Tab paying their rebates

More importantly I'm still waiting for my golf balls from bonus points built up over years......7 weeks ago and still waiting.

Bit of an assumption don't you think?  How do you know that is what happened?  I mean 4k?  If somebody was rorting the rebates, surely they would have put more on.

Probably another "rebate" site where the money simply ended up on the tote.  IMO

"rorting the rebates" is an understatement, now its become rampant.
like BF the tote will and is quickly becoming controlled by "bots" and "api's". Machines have taken over another fiscal industry.

lol.  Do you even know what an "api" is?  How is the tote controlled by these "apis"?  lol

oh blowhard u are such a pedantic drop kick


In computer programming, an application programming interface (API) is a set of routines, protocols, and tools for building software applications. An API expresses a software component in terms of its operations, inputs, outputs, and underlying types. An API defines functionalities that are independent of their respective implementations, which allows definitions and implementations to vary without compromising each other. A good API makes it easier to develop a program by providing all the building blocks. A programmer then puts the blocks together.

In addition to accessing databases or computer hardware, such as hard disk drives or video cards, an API can ease the work of programming GUI components. For example, an API can facilitate integration of new features into existing applications (a so-called "plug-in API"). An API can also assist otherwise distinct applications with sharing data, which can help to integrate and enhance the functionalities of the applications.

So these api's are quickly taking over the TAB?


So which API is starting to control the TAB, or taking it over? 


Please, teach me something.

teach me something....................................MAHAHA

Not too difficult a question is it for you?  You made the statement, so you must know something?

appi is how i feel after a profitable day.....

OH MY DEAR bjt, do u seriously want to hear a theory? or are you going to be a GIGANTISM, pick holes, devils advocate as usual.

I will teach you something, just like I taught you the difference between "turnover" and "matched wages"

or that someone really did land on the moon  (did I get around to proving that?)

or why court siding doesn't work for the 3 man operation any more in tennis

there were a couple of others but I won't harp

oh sorry must just mention one more, when I pointed out what a d!ck head you were when you joined the "Spelling and Dictation Police" ( thankfully you have taken this one at least on board)

Regards
the log that rolls

So it is too difficult a question for you?  Why make the statement if you have no reason to? 


Which API's are taking control of the TAB?  Or how are they?


Pretty simple no?

there it is, I don't know why but all your posts seem to be on the attack, aggressive, ready to prove something. you're just to much heavy work man.

and you just don't come across as a genuine guy.

all you had to do was be civil about my above post and I would have gladly shared my theory with you


is it just me any of the LURKERS out there, feel free to chime in anytime. or is "BJT" a complete C#NT and can't conduct a meaningful inter change!!

Feel free to quote any of these attacks.  I am sure you can work out how to do that.  Although clearly you just like to type and can't back anything up.

Thought it was a pretty simple question.

You made the statement the API's are taking control of the TAB.  I simply asked how, and look at you go to water.

I would hardly think "going to water my boy". looking back over the last few posts I would say I turned you round and bent u over the couch.

You couldn't promise me an intelligent conversation afterwards, so you will have to keep it as a fantasy.  Sorry.

" I mean 4k?  If somebody was rorting the rebates, surely they would have put more on."

this one simple statement made by you BJT shows that you have no idea about the rebate system and who and how the handful of syndicates are rorting the tote systems to their advantage. weather right or wrong ?

one thing i will say, is that it is to the detriment of the punters. as very well could have been an example as the thread creator has pointed out.

How?

The figures I get for this, are:
Pool: 5732

Money on second place horse ~796
Money on favourite horse ~3370

Total available for payout ~4872

Total available for payout after favourite money returned 4872 - 3370 = 1502

796 dollars placed, with funds of 1502 available to return to the punter, given that the minimum is 1.00 already paid out, is 1502 / 796


You know what that equals Einstein?  1.89


And it paid what?  1.90?



So please explain what I don't understand about rebates, and how they and API's rorted the TAB, especially on this occassion.


This race, was simply a sure thing seen by pub punters, overbacked to a price of around 85 cents, and the TAB forced to pay out to 1.00 instead of true price of 85 cents, which then cut into the second horses price.


EVERYTHING here adds up to ZERO rebates being paid.

So with numbers, do you care to back up how rebates effected anybody in this market?

While you are going, if you care to show how my opinion of 4k would not suggest any rorting was so wrong as you stated showing my "no idea" about the rebate system?


Not holding my breath.  As of yet, you have proven you are only capable of providing an opinion, based on nothing, so not sure why I would expect that to change.


For the record, the figures used there, was to 85 cents in the dollar.

If using .854700854700854 to represent a 17% take to the TAB, this is what I get.

Pool 5732
Money on second place horse 796
Money on favourite horse 3372

Pool after TAB take 4899.15

Money paid out on favourite 3372 at guaranteed 1.00 minimum odds.

Pool available for other winners (in this case, only second as only 2 payouts) 1527.15

1527.15 / 796  (Money to payout, divided by dollars to pay out to)

=1.918530150753769


Rounded down 1.90



My figures say rebates had ZERO effect on this market.


I welcome anybody to prove how they did, without simple accusations and personal attacks.



