12 views

Uploaded by jesse

Part 6 efficiency of exotic wagering markets

save

- 4. How Accurately Do Bettors Bet in Doubles
- 8. POST POSITION BIAS An Econometric Analysis of the 1987 Season at Exhibition Park.pdf
- 7. Efficient Market Adjustment of Odds Prices to Reflect Track Biases.pdf
- 6. ON THE EFFICIENCY OF THE MARKET FOR DOUBLE (QUINELLA) BETS AT A FINNISH RACETRACK.pdf
- 1. Introduction to the Efficiency of Exotic Wagering Markets
- 8. POST POSITION BIAS an Econometric Analysis of the 1987 Season at Exhibition Park
- 6. on the Efficiency of the Market for Double (Quinella) Bets at a Finnish Racetrack
- 5. Pricing Exotic Racetrack Wagers
- 7. Efficient Market Adjustment of Odds Prices to Reflect Track Biases
- 2. Some Evidence of the Efficiency of a Speculative Market.pdf
- 3. Efficiency and Profitability in Exotic Bets
- 5. Arbitrage Strategies for Cross-Track Betting on Major Horse Races
- 3. Market Efficiency in Racebtrak Betting Further Evidence and a Correction
- 1. Introduction to the Efficiency of Exotic Wagering Markets.pdf
- 3. Efficiency and Profitability in Exotic Bets.pdf
- 6. Locks at the Racetrack
- 5. Pricing Exotic Racetrack Wagers.pdf
- 4. How Accurately Do Bettors Bet in Doubles.pdf
- 4. Efficienency of the Market for Racetrack Betting
- 2. Market Efficiency in Racetrack Betting
- 1. Introduction to Prices Versus Handicapping Place and Show Anomalies
- 7. Racetrack Betting–an Example of a Market With Efficient Arbitrage
- Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind
- Yes Please
- The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America
- The Innovators: How a Group of Hackers, Geniuses, and Geeks Created the Digital Revolution
- Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future
- Dispatches from Pluto: Lost and Found in the Mississippi Delta
- John Adams
- Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America
- The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power
- This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate
- Grand Pursuit: The Story of Economic Genius
- A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story
- The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer
- Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
- The New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
- Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore
- The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers
- Smart People Should Build Things: How to Restore Our Culture of Achievement, Build a Path for Entrepreneurs, and Create New Jobs in America
- The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century
- Bad Feminist: Essays
- How To Win Friends and Influence People
- Steve Jobs
- Angela's Ashes: A Memoir
- Leaving Berlin: A Novel
- The Silver Linings Playbook: A Novel
- The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)
- Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close: A Novel
- The Light Between Oceans: A Novel
- The Incarnations: A Novel
- You Too Can Have a Body Like Mine: A Novel
- Life of Pi
- The Love Affairs of Nathaniel P.: A Novel
- We Are Not Ourselves: A Novel
- The First Bad Man: A Novel
- The Rosie Project: A Novel
- The Blazing World: A Novel
- The Flamethrowers: A Novel
- Brooklyn: A Novel
- A Man Called Ove: A Novel
- The Master
- Bel Canto
- Interpreter of Maladies
- The Kitchen House: A Novel
- Beautiful Ruins: A Novel
- The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel
- Wolf Hall: A Novel
- The Wallcreeper
- A Prayer for Owen Meany: A Novel
- The Cider House Rules
- The Bonfire of the Vanities: A Novel
- Lovers at the Chameleon Club, Paris 1932: A Novel
- The Perks of Being a Wallflower
- The Constant Gardener: A Novel

**Author(s): Mukhtar M. Ali
**

Source: Econometrica, Vol. 47, No. 2 (Mar., 1979), pp. 387-392

Published by: The Econometric Society

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1914189

Accessed: 06-07-2016 11:21 UTC

REFERENCES

Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1914189?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

**Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
**

http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted

digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about

JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

**The Econometric Society, Wiley are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
**

Econometrica

**This content downloaded from 131.172.36.29 on Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:21:49 UTC
**

All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Econometrica, Vol. 47, No. 2 (March, 1979)

