Zeljko Ranogajec

[PeterLe]

I was just reading an acticle about this professional gambler who is generating a lot of media attention at the moment. He really has taken things to a new level :-

http://afr.com/p/national/the_gambler_G ... jmpyYXNu9J

His systems have been described as a "Money Mine" and although a lot of his annual profits (>$44m) are as a result of Money Rebates, some of his profits are solely to the automated and mathematical algorithms pre race, inc UK markets. It just goes to show that the sky is the limit!

Anyway, worth a read
regards
Peter

[Euler]

That's a very revealing story but I am astonished at the stupidity of bookies giving such large rebates. Amazed at that, obviously missed a trick there.

Due to his sheer size he has persuaded the totes to pay him “rebates” or “loyalty payments”.

In the US, the syndicate received an average rebate of 13 per cent on all losing bets, according to court documents.

From there the maths is pretty simple, as Ranogajec told the court.

“If you bet $100 and lost $5, but you get a 10 per cent rebate, you still make 5 per cent,” he said.

That means the more money you can turn over, the more money that comes back to you in rebates. And so it becomes a matter of ensuring that any losses are less than the amount rebated.

The court documents show that just 15 per cent of what the syndicate earned from US racing over that 3½-year period was from selecting the right horses.

Their winnings on a correct punt were just $8 million – a figure dwarfed by the $44 million earned from losing bets with rebates attached.

[gazuty]

Thanks.

I've been following these guys for a couple of years, ever since David Walsh built the MONA.

Historically in most austalian Tote operations my understanding was from each $100, $85 goes to the pool, $5 goes to the government in tax, $5 to the tote shop (what was once your local betting shop), $5 to the tote operator.

Direct telephone accounts (before the days of the internet) eliminated the $5 to the betting shop. So $10 on the direct bets goes to the tote operator. As you an imagine a no risk 10% take on turnover is exceptionally profitable, especially if you don't need a high street betting shop with its associated overheads.

So the totes starting rebating to the very high turnover punters, much in the same way casinos rebate losses to very high rollers. At the casino though post rebate high rollers (generally) cant be e(x) positive.

The punters club on the other hand can be.

I've walked past his operations many times. Given the Olympics are on at the moment it seems apt to mention it is opposite the pool named after Ian Thorpe.

[gazuty]

Article today in Australian Financial Review - suggests that Australian Taxation Office has settled with Punters Club.

http://afr.com/p/national/on_punters_cl ... TsyE2OYjKK