value hunting...have studies been done?

[elhelmete]

I'm curious if anyone has looked into which exotic bets (vert and horiz) tend to have more imbalanced pools over time. By that I mean where the will-pays are out of whack (of course I care most about those in the player's favor) with what the individual odds would suggest.

My gut feeling tells me that it may be the daily double, especially the mid-card ones. In my opinion, doubles rarely get talked about much, and with rolling doubles the norm...it seems like wacky pools might happen a lot and go unnoticed.

[thaskalos]

I'm curious if anyone has looked into which exotic bets (vert and horiz) tend to have more imbalanced pools over time. By that I mean where the will-pays are out of whack (of course I care most about those in the player's favor) with what the individual odds would suggest.

My gut feeling tells me that it may be the daily double, especially the mid-card ones. In my opinion, doubles rarely get talked about much, and with rolling doubles the norm...it seems like wacky pools might happen a lot and go unnoticed.

IMO...the most imbalanced exotic bet is the superfecta. It isn't rare to see a $150-1 trifecta transformed into a $2,000-1 superfecta...even though a well-bet horse finishes fourth.

[DeltaLover]

IMO...the most imbalanced exotic bet is the superfecta. It isn't rare to see a $150-1 trifecta transformed into a $2,000-1 superfecta...even though a well-bet horse finishes fourth.


It's been a while since my friend Thaskalos mentioned to me supers as his favorite bet explaining its advantages and his method of betting. For a purist like me, it was not easy to accept such a statement having many theoretical arguments and objections. But I was influenced enough to at least pay a closer attention to this kind of bet... I have to admit that during the period I am test driving supers, I had some interesting or even surprising results.

Although I do not keep detailed records for this bet (which represent a very small fraction of my total handle anyway) I remember at least two cases where betting dimes and nickels saved the day or the week for me as I hit some strange payouts.

For example a $90 for a dime (SA), in a seven horse field WITH the favorite in the money,I think the ticket cost something like $2.4 and I only had it for ten or something like this times... This represents a 37-1 return in the total investment which is as good I can ask for... I regret I did not bet this or some other similar cases more seriously...

Although there is good indication I still cannot convince myself about it...

[MightBeSosa]

IMO...the most imbalanced exotic bet is the superfecta. It isn't rare to see a $150-1 trifecta transformed into a $2,000-1 superfecta...even though a well-bet horse finishes fourth.

Haven't noticed anything like that. Well bet & over 10x for the super?

Examples?

[DeltaLover]

In my opinion, looking for a big score is the way to bet horses.. Passive betting especially when it involves 'savers' is not the way to go. Our opinions should be clear about the chance of the favorites and directly reflected to our betting execution.

A very common mistake we usually do, is that although we start with negative opinion about a horse we end up throwing it into the mix under the influence of the pool. This approach results to a very weak overall behavior as our betting does not present clear directions but tries to cover pretty much any rational and possible outcome. We need to be very reluctant to last second decisions since this is the time when our subconscious mind is trying to impose fear and insecurity softening up our determination to go for a big score...

'Value hunting' is not an attribute of a specific type of bet but of a mindset allowing creative imagination to function beyond the limitations of fear and guilt.

[Overlay]

From a standpoint of developing a truly accurate assessment of value, I've always found it difficult to deal with vertical or horizontal exotics involving more than two horses or races, due to the (so far as I know) non-availability of probable payoff information such as that routinely provided for exactas, quinellas, or daily doubles (not to mention the increase in the number of possible combinations as more races or finishing positions are added to the wager).

[DeltaLover]

From a standpoint of developing a truly accurate assessment of value, I've always found it difficult to deal with vertical or horizontal exotics involving more than two horses or races, due to the (so far as I know) non-availability of probable payoff information such as that routinely provided for exactas, quinellas, or daily doubles (not to mention the increase in the number of possible combinations as more races or finishing positions are added to the wager).

Same here.. The fact that we have tote data for straight bets, exacta and double only has also limited my action to these pools adding trifecta or pick3 some time. I have followed this approach for long time but I have to admit that latetly I have changed my opinion... Doing the after math of my records I can see that I am missing way too much value by not concentraning more to longer exotics something that I am planning to do from now on..