**SOME EVIDENCE OF THE EFFICIENCY OF A SPECULATIVE
**

MARKET

BY MUKHTAR M. ALI1

**It is well known that the returns on various betting opportunities at a racetrack are
**

determined by a competitive bidding of the bettors in a natural environment of their

decision making. In this paper, two simple bets of unknown but identical winning

probabilities are identified. An analysis of 1,089 observations shows the data are consistent

with the hypothesis that both bets are identically priced, an implication of an efficient

speculative market.

1. INTRODUCTION

**IN MANY RESPECTS, valuation of a bet in racetrack betting is similar to the
**

valuation of a stock in the stock market. In both cases, future earnings are

unknown and investors (bettors) bid against each other to determine the prices or

returns on their investments. Baumol [2, p. 46] maintains that the market of

racetrack betting closely approximates the efficient market hypothesis on the

ground that

**... all opportunities for profit by systematic betting are eliminated. Bets at ten to one will in
**

the long run come off almost as badly as bets at three to one.

**However, Ali [1] has shown from an analysis of over 20,000 races that on the
**

average, one would lose 10 cents per dollar bet by betting to win on the first

favorite, the horse with the lowest odds in a race, whereas he would lose 19 cents

per dollar bet by betting to win on the second favorite, the horse with the second

lowest odds.

Rosett [6] claims that the relationship between the return from a bet if it

succeeds, and its winning probability is consistent with the hypothesis that bettors

are rational, sophisticated, and have a strong preference for low-probability-high-

return bets and thus it is consistent with the efficient market hypothesis.2 But his

estimated relationship, as derived from this hypothesis, explains only part of his

data and consistently over-estimates the returns of low probability bets. Although

this casts doubts on the validity of his claim, it does not necessarily contradict the

efficient market hypothesis.

In this paper, two distinctly different bets with identical winning probabilities3

are identified. It is shown that the hypothesis that both bets are identically priced,

1 The author wishes to acknowledge the help received from his wife Julia W. Ali in collecting the

data for the present analysis. Comments from W. E. Wecker and S. I. Greenbaum are appreciated. I

am highly grateful to T. Hatta for comments clarifying some fundamental issues.

2 Bettors are rational in the sense that no one prefers a bet with a smaller winning probability and

the same or lower return or with a lower return and the same or lower winning probability to what is

available to him. Bettors are sophisticated in the sense that the winning probabilities of the bets are

known to them.

3 These are objective probabilities. Objective probability of an event is defined as the long run

relative frequency when the experiment is repeated (the race is run) infinitely many times under the

same conditions.

387

**This content downloaded from 131.172.36.29 on Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:21:49 UTC
**

All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

388 M. M. ALI

**an implication of an efficient market, cannot be rejected. Section 2 outlines the
**

construction of two such bets and describes the methods of analysis. Empirical

findings and conclusions are in Section 3.

2. METHODOLOGY

**There are various betting opportunities at a racetrack. The odds on a bet are
**

profits per dollar bet to a successful bettor and are determined from the bets made

by the public, and the track-take and breakage. A fixed proportion of the amount

bet in a race is taken out by the track for maintenance costs, taxes, and profits,

before it distributes the rest to the successful bettors. This proportion is known as

the track-take. The breakage arises because of the following two restrictions: (a)

odds cannot be below a certain prescribed minimum, and (b) odds are rounded

downward except when (a) is in effect, in which case it is rounded upward. For the

races analyzed, the odds are rounded to either ten or five cents and the minimum

odds are also either ten or five cents depending on the particular racetrack.

Odds for different types of bets-win, place, show, daily double, quinella,

etc.-are determined separately. Let us take the case of a win bet. Suppose there

are H horses numbered 1, 2, . . ., h, .. . , H, and let Xh be the total amount of bet

for horse h to win. Then W = Mh1 Xh is the total win bet in the race also known as

the win "pool". Let the track-take and breakage be a; then the total money to be

distributed to the successful win bettors is (1 - a) W and the odds on horse h are

ah=[(1-a)W-- Xh]/Xh (h =1,2, . . H).

