3 ms·
One of the standouts being the syndicate run by David Walsh (of MONA fame) and Zeljko Ranogajec. They made money because the rebates swung the odds in their fa
by femto 2y ago
One of the standouts being the syndicate run by David Walsh (of MONA fame) and Zeljko Ranogajec. They made money because the rebates swung the odds in their favour [1].
My take is that: the syndicate wins because the odds were swung in their favour. The tote wins because even with the discounted percentage the increased pool size offset the rebate and made them more money. The rest of the mug punters lost since the syndicate was winning a portion of the pool they would have otherwise won. The rebates are a mechanism to reliably transfer additional money from mug punters to the tote via an enabling middleman (the syndicate).
[1] https://www.perthturftalk.com.au/discussion/discussion/11724/an-incredible-story-about-rebates-etc https://www.perthturftalk.com.au/discussion/discussion/11724...
- WatchDog 2y agoI mostly agree with your take, the linked article itself seems a little missleading, claiming that you could make money by placing losing bets. As far as if the regular punter is getting screwed, I'm not so sure. They certainly aren't getting as good of a deal as the professional punters are getting. However, if the punter feels like they have some special insight into the race and the predictive performance of the horses, then they stand to win much more money by having the professionals put money into the pool.