Odds to win Super Bowl racing industry wake up

[Poindexter]

With 4 teams left in the nfl playoffs the current odds to win the Super Bowl are

49 ers. 140 or 7/5
Ravens. 160 or 8/5
Chiefs 450 or 9/2
Lions. 8.5-1

So from a percentage perspective we are looking at roughly
41, 38, 18, 10.5 which totals maybe an 8 percent take, if you factor in decimals
There is another 1.2 percent take. So the takeout is 9.2 percent on this 4 horse field.

So even Vegas in the nfl futures market, one in which they can easily get away with a horse racing like 16 percent takeout has opted to go down to 9.2 percent. I wonder why? Since the racing industry is so interested in the success of sports betting, maybe they might learn something and bring down the takeout on smaller field sizes since they have so many.

[Poindexter]

Actually correcting my math. The 9.2 percent take is on 109.2 bet so it is actually an 8.4 percent takeout. Yet when Santa Anita had a four horse fiield yesterday, you had the luxury of paying over 15 percent in the win pool and of course more in the other pools.

[Dave Schwartz]

What's worse is the fact that - by comparison - racing has a high volume of events.

Sports betting has a handful of events per WEEK while racing has a similar number in a couple of hours.

[alhattab]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

With 4 teams left in the nfl playoffs the current odds to win the Super Bowl are

49 ers. 140 or 7/5
Ravens. 160 or 8/5
Chiefs 450 or 9/2
Lions. 8.5-1

So from a percentage perspective we are looking at roughly
41, 38, 18, 10.5 which totals maybe an 8 percent take, if you factor in decimals
There is another 1.2 percent take. So the takeout is 9.2 percent on this 4 horse field.

So even Vegas in the nfl futures market, one in which they can easily get away with a horse racing like 16 percent takeout has opted to go down to 9.2 percent. I wonder why? Since the racing industry is so interested in the success of sports betting, maybe they might learn something and bring down the takeout on smaller field sizes since they have so many.

Do you know if the bet takers have to pay a royalty to the leagues to take action on the games?

[lefty359]

The answer is no. With Parimutuel betting were betting against ea other, legal bookies would rather just take pctg from the racetracks and have no risk.
When you bet sports you're betting against the bookie.

[dilanesp]

Also it's worth noting that the sports betting industry certainly does gouge its customers. It just doesn't do it on the bets that are most likely to be made by professional gamblers.

But the Super Bowl, especially, is an event associated with a ton of proposition bets that have absurdly high takeouts. And also, if you go back to the beginning of the season odds to win, when there are more teams and the takeout is less obvious, they often post lines with a ton of takeout (especially when you consider that the bookie is getting an interest fee loan during the season, something that should in a perfect world lead to a lower takeout).

I'm not defending horse racing takeout writ large with this. But the situation with rebates is actually at least a little like what sports bookies are doing-- the highest volume customers get lower takeout in horse racing too. What we don't do is offer a bunch of propositions with high takeout to screw the neophytes.

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I'm not defending horse racing takeout writ large with this. But the situation with rebates is actually at least a little like what sports bookies are doing-- the highest volume customers get lower takeout in horse racing too. What we don't do is offer a bunch of propositions with high takeout to screw the neophytes.

Respectfully, I'd have to say that we (racing) sort of do... when you look at some of the exotic takeouts.

But one can argue that sports betting starts so much lower with their base takeout rates - about one-third of what racing's WPS rates are.

[AskinHaskin]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

wake up

Yeah, right,

because the Super Bowl wagering takeout has to pay the hefty prizes to the winning team as well as footing the bills for food (at the once-yearly banquets) and for sheltering the teams & their families all year long as well as for much of the rest of the infrastructure not shared with racing.


Absolutely brilliant!!


We'll implement it right away.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

Yeah, right,

because the Super Bowl wagering takeout has to pay the hefty prizes to the winning team as well as footing the bills for food (at the once-yearly banquets) and for sheltering the teams & their families all year long as well as for much of the rest of the infrastructure not shared with racing.


Absolutely brilliant!!


We'll implement it right away.

I figured this would fly over your head. Vegas easily could have given odds of
6/5
7/5
7/2
8/1

(remember most sports bettors like horse players don't have a clue about takeout or even care.)

which would have been a lot more comparable to the typical odds of in a 4 horse field in racing, but obviously their data base tells them that the extra 11 points that they are giving back to their customer comes back to them through increased betting and revenue. Or maybe they just woke up feeling philanthropic, because we know Vegas is all about philanthropy .

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

Yeah, right,

because the Super Bowl wagering takeout has to pay the hefty prizes to the winning team as well as footing the bills for food (at the once-yearly banquets) and for sheltering the teams & their families all year long as well as for much of the rest of the infrastructure not shared with racing.


Absolutely brilliant!!


We'll implement it right away.

Actually, for once, AskinNOTHaskin has a pretty good point.

[alhattab]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

I figured this would fly over your head. Vegas easily could have given odds of
6/5
7/5
7/2
8/1

(remember most sports bettors like horse players don't have a clue about takeout or even care.)

which would have been a lot more comparable to the typical odds of in a 4 horse field in racing, but obviously their data base tells them that the extra 11 points that they are giving back to their customer comes back to them through increased betting and revenue. Or maybe they just woke up feeling philanthropic, because we know Vegas is all about philanthropy .

Or maybe they need to set pricing to be competitive

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

Yeah, right,

because the Super Bowl wagering takeout has to pay the hefty prizes to the winning team as well as footing the bills for food (at the once-yearly banquets) and for sheltering the teams & their families all year long as well as for much of the rest of the infrastructure not shared with racing.


Absolutely brilliant!!


We'll implement it right away.

I'm confused.

How does a Las Vegas Sportsbook's takeout wind up paying for prizes to the winning team?

What am I missing?

[Edit]
Ah, you are justifying this by saying that the casinos don't have to while the tracks do.

And you are correct.

However, the fact that one business has a need that the other one doesn't does not make the two products equally competitive.

This is like saying that when you go to the grocery store to purchase peanut butter, you should ignore price and quality, and focus on the needs of the company producing the product.








.

[thaskalos]

The problem is that the gambler doesn’t care what the costs are of running a gambling game…he just cares about finding an affordable game to play. And horse racing has priced itself out of the current ultra-competitive gambling marketplace.

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

The problem is that the gambler doesn’t care what the costs are of running a gambling game…he just cares about finding an affordable game to play. And horse racing has priced itself out of the current ultra-competitive gambling marketplace.

Agree.


Besides, it isn't the gamblers' responsibility to influence the pricing - though we'd gladly do so if we could.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by alhattab

Or maybe they need to set pricing to be competitive

Competing with fan duel? Fan duel is in like 12 states right now. I would imagine a good portion of the Vegas sports betting money comes from California residents who don’t have legal sports betting. I don’t think Vegas needs to worry about competing at this stage of the game, but it is possible they are being proactive, anticipating more competition some time in the future. My guess is that their data tells them that the better pricing leads to more profits, but any big shot from the racing industry can make a phone call and find out the answer.