IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ajecsc/v66y2007i3p465-491.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Do Bettors Want? Determinants of Pari‐Mutuel Betting Preference

Author

Listed:
  • Marshall Gramm
  • C. Nicholas McKinney
  • Douglas H. Owens
  • Matt E. Ryan

Abstract

. This paper is an analysis of the demand for thoroughbred racetrack wagers, examining evidence that would support the existence of two types of bettors: the risk‐averse informed bettor versus the uninformed bettor. Looking at 12 major racetracks over the fall of 2002, we undertake an empirical examination of the determinants of bettors' preferences for particular wagers on specific races. The goal is to try to determine what individual aspects of a race (conditions, surface, participants, etc.) will encourage increased wagering dollars. With the advent of simulcasting, the competition for the wagering dollar is fierce, as the bettor can choose from more than 100 races daily, each race offering numerous betting options. We find for most wagers that higher quality participants, larger and more competitive fields, and turf races increase betting volume while higher pari‐mutuel takeout, poor track conditions, and other races run concurrently reduce volume. However, more competitive fields reduce betting volume in the show and trifecta pools. Optimal field size is determined to be between 10 and 12 betting interests. Overall, we find support for the existence of a significant share of risk‐averse informed bettors.

Suggested Citation

  • Marshall Gramm & C. Nicholas McKinney & Douglas H. Owens & Matt E. Ryan, 2007. "What Do Bettors Want? Determinants of Pari‐Mutuel Betting Preference," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 465-491, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ajecsc:v:66:y:2007:i:3:p:465-491
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1536-7150.2007.00523.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2007.00523.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2007.00523.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mukhtar Ali & Richard Thalheimer, 1997. "Transportation costs and product demand: wagering on parimutuel horse racing," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 529-542.
    2. John Gandar & Richard Zuber & R. Stafford Johnson, 2001. "Searching for the favourite-longshot bias down under: an examination of the New Zealand pari-mutuel betting market," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(13), pages 1621-1629.
    3. Russell Sobel & S. Travis Raines, 2003. "An examination of the empirical derivatives of the favourite-longshot bias in racetrack betting," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 371-385.
    4. Richard E. Quandt, 1986. "Betting and Equilibrium," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(1), pages 201-207.
    5. Ali, Mukhtar M, 1977. "Probability and Utility Estimates for Racetrack Bettors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(4), pages 803-815, August.
    6. Kelly Busche & W. David Walls, 2000. "Decision Costs And Betting Market Efficiency," Rationality and Society, , vol. 12(4), pages 477-492, November.
    7. Asch, Peter & Malkiel, Burton G. & Quandt, Richard E., 1982. "Racetrack betting and informed behavior," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 187-194, July.
    8. Linda M. Woodland & Bill M. Woodland, 2001. "Market Efficiency and Profitable Wagering in the National Hockey League: Can Bettors Score on Longshots?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 67(4), pages 983-995, April.
    9. Mukhtar Ali & Richard Thalheimer, 2002. "Product choice for a firm selling related products: A parimutuel application," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(10), pages 1251-1271.
    10. Swidler, Steve & Shaw, Ron, 1995. "Racetrack wagering and the "uninformed" bettor: A study of market efficiency," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 305-314.
    11. De Bondt, Werner F M & Thaler, Richard H, 1989. "A Mean-Reverting Walk Down Wall Street," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 189-202, Winter.
    12. repec:bla:jfinan:v:43:y:1988:i:4:p:995-1008 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 279-279.
    14. Woodland, Linda M & Woodland, Bill M, 1994. "Market Efficiency and the Favorite-Longshot Bias: The Baseball Betting Market," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(1), pages 269-279, March.
    15. Rhoda, Kenneth L & Olson, Gerard T & Rappaport, Jack M, 1999. "Risk Preferences and Information Flows in Racetrack Betting Markets," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 22(3), pages 265-285, Fall.
    16. Martin Weitzman, 2008. "Utility Analysis And Group Behavior An Empirical Study," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Donald B Hausch & Victor SY Lo & William T Ziemba (ed.), Efficiency Of Racetrack Betting Markets, chapter 9, pages 47-55, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    17. Daniel B. Suits, 1979. "The Elasticity of Demand for Gambling," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 93(1), pages 155-162.
    18. Les Coleman, 2004. "New light on the longshot bias," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(4), pages 315-326.
