Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > Advance Deposit Wagering (ADW)


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 07-16-2018, 02:42 PM   #91
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltonKelsey View Post
I'm glad ya'll appreciate how absurd it is for this feature to be out of service for so long. And no, there is zero impact as far as network resources . A single low end pc could probably handle the entire batch universe at twinspires

And how is it that Nyra Bets doesn't even have a batch capability at all?

Programmatically, this is a trivial exercise. No idea why these guys are dropping the ball.

Other parts of the sites show considerable programming chops, so that can't be it.
Considering that TS can't even display the correct win bet amounts on horses that ran at Sha Tin yesterday, how can they do something more complicated like taking batch wagers?

They're actually doing you and me a favor because we will find, or in my case have already found, a better service. Those who use TS to make wagers with bad information help give me an edge.

Plus, other services offer far more generous rebates, which also gives me an advantage over other players.

I hope TS grows their business. Informed players will make even more money from ignorant bettors if that happens.

Like Spice I won't comment anymore. It's not very smart of me to inform people about poorly run services. It kills my edge. But there is a part of me that feels like I have a duty to help my racetrack betting brethren.

That's all I have to say. Caveat Emptor. You've been warned.
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 02:55 PM   #92
AltonKelsey
Veteran
 
AltonKelsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
highnote, I think you're being unfair, a random glitch in a foreign pool is not proof of general problems.



I have seen few data issues with the twinspires feed in general.


What they need is someone with some power to say, "boys, get that batch back up in a week, or look for another employer".
AltonKelsey is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 03:43 PM   #93
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltonKelsey View Post
highnote, I think you're being unfair, a random glitch in a foreign pool is not proof of general problems.

I have seen few data issues with the twinspires feed in general.

What they need is someone with some power to say, "boys, get that batch back up in a week, or look for another employer".
If that's the case, then lack of batch wagering is really not a big deal, either. Right? It doesn't affect me, so why should I care?

Actually, I do care and I disagree with you.

TS having glitches in the tote pool for 6 out of 11 races on Sunday in the largest pari-mutuel pools in the world along with the loss of batch wagering functionality on the TS website sends a very clear message to horseplayers that there are a lot of problems at CD in general, and TS in particular, and those problems are the result of lack of caring about the customer from CD management.

It starts at the top. Management sets the tone.

But they would be wise to remember, it always ends at the bottom when customers seek out better suppliers.

I have had about 10 different ADW suppliers over the years. I can say without hesitation that AMWAGER is far and away the best. It's not even close.
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 04:06 PM   #94
AltonKelsey
Veteran
 
AltonKelsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
That's the problem with the internet. Lack of reason.


The batch issue is completely separate from your one time random data issue .


How do you know it wasn't the Hong Kong feed at fault?
AltonKelsey is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 04:09 PM   #95
PaceAdvantage
PA Steward
 
PaceAdvantage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by highnote View Post
I have had about 10 different ADW suppliers over the years. I can say without hesitation that AMWAGER is far and away the best. It's not even close.
I have an AmWager account as well.

I can say, without a doubt, that I have WAY MORE problems on AmWager than I have had on TS. It's not even close.

For the past two weeks or so, I'd click on the VIDEO button, and get error after error, until I refreshed the page. Then it would work again.

I've had other, countless problems with the user interface that could only be cured with a refresh of the entire page. From the results screens, to data displays getting "stuck"...all sorts of little problems from the start.

In fact, I would say I have had the exact OPPOSITE experience that you have had when pitting TS vs. AmWager in a heads-up battle of who is more reliable.

Now I'm not saying AmWager isn't a good choice for ADW. They do offer some nice rebates for those in certain states and their conditional betting system is the best I've ever seen...plus their batch wagering works

But they certainly are NOT without their glitches and problems.
__________________
@paceadvantage | Support the site and become a today!
PaceAdvantage is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 04:29 PM   #96
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage View Post
I have an AmWager account as well.

I can say, without a doubt, that I have WAY MORE problems on AmWager than I have had on TS. It's not even close.

For the past two weeks or so, I'd click on the VIDEO button, and get error after error, until I refreshed the page. Then it would work again.

I've had other, countless problems with the user interface that could only be cured with a refresh of the entire page. From the results screens, to data displays getting "stuck"...all sorts of little problems from the start.

In fact, I would say I have had the exact OPPOSITE experience that you have had when pitting TS vs. AmWager in a heads-up battle of who is more reliable.

