I'm with Mall on this issue. Focusing on past-posting is a mistake.

First, if it is happening, it would have to be happening sporadically. The pattern of one outlet winning consistently on 1 x All x All (x All) Pick-3's (and Pick-4's) would be too easy to spot.

Second, by focusing on that issue, you give the industry an easy response: it's not happening. How can you prove otherwise?

I think the better approach is to focus on the inequity of giving an unfair advantage to a few large players who are a disuptive influence on the odds.

I always thought that NYRA's system of letting only on-track wagers be made after the first horse loads (or was it after post time?) made sense. It gave on-track customers the last look at the odds. Giving them this edge would help offset the many disadvantages of betting at the track (don't get me started) and would encourage people to bet on-track. My guess is that NYRA dropped the policy because it was costing them handle from large bettors (although I haven't read that anywhere).

Another proposal that one often reads (from the NTRA players panel for example) is to address late and after-the-start odds drops by shortening the update cycle. That's just silly. From what I've learned today about batch betting, the rebate shops are going to make their computer-driven bets in the last cycle no matter how short it is. Shortening the cycle (and giving them more updated pool information) is only going to make their tactics more effective. After the race has started, I don't care whether I see the final odds in one minute or three. My money is already down.