**In other words, return per dollar bet to a successful bettor is (1 + ah) and the return
**

is zero to an unsuccessful bettor. Thus, the returns per dollar bet are market

determined through a competitive bidding of the bettors.

In the daily double bet one chooses a horse in the first race and another in the

second race during a racing day(night) and before the first race is run. The bet is

successful only when the chosen horses win their respective races. A parlay can be

constructed by choosing the same two horses before the first race is run where a bet

is made on the horse in the first race to win and if it wins, the total return from this

successful bet is bet on the horse in the second race to win. It can be verified that

winning probabilities of such a daily double and parlay are the same.

Let D be the return per dollar bet on a daily double and P be the return on a

parlay. D can be observed directly, but P must be derived. If the odds on the win

bets for the chosen horses in the first and second races are a and b, respectively,

then P can be shown to be (1 + a)(1 + b). Note that a, b, and D are determined

from distinctly different betting pools and hence D and P are separately market

determined.

The cost of a bet can be defined to be the amount that must be paid for a dollar

return from a successful bet. This will be the reciprocal of the return. As a fraction

of every wager made represents track-take and breakage, which can be inter-

preted as transaction cost, the cost of a bet has two components: transaction cost

and price of the bet. Thus, the price and cost of a bet would be identical if there is

**This content downloaded from 131.172.36.29 on Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:21:49 UTC
**

All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

EFFICIENCY OF A MARKET 389

**no transaction cost. If the return from a bet is R when the track-take and breakage
**

(transaction cost) is a, then the return would have been R/(1 - a) in the absence of

such a transaction cost; and as the cost of a bet is the reciprocal of its return, the

cost of the bet in the absence of the transaction cost would have been (1- a)/R

which would then also be the price of the bet. It then follows that the price of a

daily double is (1 - a)/D, where D is the daily double return. If the return on a

parlay is P, then P = (1 + a)(1 + b), where 1 + a is the return from the bet for the

chosen horse in the first race to win and (1 + b) is the return from the bet for the

chosen horse in the second race to win. Without the track-take and breakage of a,

the returns on these win bets would have been (1 + a)/(l - a) and (1 + b)/(l - a),

respectively, and therefore, the parlay return would have been P/(1 - a )2. Hence,

the price of the parlay is (1 - a)2/p. It can be verified that the fraction of the total

cost representing the transaction cost is higher for a parlay bet than for a daily

double bet.

It can be seen that the daily doubles and the parlays are priced separately. Any

daily double is priced in relation to all possible daily doubles involving the first two

races. The parlay prices result from the prices of the win bets in the first two races.

Any win bet is priced in relation to all possible win bets in that race and in that race

alone.

If the market is efficient, the bets will be valued according to their intrinsic

worth, i.e., their probability distributions alone, and thus, the price of a parlay bet

will equal the price of the corresponding daily double bet. However, if the

speculative motive of the bettors plays a significant role in pricing the bets, then

this equality cannot be guaranteed; rather it is likely to be violated. If the price of a

parlay differs from that of the corresponding daily double, there does not seem to

exist any motivation from the mere rationality of the bettors that can equalife

these prices. If the cost (price plus transaction cost) of a parlay is below the cost of

the corresponding daily double, the potential bettors of the daily double will find it

profitable to bet the parlay and such a betting may equalize the costs. However, as

the transaction cost of the parlay bet is higher than that of the daily double bet, the

price of the parlay can still be below the price of the daily double, i.e., the price

inequality can exist. Utilizing the definition of odds on a bet, it can be verified that

the sum of the costs of all the parlay bets involving the first two races is 1/(1 - a )2,

whereas the corresponding sum for the daily double bets is 1/(1 - a). As 1/(1 -

a)2 is larger than 1/(1 - a), it follows that inevitably the cost of at least some

parlay will be larger than the cost of the corresponding daily double. However,

mere higher cost of a parlay over the corresponding daily double cost does not

guarantee the equality in their prices. The preceding discussions show that the

price equality implication of the efficient market hypothesis is not an empty

proposition.