Now I'm not saying AmWager isn't a good choice for ADW. They do offer some nice rebates for those in certain states and their conditional betting system is the best I've ever seen...plus their batch wagering works

But they certainly are NOT without their glitches and problems.
I agree with you that they do have their fair share of errors -- especially on the video locking up. Sometimes the bet confirmation box just keeps spinning.

I can overlook all of those because of the rebates. I get your point that you get lower rebates because of source market fees. That's a bummer because the serious players that you have to compete with will set up operations in a jurisdiction where they can get the highest rebates.

I may not be nearly as good of a bettor as you, but I can make more than you at the end of year simply because of rebates.

It is unfair to horseplayers to be treated this way.

It's reasons like these that HANA was started. Unfortunately, these are political problems. In order for HANA to be really successful they will probably have to get more political.

For me, it was easier to stop betting U.S. races and look overseas for better opportunities.

I love the French racing where the jockeys ride on the backs of trotters. It looks ridiculous the first time you see it, but the fields are large and there is so much value. Why would anyone ever want to bet a steady diet of 5 horse races at Beaten Downs on a weekday afternoon when there are 14 horse fields in nearly every race in Hong Kong or steeplechases with 25 or 30 horses in England?

One more thing... as far as there being two threads on TS -- there are more like 7 or 8. The first 3 alone are about TS. 5 out of the first 7 are about TS! That's good and bad. It's good because it means they are a big player. Good for them. It's bad because it shows they have a lot of problems.

Last edited by highnote; 07-16-2018 at 04:31 PM.
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 05:33 PM   #97
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltonKelsey View Post
That's the problem with the internet. Lack of reason.
The lack of reason on internet is not the problem. The problem is your need to comment on the lack of reason on the internet in the cases when the internet is not lacking reason.

Quote:
The batch issue is completely separate from your one time random data issue .
Wrong again. The batch issue and the tote data issue is a tote data provider issue. The problems were born in the same place. Each one manifested themselves differently, but they sprouted from the same starting point. No service provider. No problems.

It was not a one time random data issue. It happened 8 times in 6 different races. I am looking around to see if I can find someone with a set of archived HK pool data to see if this has happened before.

It was not just my data issue. It was a data issue for anyone who bets on HK races and relies on the data feed from the aforementioned data provider.


Quote:
How do you know it wasn't the Hong Kong feed at fault?
Because I checked Amwager's tote and the odds on the HKJC website. Those two sites agree. No horses on the Amwager site had 8388607 bet on them at the end of the betting period.

Also, every horse that had questionable data from aforementioned data provider had the same exact amount bet on them -- 8388607.

Now, I'm not a world class statistician by any stretch of the imagination, but given that there can be over 1 billion HK bet on a single horse the chances of 8 different horses in 6 different races having exactly 8388607 bet on them is incredibly small. Not impossible, but the most likely explanation is that there was an error in the data the tote provider sent out.
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 05:43 PM   #98
AltonKelsey
Veteran
 
AltonKelsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
ts provides data for dozens of tracks , hundreds of pools daily, and I have never noticed a pool error. I'd say the accuracy rate is close to 99.99% on a daily basis.




You're distracting from the issue of management priority of a software fix.
AltonKelsey is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 06:07 PM   #99
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltonKelsey View Post
ts provides data for dozens of tracks , hundreds of pools daily, and I have never noticed a pool error. I'd say the accuracy rate is close to 99.99% on a daily basis.
You are probably correct that the pools are correct most of the time. I have never seen a problem in their domestic pools, but I have never thought to look for the specific kinds of errors I saw recently. The reason I brought this up in the first place was to remind handicappers to not become complacent and just assume the data is always correct.

It might be worth it to me to write additional code for my software that checks for certain kinds of tote errors. I have some error checking code in my software already, but not for the kind of errors I saw recently. Maybe it is possible to cross-check the pools with other sites or to look for win bet amounts that are repeated over and over?

I have always assumed the liability for any betting errors that happen to me -- even if the fault is not mine. That's part of the game. Things happen that are out of anyone's control. I have probably benefitted from errors that were outside of my control. In the end it all evens out.

Quote:
You're distracting from the issue of management priority of a software fix.
It sounds like you are saying it is more of a priority to fix batch wagering than to track down the bug that displays incorrect tote data.

I respectfully disagree. Odds are the lifeblood of bettors. If a horse is listed at 4/1 and it's really 4/5 that is a big difference to a bettor. And it could be the difference between making or not making a bet.