Please also note, that these figures can't be 100% accurate, as the prices shown are already rounded down, so impossible for somebody outside of the TAB itself to get the exact dollar placed.  This would not effect the prices given on average, so I stand by my figures.
In saying that, I would suggest it is pretty much impossible, based on the information at hand, that there was 4,000 dollars on the favourite for the place.  If there was, there is no way in hell second place would have paid 1.90.  Would have paid closer to 1.30.



So LOGROLLER, I have shown you mine.  Care to show me yours?

I think i'll just go with,


    or is "BJT" a complete C#NT and can't conduct a meaningful inter change!!


and London to a brick he has to post the last comment

Nothing more meaningful than facts and figures to prove a point.  Certainly much more meaningful than dodging, weaving, and attacking.



BJT:  Here is the correct answer logroller.
Logroller:  You are a **** then.



Well played.

Attention Logroller.

It has come to my notice that you are GUILTY of a spelling error. The word 'weather' has been used instead of 'whether'.

This is totally unacceptable and not the first time you have shamed yourself. Your future posts will be monitored closely for further breeches.

Regards,

TKDM

Spelling and Dictation Police.

Agree spelling on the forum is a disgrace.

PS not sure Kamikazee should have 2 e's.

Kamikazee is a name. I can spell it however I like. You have failed the test and as a consequence your application to join the Spelling and Dictation Police has been DECLINED!

Have a nice day!

kan eye join?

Thank you for your Application. Currently we have over 2000 Applicants. We appreciate your patience.

I wood luv two jorn all sow....Plise axe sept mi ape la kation ....

Thang yu

BJT

The 2nd horse parimutual div was 3.6 however the declared div was 1.9.

Your maths above is missing the high probability that a rebate was given to the punter that had roughly 4k on the 1st place with 6-10% paid on top of the 1.00 that was the true div of 1.00

So what does the tab do? It subtracts the available payout to the other place getter by modifying their declared odds from the true pari-mutual odds.

whats worse is the the tab system can cater for this meaning rebates are programmed into the system.

I have seen this happen at least a dozen times in the past, and have been the dismayed punter that looks up at the final odds and the declared div with bewilderment.

Before you come back with a retort, have a look through the results from that Bathurst card and show me one race where the place pool was within koo wee of the place pool in the first event (90% of win pool) and then one race where the final div differed from the declared div.

OH NO.
kami comes out to support the Spelling and Dictation Police


and then the word "breeches"              I can only assume that you will monitor the short pants I'm wearing????

Congratulations Logroller! You have passed the test. We will notify you shortly of when to attend your induction.

Warm Regards,

TKDM.

Feb 19, 2015 -- 11:34AM, gatespeed wrote:

BJTThe 2nd horse parimutual div was 3.6 however the declared div was 1.9.Your maths above is missing the high probability that a rebate was given to the punter that had roughly 4k on the 1st place with 6-10% paid on top of the 1.00 that was the true div of 1.00So what does the tab do? It subtracts the available payout to the other place getter by modifying their declared odds from the true pari-mutual odds. whats worse is the the tab system can cater for this meaning rebates are programmed into the system. I have seen this happen at least a dozen times in the past, and have been the dismayed punter that looks up at the final odds and the declared div with bewilderment.Before you come back with a retort, have a look through the results from that Bathurst card and show me one race where the place pool was within koo wee of the place pool in the first event (90% of win pool) and then one race where the final div differed from the declared div.

No my maths is showing the true odds with no rebate, as 1.90 for the 3.60 horse, that comes down purely to the guarantee of minimum of 1 dollar dividend.

I have the true odds of the favourite at around 77-78 cents, meaning that for every dollar put on that horse, close to 3700 I believe, needed to be paid out 22-23 cents more than the dividend should have paid.

This is the money that has come off the second place dividend.  It has nothing to do with rebates as I have shown.

Without rebates, the numbers work out to around 1.90 left to payout to second place.  That is without any rebates taken into consideration.  If there were rebates, then it could have only bought the price in even more.




Let's work it out your way.

5700 in the pool, 4900 available to be paid out after the TAB gets their cut.

4000 on the favourite, receiving a 6-10% rebate.  Let us average that to 8% for you on your figures.

That means, out of the 4000 on the favourite, they are paying out 4320 of the 4900 available on that horse alone, leaving 580 dollars to be paid out on the second placed horse.  Right?

Considering there was nearly 800 placed on this horse, and only 580 available to be paid out, for what you say to be accurate, means the second horse would have paid out about 72 cents.  Certainly not 1.90.  No?  It is impossible for what you say to be anywhere near accurate. 


I will humor you though, and go through the rest of the card and show you the difference.

R2.  357% market, 3 dividends.
R3.  354.2% market, 3 dividends.
R4.  356.6% market, 3 dividends.
R5.  361% market, 3 dividends.
R6.  348.6% market, 3 dividends. 
R7.  358.3% market, 3 dividends.
R8.  353.1% market, 3 dividends.
R9.  355.8% market, 3 dividends.


R1.  169.8% market, 2 dividends.


