Shenanigans in the greyhound wagering market
I HAVE to agree with many of the comments from reader “National Lass” (see The Worth of Greyhound Administrations, July 26), but particularly the uncontrolled and uncontrollable nature of the Australian betting market.
However, three corrections: first, my comments about disappearing punters were not related to professionals but to everyday serious punters of small to medium size – note that one lot gets discounts, the other does not. I was quite specific about that.
Second, Tabcorp’s and Ubet’s fixed odds markets for greyhounds are just as hungry as anyone else’s – always in the vicinity of 130%. When added to the Mystery bet or boxed Trifecta market, where punters lose before they start, and considering Tabcorp’s size and influence, it must take a large responsibility for today’s outcomes.
Third, much of the dilution of betting pools is a function of Tabcorp’s mad scramble to stuff as much racing as possible into every hour. It alone controls all that, although some racing authorities also contribute.
How it grew
Historical accuracy is also important. It was the rise and rise of corporate bookmakers which put some life back into what was a moribund racing market. At the time, oncourse bookmakers were plodding, partly because of the biased rule-making by state governments and major race clubs (the “Principal Clubs” as they were then) and partly due to their ineffective or non-existent lobbying.
Those problems, incidentally, were the prime motivators in several of them setting up operations in the Northern Territory in the first place (from the mid-1990s) and later making millions by on-selling them to overseas owners. The whole process was a reaction to faulty traditional management.
The operation of TABs, mainly Tabcorp, was characterised by monopolistic behaviour, including sitting back and raking in profits for its shareholders and staff. A totalisator can never lose as it simply rakes its cut off the top of whatever volume is bet. That cut is liberal and artificial and is defined by the government, not the customer.
Subsequently, Tabcorp did not lead any change, rather it followed the example of offline bookmakers by adding fixed odds to its portfolio (to arrest the leakage) and by establishing its own NT online company, Luxbet, (to compete directly with the newcomers). It was always reactive, not proactive, in contrast to its pre-1990 experience when it had regularly improved and widened its product range, thereby expanding wagering activity.
Little regulation
The current position is that all operators, Tabcorp included, are regulated lightly or not at all in respect to fixed odds or related betting. They can and do make up their own rules, often changing those rules to better suit their individual aims. A recent attempt by Racing NSW to keep them honest is merely tinkering at the edges.
Over the last 25 years, after adjusting for inflation, racing turnover has almost stood still but what might have been growth for Tabcorp (given some initiative, which was absent) instead fell into the arms of the online people. Concurrently, racing’s overall share of the gambling market has fallen from 50% or so to about 10% today. There is no greater illustration than that of the industry’s mediocre performance. That responsibility lies jointly with racing administrations and the two TABs.
Importantly today, Ubet’s sagging fortunes in an internet-friendly society will continue to worsen due to its smaller pools and because many punters no longer have any geographical allegiances. Both Ubet and Tabcorp have an advantage only as a function of the value of local shopfronts. However, since its major market in Queensland is in a state of upheaval, Ubet has a two-pronged challenge. That’s not a good corporate outlook and it will further unbalance the Australian market.
A Solution
The obvious solution to these and other problems – especially the “liquidity” hassle mentioned by “National Lass” – is to create a properly supervised national betting pool. Not only would that bring some solidity to the market but it would also encourage lost greyhound punters to return to the game. The only thing standing in the way is petty jealousy amongst state governments. They cannot see the wood (more taxes) for the trees.
The unfortunate thing is that the resultant dumbing down of the market, particularly for greyhounds with its smaller pools, is not a static situation. Failing some attention, it must continue to worsen. Value is hard to find, doubly so in the fixed odds area where “National Lass” seems to like what Tabcorp does (unlike many other comments one hears, some of which have been quoted in these columns). However, over-betting on favourites is not helping either.
Lack of Knowledge
Let me offer some examples of today’s market in the three distance races at The Meadows last Saturday. I will not quote final fixed odds prices as they represent only where the book finished, not what happened en route.