If the horse is 4/5 and you think it is 4/1 and send in a big bet because you think you are getting value, then you're in for a rude surprise if the horse wins. People would be screaming about past posting. I can hear them now, "It was 4/1 when I bet at a minute to post and it only paid 4/5!"

Or vice versa, "I would have bet if I would have known it was 4/1. No way would I bet it at 4/5!"
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 10:24 PM   #100
Spicemaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 89
Much respect for you guys/gals (especially altonkelsey and Parkview Pirate).

I looked into highnote's issue and found no other reports of his complaint. It's likely a localized issue (maybe he doesn't log in/log out). First, there is no TwinSpires Supertote, even BRIS supertote was discontinued...there were no reports of bad odds (and there would have been many, if true)...good luck with your betting strategy of better odds versus the worldwide pool. Doesn't sound like we are missing any handle by helping him either way...

Paceadvantage, you are fair and I appreciate that.

Hapman, thx - if you think I can help LMK.

Poindexter, we do care and if I can help LMK. If I can't, I apologize, but we still care. I think we'll fix your issue eventually...

thx, Jerryboyle...you are on point.

If I missed someone, I apologize.

P.S. thaskalos, happy to take your call, anytime.
Spicemaster is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 10:52 PM   #101
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicemaster View Post
Much respect for you guys/gals (especially altonkelsey and Parkview Pirate).

I looked into highnote's issue and found no other reports of his complaint. It's likely a localized issue (maybe he doesn't log in/log out). First, there is no TwinSpires Supertote, even BRIS supertote was discontinued...there were no reports of bad odds (and there would have been many, if true)...good luck with your betting strategy of better odds versus the worldwide pool. Doesn't sound like we are missing any handle by helping him either way...
Thanks for looking into it.

I just remembered I saved the XML tote data for the 11th race from Sha Tin on Sunday. Note horses #7 and #9 have the same amount bet on them which makes their odds appear incorrectly. I got to the TS tote by going to BRISNET.com and clicking on "More" and then clicking on "Free Supertote" which explains why I called it TS Supertote. This is the XML data that was displayed.

If you guys would have just kept the old HTML version of Supertote functioning you would have a lot fewer complaints. But I get it. Things change. Unfortunately, for customers, change is not always for the better (and not always for the bettor).

Code:
"<?xml version=""1.0"" encoding=""ISO-8859-1"" ?> 
- <ApiResponse>
  <UTS>1531703741</UTS> 
  <Debug>off</Debug> 
- <PoolTotals>
- <PoolTotal>
  <PoolType>WN</PoolType> 
  <Amount>54999715</Amount> 
  <Base>1</Base> 
  <Track>st</Track> 
  <Type>Thoroughbred</Type> 
  <Race>11</Race> 
  </PoolTotal>
- <PoolTotal>
  <PoolType>SH</PoolType> 
  <Amount>34500266</Amount> 
  <Base>1</Base> 
  <Track>st</Track> 
  <Type>Thoroughbred</Type> 
  <Race>11</Race> 
  </PoolTotal>
  </PoolTotals>
- <PoolTotalsContext>
  <Track>st</Track> 
  <Type>Thoroughbred</Type> 
  <Race>11</Race> 
  </PoolTotalsContext>
- <WPSPools>
  <Track>st</Track> 
  <Type>Thoroughbred</Type> 
  <TotalsRace>11</TotalsRace> 
- <Entries>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>1</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>1417365</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>1736288</Show> 
  <WinPct>2.6</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>5.0</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>2</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>1381498</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>1586866</Show> 
  <WinPct>2.5</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>4.6</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>3</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>1056914</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>1111494</Show> 
  <WinPct>1.9</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>3.2</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>4</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>1725554</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>1703805</Show> 
  <WinPct>3.1</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>4.9</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>5</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>501949</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>555634</Show> 
  <WinPct>0.9</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>1.6</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>6</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>2615371</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>2387317</Show> 
  <WinPct>4.8</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>6.9</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>7</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>8388607</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>7443107</Show> 
  <WinPct>15.3</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>21.6</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>8</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>3257500</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>3479413</Show> 
  <WinPct>5.9</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>10.1</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>9</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>8388607</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>6139076</Show> 
  <WinPct>15.3</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>17.8</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>10</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>901818</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>1034287</Show> 
  <WinPct>1.6</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>3.0</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>11</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>1928416</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>1775237</Show> 
  <WinPct>3.5</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>5.1</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>12</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>4360084</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>2956420</Show> 
  <WinPct>7.9</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>8.6</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>13</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>186704</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>296833</Show> 
  <WinPct>0.3</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>0.9</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
- <Entry>
  <ProgramNumber>14</ProgramNumber> 
  <Win>2057694</Win> 
  <Place>0</Place> 
  <Show>2294489</Show> 
  <WinPct>3.7</WinPct> 
  <PlacePct>0.00</PlacePct> 
  <ShowPct>6.7</ShowPct> 
  </Entry>
  </Entries>
  <PctRace>11</PctRace> 
  </WPSPools>
  </ApiResponse>"