The observed daily double return, D, can be different from its true value. The

true daily double return, DT, is defined to be the one which is obtained if there is no

friction in the market. The true parlay return, PT, is similarly defined. In practice,

the market may not be free from frictions. For example, there is no secondary

market where bettors can exchange bets already made. Further, no bet can be less

**This content downloaded from 131.172.36.29 on Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:21:49 UTC
**

All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

390 M. M. ALI

**than $2 and some bets cannot be less than $3. Moreover, the equilibrating process
**

which adjusts D towards DT works for only a finite length of time. There may be

numerous other factors influencing the workings of the market. However, none of

these seemed to have a systematic effect on the determination of D. The aggregate

influence of all these factors will be called unsystematic effects on D and we will

view

D =DT+eD

**where eD is the error in the observation due to the unsystematic effects. The error
**

eD can be positive or negative and can be assumed to have zero mean in repeated

sampling. DT is expected to depend upon the winning probability of the bet. As

this probability differs from observation to observation, DT will be different at

different observations. However, as the unsystematic effects on D can be assumed

to be independent and remain invariant in basic structure from observation to

observation, eD's can be taken as a random sample from a population with zero

mean and unknown variance.

We view the observed parlay return, P, in a similar fashion so that

P=PT+ ep

**where ep is the error in observation and the ep's are a random sample from a
**

population with zero mean and unknown variance.

Following our earlier discussions, the price of a daily double with a return, DT is

(1- a)/DT and the price of the corresponding parlay with a return, PT is

(1-a )2/PT. Thus, a test of the efficient market hypothesis can be achieved by

testing the implication, (1 - a)/DT = (1- -a)2/PT, or (1 - a)DT = PT.

In order to test (1- a)DT = PT, we note the random variable, (1- a)D -P has a

mean, ILD_P = (1- a)DT-PT and an unknown variance, 2_p. Thus, the postu-

lated hypothesis can be tested by testing to see whether A1D-P = Oor not.

From a sample of size N, an unbiased estimate of I.D-P and that of _2-p can be

obtained, respectively, as

A 1 -

-LD-P Exi = X

N

and

OD-P N-I (xi X)

where Xi = (1- a)Di -Pi is the ith observation. Thus, an unbiased estimate of the

variance of /.D-P is O/D_p1N and the standard error of the estimate, 12D-P, can be

computed as

S.E.(/ID-P) = D -P/IVN.

For large N, it is well known that the sampling distribution of

A

Z 1D-P - AD-P

S.E.(iAD-P)

**This content downloaded from 131.172.36.29 on Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:21:49 UTC
**

All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

EFFICIENCY OF A MARKET 391

**is well approximated by a normal distribution with mean zero and unit variance.
**

Thus, the hypothesis, LD-P = O, can be tested using the statistic Z, and referring it

to the standardized normal distribution.

3. EMPIRICAL FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

**The data were collected from the race results published in The Horseman and
**

Fair World during September through December, 1975. The data consist of 1,089

observations from 34 racetracks in the U.S.A. and Canada. Each observation

consists of the winning daily double return, D, and the return on a $2 bet on each

of the horses finishing first in the first and second races of a racing day (night).

From these returns, the respective odds on a win bet are constructed and

therefrom the parlay return, P is computed. The track-take and breakage, a is

taken to be 0.18 which is an average a found in Ali [1] from an analysis of over

20,000 similar races.4'5 We find

JID-P- -0.5931

and

S.E.(ZD-P) = 0.5673,

**so that the computed Z when the market is efficient is - 1.0455. Thus, ILD-P does
**

not differ significantly from zero and hence the efficient market hypothesis cannot

be rejected.

