take your bet, and dopey bookmakers who wont break your legs when you go to collect
TEDK215 More than 1 year ago
I would just like to send a ty out to that "group of bettors". my dinner tasted so much better that evening than it would have at 1-2!
Tom Jones More than 1 year ago
they did not use a bookmaker they used 1 of the thousands of online books...done this a few times myself at Ag Park in Columbus
Boyd Cord More than 1 year ago
I would be uncomfortable doing that.. Hard enough handicapping a lot of races, now add in Poker logic. Ken is right , Dog racing much easier . .
Howard Schwartz More than 1 year ago
I would not know a bookmaker if one stepped on my foot. But I dont believe they like getting cheated. Broken legs, found floating in the lake. That sort of thing.
Ray Sousa More than 1 year ago
the books they are talking about are probably the online off shore type. And they are not the ones being cheated they know how to take care of themselves.you are the one being cheated .trust me on this.
ken n More than 1 year ago
Dogs are more easy.
jim lefferts More than 1 year ago
Further rationale is the large rebate involved on such a bet. Missjeanlouise paid $8.20, so if they would have to bet more than $7150 on her to win to make a net profit on the wager that exceeded the rebate received from an 8% rebate. At that amount their wager profit is $2163 and their rebate is $2172. Rebates are a major component of such plays.
1971 Whippet More than 1 year ago
There's an easier way to do this. without having to toss in $20,000. Anyway.....why would the scientists have to bet on all the other horses, when one $20,000 win wager, on any other horse, accomplished exactly the same thing? And this is more about trying to put a fellow bookmaker out of business than it is about horse racing.
Hanna More than 1 year ago
in your example...he only has minimal coverage (one other runner) if his "key" horse loses...if he spreads (3, 4, etc...) on multiple horses he has a greater chance of at least recovering a portion of his principal...
Boyd Cord More than 1 year ago
it's still stupid. and it helps out the bettors. like ante up in poker. more money in the pot.
Walter More than 1 year ago
Very true.
Ray Sousa More than 1 year ago
wow not a lot of geniuses here.lets say the horse looses and the other horse they used to raise the odds also looses .they would be out the full amount.now if they spread it out on the whole field and the unexpected happens and another horse wins at least they recoup some or all of their money and if a long shot wins they might even make a profit. besides large bets on 1 horse call attention.
Bruce Epstein More than 1 year ago
This can only be done at small track, with small fields with low handle. OH, this means N. CA, Medowlands turf flat meet, AC, Some fair meets, and now Arlington, and FP.
Boyd Cord More than 1 year ago
AC has a low handle?