Last edited by highnote; 07-16-2018 at 11:07 PM.
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 11:11 PM   #102
PaceAdvantage
PA Steward
 
PaceAdvantage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,180
Well, if BRIS supertote was discontinued (which it was), and you somehow found some still functioning back door to it, maybe that's why you were getting bad data.

Something that is discontinued can't be relied upon for accurate data.
__________________
@paceadvantage | Support the site and become a today!
PaceAdvantage is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-16-2018, 11:22 PM   #103
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage View Post
Well, if BRIS supertote was discontinued (which it was), and you somehow found some still functioning back door to it, maybe that's why you were getting bad data.

Something that is discontinued can't be relied upon for accurate data.

All I know is that BRISNET.com directed me to a Twinspires website with this URL: https://m.twinspires.com/#liveRaces

It doesn't look discontinued to me and I certainly didn't use a backdoor to get to it. I went through a CD owned property to get to it.

As far as I can tell http://www.brisnet.com/content/ is still a going concern. There is news for the upcoming Del Mar meeting and live tote for tonight's races.

If they don't want to fix the problem there is nothing I can do about it. I'm just putting it out there for other handicappers to make sure they check the data for integrity. And that goes for any tote board -- not just for the TS tote board or whatever they call it.

I'm just the messenger, but I get it people don't like criticism. Maybe if they took care of customers they wouldn't get criticized. And maybe their customers would not leave them to go bet on races in exotic, far away lands.
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-17-2018, 07:30 AM   #104
Spicemaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 89
highnote, you are correct it does say Supertote so I'm wrong. I didn't realize that was on there. The old Supertote was discontinued when the new BRIS site was launched and that link redirects you to the mobile interface (m....).

Again, there were no reports of an issues on that interface. If you are having one I would contact Tech Support for help. Gonna be awhile before you can test the Hong Kong theory though since their last day of the meet was the other night.
Spicemaster is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-17-2018, 01:30 PM   #105
highnote
Registered User
 
highnote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicemaster View Post
highnote, you are correct it does say Supertote so I'm wrong. I didn't realize that was on there. The old Supertote was discontinued when the new BRIS site was launched and that link redirects you to the mobile interface (m....).

Again, there were no reports of an issues on that interface. If you are having one I would contact Tech Support for help. Gonna be awhile before you can test the Hong Kong theory though since their last day of the meet was the other night.
Thanks again.

It occurred to me that since it was the last day of the meeting people let their guard down a little and things slipped through the cracks. It's kind of the like restaurant at the Carousel at Saratoga on closing day. It's pretty laid back compared to the tension there on opening day.

I may have posted this before:

Here are 8 horses that had 8388607 bet on them to win:

Race #5 - horse #3
Race #6 - horse #2
Race #7 - horse #3
Race #8 - horse #7 and horse #8
Race #10 - horse #13 and horse #14
Race #11 - horse #7

It looks like a software glitch. I went back at the end of the day and checked to toteboard in a couple of different browsers. I am trying to figure out a scenario where two different browsers would display the wrong win bet amounts on 8 different horses over 5 races.

Like PA said, maybe it's because I was getting to TS through an typical way that the values in some of the fields did not update properly or were stored in a variable and the variable didn't get cleared?

I'll keep an eye on it. I think I can probably get by with just the odds from the HKJC website and use them to estimate the pool sizes. I like to bet the Dr. Z place and show system -- although, they only have place wagering in HK which is like show wagering here. They give the odds for place -- which I have never seen done anywhere else -- maybe England? I'm not sure how they calculate place odds. And I don't know if the place odds are fixed or if they are pari-mutuel.

I don't think TS shows place odds -- just win odds.

Anyway, lots of questions and lots to learn and investigate.
highnote is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.