In conclusion, two bets of equal winning probabilities have been shown to be

equally priced which is an implication of an efficient market. One of the two bets is

a daily double and the other is the corresponding parlay. The data are obtained

from a controlled experiment conducted under a natural environment of the

decision makers. This can be contrasted with various laboratory studies (Preston

and Baratta [5], Mosteller and Nogee [4], Rosett [7]) to learn human decision

behavior under uncertainty. The conclusion derived is independent of any

behavioral assumption such as risk preference, risk aversion or risk neutrality of

the individuals except that they are rational. The validity of the conclusion

requires no assumption regarding the decision makers' perception of the prob-

abilities, i.e. the bettors need not be sophisticated as assumed by Rosett [6]. Nor is

it necessary to assume that decision makers are expected utility maximizers. In

4 Utilizing the definition of ah, a can be obtained from the identity,

h= (1+ah) 1-a

where ah are the odds on horse h to win a race and H is the number of horses in the race.

SAlthough the track-take and breakage vary from race to race and also from racetrack to racetrack,

their variability is negligible. The coefficient of variation of a in the above study was less than one per

cent.

**This content downloaded from 131.172.36.29 on Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:21:49 UTC
**

All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

392 M. M. ALI

**short, the conclusion of the paper does not depend on any specific valuation
**

process of the decision makers.6 This is a novelty not usually found in the works

dealing with market efficiency.

University of Kentucky

Manuscript received February, 1977; final revision received April, 1978.

REFERENCES

**[1] ALI, M. M.: "Probability and Utility Estimates for Racetrack Bettors," Journal of Political
**

Economy, 85 (1977), 803-816.

[2] BAUMOL, W. J.: The Stock Market and Economic Efficiency. New York: Fordham University

Press, 1965.

[3] KEYNES, J. M.: The General Theory of Employment Interest and Money. New York: Harcourt,

Brace and Co., 1935.

[4] MOSTELLER, F., AND P. NOGEE: "An Experimental Measurement of Utility," Journal of

Political Economy, 59 (1951), 371-404.

[5] PRESTON, M. G., AND P. BARAITA: "An Experimental Study of the Auction-value of an

Uncertain Outcome," American Journal of Psychology, 61 (1948), 183-193.

[6] RoSETT, R. N.: "Gambling and Rationality," Journal of Political Economy, 73 (1965), 595-607.

[7] "Weak Experimental Verification of the Expected Utility Hypothesis," Review of

Economic Studies, 37 (1971), 481-492.

**6The discounted future earnings of a stock is often viewed as its value. There are numerous ways to
**

make this valuation process operational. Any test for market efficiency relying on such an arbitrary

valuation process is questionable because the failure of a market in the efficiency test can be ascribed to

the possible invalidity of the postulated valuation model.

**This content downloaded from 131.172.36.29 on Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:21:49 UTC
**

All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

- Sapiens: A Brief History of HumankindYuval Noah Harari
- Yes PleaseAmy Poehler
- The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New AmericaGeorge Packer
- The Innovators: How a Group of Hackers, Geniuses, and Geeks Created the Digital RevolutionWalter Isaacson
- Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic FutureAshlee Vance
- Dispatches from Pluto: Lost and Found in the Mississippi DeltaRichard Grant
- John AdamsDavid McCullough
- Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New AmericaGilbert King
- The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & PowerDaniel Yergin
- This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The ClimateNaomi Klein
- Grand Pursuit: The Story of Economic GeniusSylvia Nasar
- A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True StoryDave Eggers
- The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of CancerSiddhartha Mukherjee
- Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham LincolnDoris Kearns Goodwin
- The New Confessions of an Economic Hit ManJohn Perkins
- Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't IgnoreJay Sekulow
- The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy AnswersBen Horowitz
- Smart People Should Build Things: How to Restore Our Culture of Achievement, Build a Path for Entrepreneurs, and Create New Jobs in AmericaAndrew Yang
- The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first CenturyThomas L. Friedman
- Bad Feminist: EssaysRoxane Gay
- How To Win Friends and Influence PeopleDale Carnegie
- Steve JobsWalter Isaacson
- Angela's Ashes: A MemoirFrank McCourt

