Do the CRW Teams Have Body Language Covered?

There was an interesting discussion on the twitter recently with Chris asking, "we all know about the advantages for the CAW teams, but what are some advantages for the human player?"

There were some good suggestions, one of which was inside info which is a human trait, and I agree with that completely. We've seen some sharp fair odds computer players look dumbfounded when a horse they didn't figure runs off the screen where on-track they know. 

But intuitively, I suspect the answer to this question is frankly "not much". If you're going to bet hundreds of millions of dollars and have any skill in setting up an organization, you're probably going to have most bases - whether computer or human - covered. 

One area the teams try to cover is body language, but I'm not convinced they are particularly excellent at it (yet). 

First off, if a horse looks sore, it's pretty hard to change a line on the fly, especially with the extent of the soreness. Sore horses who are 8-5 on paper can be 5-2 fair odds, or 520-1 fair odds. Lame horses for me, you and many are an auto-pitch; we're not guessing degrees. 

Second, (and I'm the first to admit this could be anecdotal and I miss things like everyone else) I see little adjustment in the late betting when I personally see a lame or sore horse. 

Just in the past week there was a race where a horse came out looking horrible (who usually looks okay), and in my view should've been scratched. The multi-race wagers (wagers bet before you can see the animal on the track) indicated a strong betting team horse: odds of about 6-5 in the win pool. 

The betting opened hard with an even money win price, but after the parade the horse moved like we'd expect from sharp people noticing the soreness; he closed at 9-5. But it was only 9-5. If the teams were that sharp, wouldn't we expect a higher price? (The horse ran 8th).

I don't know exactly what goes on inside the "team room" but I have been around the block a little outside of it. 

Back before the word "CAW" was a thing, many sharps were betting on Betfair; but by sharps I mean some of the human folks Chris alludes to in his question. I'd often see movement after a post parade at the exchange based on how a horse looked. 

I particularly remember a stakes race at Saratoga where I faded a horse for more than I ever have, based on stiffness. She was from a top barn, and was 7-5, but not long after the parade she was 5-2 on the exchange, then 3-1. She finished at 3.9-1 and ran out of the money. Who were myself and others getting filled by on the buy end? From the betting bots. 

It's dumb to think we'd know more than a well-capitalized, well-run team of sharps. But to Chris's point I do believe there are avenues where we can be better than they are. We see it on the tote board each and every day. 

Have a nice Tuesday everyone.