Race 1 was certainly overbet.  I would also argue that Race 6 was overbet, hence why it was under 351%, but very marginally, and would not have been enough to take the dividend under 1.00. 

Being overbet, doesn't equate to rebates though.  How are the 2 mutually inclusive?

In a 2 dividend pool, they pay out to 200%, and should have a 234% pool so they take 17% of each, leaving 200% left to pay out.

At 170%, after taking 34%, they are left with 136% where 65% of the money has to be paid at in inflated dividend, because of their guarantee to the punter to never lose money on a winning bet unless a dead heat.




The facts of this race are this:
1.  The TAB will get their 17% before worrying about the punter.
2.  The minimum dividend paid out is 1.00.  These punters get that money guaranteed.
3.  The favourite was overbet and true dividend was ~78 cents.
4.  The payout on the other runners once the must haves, are then paid out based on the money placed on them.


There is NOTHING to suggest a rebate paid of more than 0%, because if there was, there wasn't enough money left to payout to 1.90.  The numbers you suggest would have left less money than was available to be paid, so would have been 1.00 for the second placed horse.  Nowhere near 1.90.


I understand you have an issue with rebates, and may feel you have seen this happen a dozen times before, but stand back for a second, and think about the numbers involved.  What you say, is not accurate, and impossible.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
the last word he hopes

good on you BJT a very thorough and informative reply - i do stand corrected

Your maths does appear correct and why i originally posted that the large bet placed on the first place getter was by a 'low life' ill rephrase that to a 'dumb sh#t'. Given what you have explained he was on an absolute hiding to nothing, thus my belief that he must have been remunerated with a rebate.

All the best

the money in a single race pool has got no bearing on the rebate, the rebate is paid at the end of a period of time on the total amount turned over in that period

How do you KNOW that logroller??

and

WHAT period of time is it normally over (month, quarter?)??

shiraz
he knows that because its true

simple

That's fine nick, my point is that he did not indicate what a "period of time" means.

I have been involved with rebates from TAB (not in parimuatuel markets) in the past and logroller's statement seems a bit 'broad'.

Hence my Q.  I just want to know more.

shiraz , now I am curious! you are getting rebates on fixed odds sports betting or fixed odds for racing?

Logroller: the guy that said Citibet didn't exist...

I have made it very clear many times on this forum (showing my ignorance) that I have a very limited interest in horse race betting.........I think the market is 'saturated' and I cannot find an acceptable 'edge', therefore I do not bet seriously. 

Any betting I have knowledge of with rebates are on sports fixed odds betting.

I have been very forthcoming, but.............

You did not answer my two questions.

balllicker, OMG the biggest LURKER on the forum, nothing to contribute as usual, just another bullsh!t line, can't wait till you bring that quote up. from my quess a broken down bitter old bookie or a bookies dog.
either way welcome back old chum

OK shiraz, I think what you are receiving and taking advantage of, is the promo's in give backs and free bets from the
bookies not actual rebates from the TABs Pari Mutuel system. correct me if i'm wrong please.

Feb 20, 2015 -- 10:19AM, shiraz wrote:

I have made it very clear many times on this forum (showing my ignorance) that I have a very limited interest in horse race betting.........I think the market is 'saturated' and I cannot find an acceptable 'edge', therefore I do not bet seriously.  Any betting I have knowledge of with rebates are on sports fixed odds betting.I have been very forthcoming, but.............You did not answer my two questions.

He won't answer questions, as I think he has no idea of the answers.  Just a guy that likes to make noise.

One the one hand I read about corporates  refusing bets , closing accounts or limiting to threepence ...then up pops the topic of rebates to encourage trade....


From what I read mark Read offers 11% rebate...paid in 24 hours......my first thought is "big woop" ......but I try to avoid gimmicks( qantas club is a gimmick but confess to being a member)

au contraire, my dear BJT, but with you I'd rather go down the line of-

or is "BJT" a complete C#NT and can't conduct a meaningful inter change!!

Feb 21, 2015 -- 12:54AM, henryluca wrote:

One the one hand I read about corporates  refusing bets , closing accounts or limiting to threepence ...then up pops the topic of rebates to encourage trade....From what I read mark Read offers 11% rebate...paid in 24 hours......my first thought is "big woop" ......but I try to avoid gimmicks( qantas club is a gimmick but confess to being a member)

Don't believe he offers anything now.  Don't think he runs books any more.  He is an agent for Citibet, and runs a syndicate on HK races.  Last I looked anyway.  Certainly was offering 11%, but I believe the takeout of HK is 25% or so, so brings you not far under TAB anyway after the rebate, and you can get much better than that on Citibet anyway.

And the rebates, are for totes, not for fixed odds.

the rebates, are for totes

Ahh! (slowing learning)..assume that way it comes out of money invested by others and not put of the promoters pocket...then how does that rationalize with
shiraz:

" Any betting I have knowledge of with rebates are on sports fixed odds betting." (underlined added)

No idea.  Not sure where you can even get on betting fixed odds sports, let alone getting rebates.  I would assume bonuses or something, as if they aren't betting people on sports I fail to see who they are giving rebates to.  From where I sit anyway.

Are these mass rebates?

That's worth a debate Joel.