    19. Kenneth L. Rhoda & Gerard T. Olson & Jack M. Rappaport, 1999. "Risk Preferences And Information Flows In Racetrack Betting Markets," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 22(3), pages 265-285, September.
    20. Busche, Kelly & Hall, Christopher D, 1988. "An Exception to the Risk Preference Anomaly," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(3), pages 337-346, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christian Deutscher & Marius Ötting & Sandra Schneemann & Hendrik Scholten, 2019. "The Demand for English Premier League Soccer Betting," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 20(4), pages 556-579, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Philip W. S. Newall & Dominic Cortis, 2021. "Are Sports Bettors Biased toward Longshots, Favorites, or Both? A Literature Review," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, January.
    2. Jinook Jeong & Jee Young Kim & Yoon Jae Ro, 2019. "On the efficiency of racetrack betting market: a new test for the favourite-longshot bias," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(54), pages 5817-5828, November.
    3. Martin Kukuk & Stefan Winter, 2008. "An Alternative Explanation of the Favorite-Longshot Bias," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 79-96, September.
    4. Stefan Winter & Martin Kukuk, 2008. "Do horses like vodka and sponging? - On market manipulation and the favourite-longshot bias," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 75-87.
    5. Marshall Gramm & Douglas H. Owens, 2006. "Efficiency in Pari‐Mutuel Betting Markets across Wagering Pools in the Simulcast Era," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(4), pages 926-937, April.
    6. M. Sung & J. E. V. Johnson, 2010. "Revealing Weak‐Form Inefficiency in a Market for State Contingent Claims: The Importance of Market Ecology, Modelling Procedures and Investment Strategies," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 77(305), pages 128-147, January.
    7. Yu, Dian & Gao, Jianjun & Wang, Tongyao, 2022. "Betting market equilibrium with heterogeneous beliefs: A prospect theory-based model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(1), pages 137-151.
    8. Erik Snowberg & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Explaining the Favorite-Long Shot Bias: Is it Risk-Love or Misperceptions?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(4), pages 723-746, August.
    9. Alistair C. Bruce & Johnnie E. V. Johnson & John D. Peirson & Jiejun Yu, 2009. "An Examination of the Determinants of Biased Behaviour in a Market for State Contingent Claims," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 76(302), pages 282-303, April.
    10. Russell Sobel & S. Travis Raines, 2003. "An examination of the empirical derivatives of the favourite-longshot bias in racetrack betting," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 371-385.
    11. Ziemba, William, 2020. "Parimutuel betting markets: racetracks and lotteries revisited," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118873, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Jullien, Bruno & Salanié, Bernard, 2005. "Empirical Evidence on the Preferences of Racetrack Bettors," IDEI Working Papers 178, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    13. Jaiho Chung & Joon Ho Hwang, 2010. "An Empirical Examination of the Parimutuel Sports Lottery Market versus the Bookmaker Market," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(4), pages 884-905, April.
    14. Hwang, Joon Ho & Kim, Min-Su, 2015. "Misunderstanding of the binomial distribution, market inefficiency, and learning behavior: Evidence from an exotic sports betting market," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(1), pages 333-344.
    15. Niko Suhonen, 2011. "Market Efficiency in Finnish Harness Horse Racing," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 24(1), pages 55-63, Spring.
    16. Restocchi, Valerio & McGroarty, Frank & Gerding, Enrico & Johnson, Johnnie E.V., 2018. "It takes all sorts: A heterogeneous agent explanation for prediction market mispricing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 270(2), pages 556-569.
    17. Michael Cain & David Peel, 2004. "The utility of gambling and the favourite-longshot bias," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(5), pages 379-390.
    18. Michael Cain & David Law & David Peel, 2003. "The Favourite‐Longshot Bias, Bookmaker Margins and Insider Trading in a Variety of Betting Markets," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 263-273, July.
    19. Kenneth L. Rhoda & Gerard T. Olson & Jack M. Rappaport, 1999. "Risk Preferences And Information Flows In Racetrack Betting Markets," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 22(3), pages 265-285, September.
    20. Ariane Charpin, 2018. "Tests des modèles de décision en situation de risque. Le cas des parieurs hippiques en France," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 69(5), pages 779-803.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ajecsc:v:66:y:2007:i:3:p:465-491. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0002-9246 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.