The Economics of Sport
  • Sports Economics
  • About
  • Workshop
  • Selected Publications
  • Book Reviews
  • A Primer on Gaelic Games
  • Upcoming Events
  • Media
  • Education
  • Resources & Links
  • Data

The End-of-Day Effect

16/12/2015

 
By David Butler
 
Over the years sport has acted as a useful domain to study decision making under risk and uncertainty. This is because incentives are at work in semi-structured environments where participants mostly have had the chance to learn.  A curious and quite old finding, where people make such ‘real-life’ probability estimations, comes from studying the behaviour of gamblers at race tracks.

The End-of-Day effect involves choosing bets that have a lower probability of occurring but higher payoffs, in the later stages of a round of gambling, and is one of many cognitive biases psychologists and behavioural economists have discovered. The problem at hand is intuitively quite simple. Imagine you are at a racetrack where eight races are going to post throughout the day. You have a fixed budget of a €10 bet per race. Let’s assume that you are not having any luck; you are backing favourites and none of them have won!

By the time the last race goes to post you are €70 out of pocket after seven previous failed bets. Given that you only have €10 euros left, what do you choose to place your final bet on? Do you a) bet on a horse that is clearly odds on favourite at 1/7, as you have been doing all day, or do you b) shift your preference to an outsider horse who has a chance but is priced at 7/1? If you stick with the 1/7 favourite and are successful (which is most likely to happen) you will leave the racecourse with €14.28 (a lot less than the €80 you arrived with). If you switch to the 7/1 long-shot however there’s an outside chance you will leave with your original budget of €80. Of course, as it’s a long-shot it’s more likely you’ll leave the race track penniless!

The most famous study on this idea was conducted in the middle of the 20th century when William McGlothin (1956) collected data on 9,605 horse-races, primarily from California tracks from 1947-1953. He was interested in the stability of risk taking behaviour over a series of events, in particular the constancy of subjective probability and subjective utility of those who place bets over the course of a day. On-course betting allowed the preferences of gamblers to be measured that were of equal expectations but different probabilities of success. McGlothin (1956, 615) concluded that “the group behaved in a manner such as to increase the variability of their assets as a series of risk-taking events preceded”. In the last race risky decision making increased as bettors shifted towards horses that held longer odds.

Further evidence of the end-of-day effect in the race course is provided by Muktar Ali (1977) who analysed 20,247 horse races over a five year period. Again, horses with a high objective probability of winning were seen to be understated and horses with a lower objective probability of winning were overstated.  This relationship was shown to be robust across different race tracks and alternative race conditions, supporting the original McGlothin (1956) study.

Why is this interesting to economists? The answers is because such behaviour is inconsistent with the predictions of subjective expected utility theory - a central theory in the discipline. This theory suggests that when offered a risky gamble we make a rational choice by  weighing up probabilities and likely consequences, consistently choosing the best outcome. In the thought experiment given above, you should treat the races independently. On average punters wouldn’t back a 7/1 shot over a 1/7 shot in the first race, so why would more people do so in the last? The problem is because it is psychologically challenging for any race-goers to treat their wealth level and races independently; logically one should not seek out a long-shot in the final race but rather incur a small gain of €4.28 (but retain a net loss) and treat the first race of the next meeting you attend as your next bet. 

While the End-of-Day effect is outside of the predictions of the traditional utility theory in economics, it can be accommodated by Prospect Theory. Perhaps we shift toward more risky bets as the day goes on  because we form reference points in regards to profit making? The reference profit is commonly zero. If gamblers are incurring high loses by the last race of the day they would prefer to substitute away from gambling on favourites, towards horses that have a lower likelihood of winning, in an effort to return to this reference point of zero.

My advice would be to keep the End-of-Day effect in mind the next time you head to the race track, casino or even when you see your bookmakers offer a boosted price for long-shots in later races.  By that last race of the day you’ll probably see punters who just don’t care about their final €10 and irrationally take a big punt that could, but probably won't, come off!  .

Comments are closed.

    Archives

    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013

    About

    This website was founded in July 2013.

    RSS Feed

    Categories

    All
    American Football
    Athletics
    Baseball
    Basketball
    Behavioural Economics
    Boxing
    Broadcasting
    Competitive Balance
    Cricket
    Cycling
    Darts
    David Butler
    Declan Jordan
    Drugs
    Ed Valentine
    Epl
    Esports
    Expenditure
    F1
    Fifa World Cup
    Finances
    Funding
    Gaa
    Gaelic Games
    Gambling
    Game Theory
    Gary Burns
    Geography
    Golf
    Greyhound Racing
    Guest Posts
    Horse Racing
    Impact Studies
    John Considine
    John Eakins
    League Of Ireland
    Location
    Media
    Mls
    Mma
    Olympics
    Participation
    Paul O'Sullivan
    Premier League
    Regulation
    Research
    Robbie Butler
    Rugby
    Simpsonomics
    Snooker
    Soccer
    Spatial Analysis
    Sporting Bodies
    Stephen Brosnan
    Swimming
    Taxation
    Teaching
    Technology
    Tennis
    Transfers
    Uefa
    Ufc
    World Cup
    Wwe

Related

The website is not formally affiliated to any institution and all of the entries represent the personal views and opinions of an individual contributor. The website operates on a not-for-profit basis. For this reason we decline all advertisement opportunities. 

Contact

To contact us email sportseconomics2013@gmail.com or find us on Twitter @SportEcon.