For those who don’t know, a syndicate in horse racing looks more or less like this: several bettors pool their money so that they can make more bets on an exotic bet (usually a Pick Six). The more money in the pool, the more combinations they can buy, and thus the more likely they are to win. Each dollar contributed by a bettor is a “share,” so to speak, so if $1,000 is in the pool, and one of the tickets wins $2,000,000, then each bettor gets $2,000 for each dollar he contributed.
Is this illegal? I know that many syndicates at tracks are run by the Mob, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that a syndicate is, in and of itself, illegal.
Furthermore, I don’t see how the track could care. They get their cut off each dollar bet, win or lose. AND, tracks get publicity for big wins, so I’d think they’d welcome syndicates with open arms.
Anyone got the Straight Dope™ on this?
And, as an aside, how do I contribute to a syndicate (assuming it’s legal, of course)? Walk around the track looking for a guy in pinstripes with a pinkie ring? Hold a sign that says “I’m looking for a syndicate”?
Are syndicates illegal/frowned upon in other forms of gambling? I’m thinking specifically about sports books. For example, I know that one of the bigger Las Vegas Strip casinos (Mandalay Bay, perhaps?) offers a bet where you pick the winners of all 14 or 15 NFL games on a Sunday. Surely a syndicate could buy every possible combination?
I doubt that it would be worth the effort on sports betting. The odds make it unlikely that the dividend would be worth the effort. More than half the games will be won by favourites. Even on the racetrack it isn’t worth going for most exotic pools until it has jackpotted. I can’t imagine that the track would care. It’s just more money that they take a cut from.
In the Australian papers today is a story about a decent bet on next Monday’s Australia Cup.
No the race tracks don’t care, and would welcome the action. The type of wagering at the track is Pari-Mutual. What this means is there is a certain amount of money in the pool for every type of wager (Win, Place, Pick Six doesn’t matter really) and the track takes a cut of this (about 20% depending on the type of wager) off the top. So if there is $1,000 total wagered on win bets, there is $800 that is going to be paid out of the win pool. So it doesn’t matter if people are working together because at the track you are better against other bettors and not the house.
Is there a difference between ‘wagering’ and ‘betting’?
I always had the impression that ‘wager’ was simply a fancier word for betting, used by people who wanted a more upscale image, and was otherwise somewhat archaic. Am I wrong?
How do you "know"syndicates are run by the mob?The last thing those guys want to do is gamble on the outcome of events.They make their money on sure things.
Go sniff around some horseracing newsgroups,I’m sure some of those contributors would like some fresh money.
Or form your own with coworkers and friends.
As has been stated before the track doesn’t care where the handle’s coming from as long as you look close enough to legal betting age.
To ** sunspace **,your impression is correct.Wager is a more formal word for a bet.Don’t use it when you’re looking to lay down your money,tho,unless you’re at Monte Carlo
You’d probably be looked at as a little off your beat.
I said “some” syndicates are run by the Mob. And I know this because Whatshisname Beyer (the Beyer Speed Ratings guy) said as much in his book Picking Winners (or was it Beyer on Speed?).
There is another type of syndicate that bookies do fear: Sports betting syndicates. These are large groups of people that approach sports betting as a science. They have their own experts in various teams, professional handicappers, ‘runners’ who check odds offered at multiple casinos looking for differences that can be exploited, and mathematicians who analyze the games, payout structures, and other rules looking for an advantage.
More than one sports betting syndicate has been barred in Las Vegas. It’s hard to bar them, because they can front their money through anyone, but the bookies try.
There is a double threat to the book here - the first is that these teams usually have an advantage over the house. The second is that they can put astounding amounts of money into pay in the right circumstances, and can really hurt the book’s bottom line.
Cheezit, Titan2. Am I asking a General Question here or having my doctoral disstertation critiqued? If Beyer’s wrong, so be it, but that doesn’t change the gist of my question, which is, are syndicates illegal?
Since the race track isn’t paying out its own money, but rather the pay outs come from what is bet, just who bets the money and how any potential payoffs get divided up is unimportant.
And if the “syndicate” loses its bet, the track certainly isn’t going to care at all who gave them the money.
The tracks care about the results of the race being tampered with in some way, either by use of drugs or illegal actions by the jockeys or flat out fixing.
