Skip to main content
Log in

Managing losses in exotic horse race wagering

  • Published:
Journal of the Operational Research Society

Abstract

We consider a specialized form of risk management for betting opportunities with low payout frequency, presented in particular for exotic horse race wagering. An optimization problem is developed which limits losing streaks with high probability to the given time horizon of a gambler, which is formulated as a globally solvable mixed integer nonlinear program. A case study is conducted using one season of historical horse racing data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Asch P, Malkiel BG and Quandt RE (1984). Market efficiency in racetrack betting. The Journal of Business 57(2):165–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benter W (2008). Computer based horse race handicapping and wagering systems: a report. In: Hausch DB, Lo VSY and Ziemba WT (eds.) Efficiency of Racetrack Betting Markets (pp. 183–198). World Scientific.

  • Bolton RN and Chapman RG (1986). Searching for positive returns at the track: a multinomial logic model for handicapping horse races. Management Science 32(8):1040–1060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonami P, Biegler LT, Conn AR, Cornuéjols G, Grossmann IE, Laird CD and Wächter A (2008). An algorithmic framework for convex mixed integer nonlinear programs. Discrete Optimization 5(2):186–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandimarte P (2006). Numerical Methods in Finance and Economics: A Matlab-Based Introduction. John Wiley & Sons.

  • Carlson B (2001). Blackjack for Blood. Pi Yee Press.

  • CompuBet (2014). https://compubet.com. Accessed 2 June 2014.

  • Croissant Y (2012). Estimation of multinomial logit models in R: The mlogit packages. R package version 0.2.4.

  • Harville DA (1973). Assigning probabilities to the outcomes of multi-entry competitions. Journal of the American Statistical Association 68(342):312–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausch DB, Ziemba WT and Rubinstein M (1981). Efficiency of the market for racetrack betting. Management Science 27(12):1435–1452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HorsePlayer Interactive (2014). http://www.horseplayerinteractive.com. Accessed 2 June 2014.

  • Isaacs R (1953). Optimal horse race bets. American Mathematical Monthly 60(5):310–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kallberg JG and Ziemba WT (2008). Concavity properties of racetrack betting models. In: Hausch DB, Lo VSY and Ziemba WT (eds.) Efficiency of Racetrack Betting Markets (pp. 99–107). World Scientific.

  • Kanto A and Rosenqvist G (2008). On the efficiency of the market for double (quinella) bets at a Finnish racetrack. In: Hausch DB, Lo VSY and Ziemba WT (eds.) Efficiency of Racetrack Betting Markets (pp. 485–498). World Scientific.

  • Kaplan M (2002). The high tech trifecta. Wired Magazine 10(3):10–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly JL (1956). A new interpretation of information rate. IRE Transactions on Information Theory 2(3):185–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo VSY (2008). Application of running time distribution models in Japan. In D. B. Hausch, V. S. Y. Lo, & W. T. Ziemba (Eds.), Efficiency of Racetrack Betting Markets (pp. 237-247). World Scientific: Singapore.

  • Lo VSY and Bacon-Shone J (1994). A comparison between two models for predicting ordering probabilities in multiple-entry competitions. The Statistician 43(2):317–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo VSY and Bacon-Shone J (2008). Approximating the ordering probabilities of multi-entry competitions by a simple method. In: Hausch DB and Ziemba WT (eds.) Handbook of Sports and Lottery Markets (pp. 51–65). Elsevier.

  • MacLean LC, Sanegre R, Zhao Y and Ziemba WT (2004). Capital growth with security. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 28(5):937–954.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacLean LC, Thorp EO and Ziemba WT (2011). The Kelly Capital Growth Investment Criterion: Theory and Practice (Vol. 3). World Scientific.

  • MacLean LC, Ziemba WT and Blazenko G (1992). Growth versus security in dynamic investment analysis. Management Science 38(11):1562–1585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz H (1952). Portfolio selection. The Journal of Finance 7(1):77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFadden D (1974). conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka P (ed.) Frontiers in Econometrics (pp. 105–142). Academic Press: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poundstone W (2005). Fortune’s Formula: The Untold Story of the Scientific Betting System that Beat the Casinos and Wall Street. Hill and Wang.

  • Rosett RN (1965). Gambling and rationality. The Journal of Political Economy 73(6):595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro A, Dentcheva D and Ruszczyński A (2009). Lectures on Stochastic Programming: Modeling and Theory. SIAM.

  • Smoczynski P and Tomkins D (2010). An explicit solution to the problem of optimizing the allocations of a bettor’s wealth when wagering on horse races. Mathematical Scientist 35(1):10–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorp EO (2006). The Kelly criterion in blackjack, sports betting, and the stock market. In: Zenios SA and Ziemba WT (eds.) Handbook of Asset and Liability management, Volume I (pp. 385–428). Elsevier.

  • Thorp EO (2008). Understanding the Kelly criterion. Wilmott Magazine (May 2008).

  • TrackIT (2014). https://trackit.standardbredcanada.ca. Accessed 2 June 2014.

  • Wächter A. and Biegler LT (2006). On the implementation of an interior-point filter line-search algorithm for large-scale nonlinear programming. Mathematical Programming 106(1):25–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weitzman M (1965). Utility analysis and group behavior: an empirical study. Journal of Political Economy 73(1):18–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong CX (2011). Precision: Statistical and Mathematical Methods in Horse Racing. Denver, Colorado: Outskirts Press, Inc.

  • Wong SÌ (2009). Sharp Sports Betting. Pi Yee Press.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the anonymous referees for their valuable comments. This work was partially supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Discovery Grant programs (RGPIN-2015-06163, RGPIN06524-15), and by the Digiteo Chair C&O program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael R. Metel.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 Estimating win probabilities

A number of factors and their logarithms were considered, displayed in Table 2 below. The domain of each factor is listed in brackets, but all were normalized to be between 0 and 1 for statistical use. The first six factors are from CompuBet (2014), with the other two from the race program and result.

Table 2 Win probability considered factors

Systematically removing the least significant factor with a p-value greater than 0.05 resulted in the factors in Table 3.

Table 3 Win probability factors

The McFadden (1974) \(R^2\) goodness of fit measure was used to compare the public’s implied winning probabilities to the model’s, where \(R^2=1\) implies perfect predictive ability and \(R^2=0\) means predictability is no better than random guessing. Using the last \(30\%\) of the racing data, \(R^2_{\pi _h}=0.218077\) and \(R^2_{\pi ^m_h}=0.214455\). We see the model has a small positive edge of \(\Delta R^2=R^2_{\pi _h}-R^2_{\pi ^m_h}=0.0036\) over the general public.

1.2 Estimating superfecta probabilities

Below are the results of estimating the \(\lambda ^{i}\) parameters Table 4.

Table 4 Superfecta probability parameters

1.3 Estimating public’s superfecta probabilities

Below are the results of estimating the \(\theta ^{i}\) parameters Table 5.

Table 5 Superfecta probability parameters

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Deza, A., Huang, K. & Metel, M.R. Managing losses in exotic horse race wagering. J Oper Res Soc (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41274-017-0213-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41274-017-0213-8

Keywords

Navigation