(1) Race 1: Punters supported Sisco Rage into favouritism at $2.40 or $2.80 (depending on location) because the Watchdog put him on top and suggested he was worth a $2.10 price. Now this is a useful dog and it has won over the long trip but that was a long time ago and it made it then by jumping in front and holding on against lesser dogs. Its recent form included a good win at Ballarat and three failures, all over short trips. Predictably, on Saturday it compounded on the home turn and finished nowhere. Tribal Faith, which should have been favourite, had solid recent distance form, had won two of three starts over the trip and won easily at big “overs”, even though the time was poor. Its handicap penalty made little difference as it does not rely on leading anyway.
(2) Race 5: The next race saw everyone’s favourite Sweet It Is win really well. But, miraculously, it actually jumped in front at the start and quickly settled into 2nd spot, after which it was a lay down misère. It paid $2.10/$2.20 which was much more sensible than the Watchdog’s $1.50. I have previously suggested to readers never to back this bitch at odds-on, so I suppose that was alright. However, don’t expect it to lead again.
(3) Race 7: The third event saw punters hammer that marvellous dog Space Star into $1.70 (Watchdog $1.50) even though it was coming back from 10 weeks off due to injury and even though the trainer said it was not really fit. It led to the home turn and then folded. Surprise, surprise! Tens of thousands of dollars went down the drain. The winner could record only 43.36, a full second outside its best, but most of them were paddling by the home turn.
The point here is that in two of these cases the betting was irrational and probably spurred on by a tipster and a follow-the-leader syndrome. The other was an acceptable bet considering the opposition was modest and was mostly over-raced anyway. Lady Toy was the only possible test for Sweet It Is but it never got into the race and is not at its best over the last 50m, or from an outside box where life is always hard at this track.
Rip-Offs
I can’t see a lot of educated money in these pools but who knows what happened in the online area or in fixed odds. Possibly much the same. In total, all these goings-on are indications of a market full of poker machine refugees. The age-old concept of knowledgeable punters doing battle with knowledgeable bookmakers is but a distant memory. So is the potential for turning a profit when favourites are too short and the house takes 20% to 30% out of the action for the other half of the business.
Sad though it is for me to say it, what wagering needs is more regulation, more oversight, more transparency and more business-like behaviour. Simply, the ordinary gambler is getting ripped off, partly through a lack of knowledge, partly due to secretive or unpublished practices and partly due to a lackadaisical attitude from state governments.
The frustrating thing is that each racing administration, like its state government, is far too inclined to take short term decisions and ignore the national implications, which have become so vital in an internet age. That fragmentation means they lack oomph when dealing with TABs and governments and get picked off one at a time. What better illustration is there than that no-one can tell you at a given time how much Australians are betting in total, or on what. For a multi-billion dollar industry where customers have multiple access points, that is ridiculous.
Hi Bruce
I feel somewhat flattered that you based another great article on my comment. I think it’s fair to say that we are on common ground for 90% of the issues raised. But as is the human condition we concentrate on and debate the other 10%! So in keeping with that philosophy…
Your ambition/desire to increase the number of discerning punters on greyhound racing is a noble and important one for the survival of the sport, but my point is that is it simply not possible in today’s wagering environment as these punters have been shunned and pushed away by corporate bookmakers or left with poor liquidity in traditional tote pools.
I should point out that I’m not a professional player. I have a full-time job. I’m in my 50s and have been betting on greyhound racing for at least 20 years. I love doing the form/watching replays and am a reasonable judge. Exactly the type of customer you seek. Like most I am a long-time loser on the punt, but have done reasonably well in recent years – a combination of being older and wiser and exploiting the imperfections in the explosion of fixed odds markets (more on this later).
The stark reality is this. Any racing punter who is complimentary of corporate bookmakers falls into one of the following four categories:
1. They don’t bet or bet so small it doesn’t matter
2. They consistently lose (there are winning days, but they are well behind overall)
3. They work in the media and are allowed to keep winning betting accounts in return for positive press
4. They are an administrator and are allowed to keep winning betting accounts for relationship building purposes
Now, Bruce, unless you are being disingenuous, I can guarantee that you also fit into one of these subsets. I don’t expect you to tell me which one – and if it’s #3 then you may be blissfully unaware of the dynamics at play – but a surer bet has never existed.