- Leaving Berlin: A NovelJoseph Kanon
- The Silver Linings Playbook: A NovelMatthew Quick
- The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)Viet Thanh Nguyen
- Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close: A NovelJonathan Safran Foer
- The Light Between Oceans: A NovelM.L. Stedman
- The Incarnations: A NovelSusan Barker
- You Too Can Have a Body Like Mine: A NovelAlexandra Kleeman
- Life of PiYann Martel
- The Love Affairs of Nathaniel P.: A NovelAdelle Waldman
- We Are Not Ourselves: A NovelMatthew Thomas
- The First Bad Man: A NovelMiranda July
- The Rosie Project: A NovelGraeme Simsion
- The Blazing World: A NovelSiri Hustvedt
- The Flamethrowers: A NovelRachel Kushner
- Brooklyn: A NovelColm Tóibín
- A Man Called Ove: A NovelFredrik Backman
- The MasterColm Tóibín
- Bel CantoAnn Patchett
- Interpreter of MaladiesJhumpa Lahiri
- The Kitchen House: A NovelKathleen Grissom
- Beautiful Ruins: A NovelJess Walter
- The Art of Racing in the Rain: A NovelGarth Stein
- Wolf Hall: A NovelHilary Mantel
- The WallcreeperNell Zink
- A Prayer for Owen Meany: A NovelJohn Irving
- The Cider House RulesJohn Irving
- The Bonfire of the Vanities: A NovelTom Wolfe
- Lovers at the Chameleon Club, Paris 1932: A NovelFrancine Prose
- The Perks of Being a WallflowerStephen Chbosky
- The Constant Gardener: A NovelJohn le Carre

- 4. How Accurately Do Bettors Bet in DoublesUploaded byjesse
- 8. POST POSITION BIAS An Econometric Analysis of the 1987 Season at Exhibition Park.pdfUploaded byjesse
- 7. Efficient Market Adjustment of Odds Prices to Reflect Track Biases.pdfUploaded byjesse
- 6. ON THE EFFICIENCY OF THE MARKET FOR DOUBLE (QUINELLA) BETS AT A FINNISH RACETRACK.pdfUploaded byjesse
- 1. Introduction to the Efficiency of Exotic Wagering MarketsUploaded byjesse
- 8. POST POSITION BIAS an Econometric Analysis of the 1987 Season at Exhibition ParkUploaded byjesse
- 6. on the Efficiency of the Market for Double (Quinella) Bets at a Finnish RacetrackUploaded byjesse
- 5. Pricing Exotic Racetrack WagersUploaded byjesse
- 7. Efficient Market Adjustment of Odds Prices to Reflect Track BiasesUploaded byjesse
- 2. Some Evidence of the Efficiency of a Speculative Market.pdfUploaded byjesse
- 3. Efficiency and Profitability in Exotic BetsUploaded byjesse
- 5. Arbitrage Strategies for Cross-Track Betting on Major Horse RacesUploaded byjesse
- 3. Market Efficiency in Racebtrak Betting Further Evidence and a CorrectionUploaded byjesse
- 1. Introduction to the Efficiency of Exotic Wagering Markets.pdfUploaded byjesse
- 3. Efficiency and Profitability in Exotic Bets.pdfUploaded byjesse
- 6. Locks at the RacetrackUploaded byjesse
- 5. Pricing Exotic Racetrack Wagers.pdfUploaded byjesse
- 4. How Accurately Do Bettors Bet in Doubles.pdfUploaded byjesse
- 4. Efficienency of the Market for Racetrack BettingUploaded byjesse
- 2. Market Efficiency in Racetrack BettingUploaded byjesse
- 1. Introduction to Prices Versus Handicapping Place and Show AnomaliesUploaded byjesse
- 7. Racetrack Betting–an Example of a Market With Efficient ArbitrageUploaded byjesse