"Arbitrage: Attempting to profit by exploiting price differences of similar financial instruments [horses], in different markets."
Arbitrage as part of the racing biz has always interested me, but I know very little about actual situations that could be leveraged for profit.
The UK runner shipped to California seems to be successful quite often... As well, the South American stakes winner shipped North also seems to work.
As for claiming arbritage, technically there is an attempt to somewhat normalize the Beyers from track to track by how the 100 Beyer for each track is calculated. I'm not sure how good it is at uncovering arbritage. Par times/values seem to be better and used by handicappers to look for betting angles on shippers. (But ya gotta pay for that data...)
So my "leverage the internet so I don't have to go and pay real money for the data" question is.... What are the tracks where $5K, $10K, and $20K claimers run the best performances? ie. If you had a race with the average winners of $10K claimers from each track in North America, which track's horse would usually win? (I know it's not an exact science, just hoping for some opinions, please) In a racing market with little arbritage, they would all basically head bob each other in the photo....
Cheers,
KH
Claiming Arbitrage
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
-
angelsprite
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 351
- Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:11 pm
- Location: waller, Texas
- Contact:
Gallop,
I think I understand what you're saying. In other words, a UK racer may not be of great value in the UK whereas in the US, simply because he was imported, he will be viewed as being of greater value. The same with the South American horse, although the perception of most people would be to conisder him more dubiously until he proved himself. They have some exceptional racing in South America and some very sound horses too.
So, basically, you're asking, which track might a horse run for one price on that, if he moved to a different track he would have more respect for having performed well at the place where horses have tougher company. That's if I understand you correctly.
Florida tracks are tough. California tracks are tough. New York has always had a reputation for being very tough at all levels, but you have to realize that Belmont has a 3/8 stretch and a jockey who goes up there to ride a particular horse in a particular race, who is not used to the oval, will let his horse burn itself out before it ever hits the stretch and then it's a long way down for a tired horse. Louisiana has a long history of tough company with Fairgrounds probably being the toughest.
Is that what you're asking?
I think I understand what you're saying. In other words, a UK racer may not be of great value in the UK whereas in the US, simply because he was imported, he will be viewed as being of greater value. The same with the South American horse, although the perception of most people would be to conisder him more dubiously until he proved himself. They have some exceptional racing in South America and some very sound horses too.
So, basically, you're asking, which track might a horse run for one price on that, if he moved to a different track he would have more respect for having performed well at the place where horses have tougher company. That's if I understand you correctly.
Florida tracks are tough. California tracks are tough. New York has always had a reputation for being very tough at all levels, but you have to realize that Belmont has a 3/8 stretch and a jockey who goes up there to ride a particular horse in a particular race, who is not used to the oval, will let his horse burn itself out before it ever hits the stretch and then it's a long way down for a tired horse. Louisiana has a long history of tough company with Fairgrounds probably being the toughest.
Is that what you're asking?