I cannot get a fixed odds bet on with any corporate bookmaker (outside ridiculously small token amounts) and some are losing accounts, however I can get on to win $500 or slightly more with TAB fixed odds (and UBet). You may be critical of their markets, but at least I can bet fixed odds with them both.
While on the topic of fixed odds. There is plenty of value in the markets because they are wrong so often. Anyone who maintains there is no value is being lazy doing their form. Just last night at Angle Park Taser McBain was $14 to $7 with TAB fixed odds. A ripping price for a guaranteed leader dropping in class. You say they are 130% – perhaps they are – I only ever compare my markets with theirs so the exact percentage is almost irrelevant to me as I only bet if my market says I’m getting value. Obviously I will have less bets in the long run if their markets are 130% instead of 115%, but we are starting to get very technical.
To use a stupid example… If I’m going to toss a coin and say to you “if you want to back tails you can take $1.11 and if you want to back heads you can have $2.50”. That’s 130%. Is there value in the market? Of course there is because you would have rated them $2.00 each in a pure 100% market.
As a man with an economics background you’d understand the concept of opportunity cost. If somebody is going to spend, say, 20 hours a week doing greyhound form as a hobby he/she would at the very least expect it to be an enjoyable pursuit. My best word for the current landscape is frustrating and I’m being very measured with that description.
Which brings me to the tote. Yes, a combined national pool would spark some life back into things for a punter like me especially for the more obscure meetings with lower liquidity. I can’t see it happening though. As it stands I still have the option of betting into the tote and I do especially on Thursday nights, but the dividends are so erratic. I return to a previous point. This is still meant to be a bit of fun!
And now to my favourite topic. Bet365. They go up with markets the night before the meetings. What a fabulous innovation and pro-active service. The only problem is no one with a clue can get a bet on with them. Then to make matters worse you have to stare at a runner you think will be $3 (as an example) and they have it $8. But it’s not really a price because you can’t get set. And then the next day the actual market comes out and it’s $4. You should be happy because you’re getting value, but the $8 is messing with your head. And you wonder why it’s all too much for discerning punters and they are leaving in droves.
I do want to make a point of agreeing with you on Tabcorp’s lack of vision. Even though I can get set with them, they still restrict me. I was once able to get on to win $2,000+ with them, but slowly this has dissipated to around $500. All they have done in this regard is copy the business models of the corporate bookies, albeit not quite as aggressively, instead of coming up with something new and innovative in response.
I am aware of how some punters get around these problems. Apparently betting cash in TAB retail outlets allows you to get on for much more and obviously opening/using bowler accounts is popular, but if that’s what it takes to get on a bet these days it really is time to give it away.
Honestly, I could go on and on and on discussing this topic. I haven’t even touched on the unethical way wagering operators allow problem gamblers and long-time losers to squander away their savings without any intervention or restrictions, yet have an entire department for the sole purpose of restricting winning customers. Maybe another time.
Hi Bruce
I feel somewhat flattered that you based another great article on my comment. I think it’s fair to say that we are on common ground for 90% of the issues raised. But as is the human condition we concentrate on and debate the other 10%! So in keeping with that philosophy…
Your ambition/desire to increase the number of discerning punters on greyhound racing is a noble and important one for the survival of the sport, but my point is that is it simply not possible in today’s wagering environment as these punters have been shunned and pushed away by corporate bookmakers or left with poor liquidity in traditional tote pools.
I should point out that I’m not a professional player. I have a full-time job. I’m in my 50s and have been betting on greyhound racing for at least 20 years. I love doing the form/watching replays and am a reasonable judge. Exactly the type of customer you seek. Like most I am a long-time loser on the punt, but have done reasonably well in recent years – a combination of being older and wiser and exploiting the imperfections in the explosion of fixed odds markets (more on this later).
The stark reality is this. Any racing punter who is complimentary of corporate bookmakers falls into one of the following four categories:
1. They don’t bet or bet so small it doesn’t matter
2. They consistently lose (there are winning days, but they are well behind overall)
3. They work in the media and are allowed to keep winning betting accounts in return for positive press
4. They are an administrator and are allowed to keep winning betting accounts for relationship building purposes
Now, Bruce, unless you are being disingenuous, I can guarantee that you also fit into one of these subsets. I don’t expect you to tell me which one – and if it’s #3 then you may be blissfully unaware of the dynamics at play – but a surer bet has never existed.
I cannot get a fixed odds bet on with any corporate bookmaker (outside ridiculously small token amounts) and some are losing accounts, however I can get on to win or slightly more with TAB fixed odds (and UBet). You may be critical of their markets, but at least I can bet fixed odds with them both.
While on the topic of fixed odds. There is plenty of value in the markets because they are wrong so often. Anyone who maintains there is no value is being lazy doing their form. Just last night at Angle Park Taser McBain was to with TAB fixed odds. A ripping price for a guaranteed leader dropping in class. You say they are 130% – perhaps they are – I only ever compare my markets with theirs so the exact percentage is almost irrelevant to me as I only bet if my market says I’m getting value. Obviously I will have less bets in the long run if their markets are 130% instead of 115%, but we are starting to get very technical.
To use a stupid example… If I’m going to toss a coin and say to you “if you want to back tails you can take .11 and if you want to back heads you can have .50”. That’s 130%. Is there value in the market? Of course there is because you would have rated them .00 each in a pure 100% market.
As a man with an economics background you’d understand the concept of opportunity cost. If somebody is going to spend, say, 20 hours a week doing greyhound form as a hobby he/she would at the very least expect it to be an enjoyable pursuit. My best word for the current landscape is frustrating and I’m being very measured with that description.
Which brings me to the tote. Yes, a combined national pool would spark some life back into things for a punter like me especially for the more obscure meetings with lower liquidity. I can’t see it happening though. As it stands I still have the option of betting into the tote and I do especially on Thursday nights, but the dividends are so erratic. I return to a previous point. This is still meant to be a bit of fun!
And now to my favourite topic. Bet365. They go up with markets the night before the meetings. What a fabulous innovation and pro-active service. The only problem is no one with a clue can get a bet on with them. Then to make matters worse you have to stare at a runner you think will be (as an example) and they have it . But it’s not really a price because you can’t get set. And then the next day the actual market comes out and it’s . You should be happy because you’re getting value, but the is messing with your head. And you wonder why it’s all too much for discerning punters and they are leaving in droves.
I do want to make a point of agreeing with you on Tabcorp’s lack of vision. Even though I can get set with them, they still restrict me. I was once able to get on to win ,000+ with them, but slowly this has dissipated to around . All they have done in this regard is copy the business models of the corporate bookies, albeit not quite as aggressively, instead of coming up with something new and innovative in response.
I am aware of how some punters get around these problems. Apparently betting cash in TAB retail outlets allows you to get on for much more and obviously opening/using bowler accounts is popular, but if that’s what it takes to get on a bet these days it really is time to give it away.
Honestly, I could go on and on and on discussing this topic. I haven’t even touched on the unethical way wagering operators allow problem gamblers and long-time losers to squander away their savings without any intervention or restrictions, yet have an entire department for the sole purpose of restricting winning customers. Maybe another time.
what are these greybase range of computer form analysis programs???? also if you want something done right do it yourself if you want to be a lazy ass let someone else pretend to do the form work for you….but when you end up broke dont blame no on but yourselves…do the form work yourself people dont rely on so called form experts becuase if they were experts they would not be tipping to the world.
what are these greybase range of computer form analysis programs???? also if you want something done right do it yourself if you want to be a lazy ass let someone else pretend to do the form work for you….but when you end up broke dont blame no on but yourselves…do the form work yourself people dont rely on so called form experts becuase if they were experts they would not be tipping to the world.