Whats more important for your bankroll?

[davew]

For maintenance and growth of your betting bankroll?

1- making good bets
2- not making bad bets
3- not betting at all


There are so many options available - win, place, show, exacta, trifecta, superfecta, daily double, pick 3, pick 4, ....

[BlueChip@DRF]

Having one.

[thaskalos]

For maintenance and growth of your betting bankroll?

1- making good bets
2- not making bad bets
3- not betting at all


There are so many options available - win, place, show, exacta, trifecta, superfecta, daily double, pick 3, pick 4, ....

I don't understand these choices.

If you are making nothing but good bets...then you must necessarily not be making bad bets.

And if you are "not betting at all", then what do you need a "betting bankroll" for?

[1st time lasix]

not quiting my day job..... and having a sucessful investment portfolio is the most important factor in maintaining my "risk bankroll." :cool:

[HUSKER55]

A good bet, even if you lose, is a good bet. Betting just for the "action" certainly isn't in your best interests. Making no bet when you have a good advantage defeats the purpose of playing the horses.


JMHO

[Magister Ludi]

Investment Level + Investment Type = Result

>1.0 x Kelly/Isaacs + overlay = eventual ruin from overbetting

>1.0 x Kelly/Isaacs + underlay = eventual ruin from overbetting and ROI<0

1.0 x Kelly/Isaacs + overlay = optimal geometric growth of portfolio

1.0 x Kelly/Isaacs + underlay = eventual ruin from ROI<0

<1.0 x Kelly/Isaacs + overlay = suboptimal portfolio growth from underbetting

<1.0 x Kelly/Isaacs + underlay = eventual ruin from ROI<0

[pondman]

For maintenance and growth of your betting bankroll?

1- making good bets
2- not making bad bets
3- not betting at all


Good question!

1st. Knowing a good bet. I'm not sure many players understand the concept of a good bet.

2nd. Never make anything but good bets. Sit, sit , sit. If you follow this, you'll never make bad bets.

[SharpCat]

Good question!

1st. Knowing a good bet. I'm not sure many players understand the concept of a good bet.

2nd. Never make anything but good bets. Sit, sit , sit. If you follow this, you'll never make bad bets.


Agreed. Sometimes I have to wait for several hours on a good bet. If I don't have any good bets I'll buy the programs for the next day and hit the door.

[Longshot6977]

I don't understand these choices.

If you are making nothing but good bets...then you must necessarily not be making bad bets.

And if you are "not betting at all", then what do you need a "betting bankroll" for?

I agree. This poll is silly and doesn't make sense. Maybe the OP should reword it.

[therussmeister]

Off you can't show a profit on paper, not betting is the best thing for your bankroll.

[Fingal]

Good question!

1st. Knowing a good bet. I'm not sure many players understand the concept of a good bet.

2nd. Never make anything but good bets. Sit, sit , sit. If you follow this, you'll never make bad bets.

There really should have been another option on this poll, & that's listening to that little gut feeling that says
" something just doesn't feel right. "

It may be betting patterns in how the horse is taking money or " I came up with this horse last night & it should be getting creamed on the tote, but it's hanging there at 3/1....Why isn't it taking action ? "

Just because a number is out there doesn't make it right.

[tzipi]

If you're making good bets, then you're not making bad bets. If you're making bad bets, then you're not making good bets ;)

[SharpCat]

If you're making good bets, then you're not making bad bets. If you're making bad bets, then you're not making good bets ;)

Do people not make a good bet followed by a bad bet?

[raybo]

Of course, making only good bets is optimal. However, knowing when a bet is a good one is the first obstacle you must overcome, and that entails both the handicapping and the betting sides of the equation.

So, first you must learn to handicap consistently well, in order to develop very good contenders (I'm assuming win betting, but is also true for all other types of bets, just needs to be expanded for those other bets). In order to know if your contender selection process is good, you must keep records of all your plays, both your contenders and the results. This is the step most players disregard, and doing so, guarantees failure. Depending on what your average payouts are, determines what your hit rate must be, long term. For the average track (tracks with average win payouts), 60% hits with 3 contenders is probably a minimum, for 4 contenders, 70+% is probably needed.

Once you reach a good hit rate with your contenders, then you know what your minimum odds need to be. Bet only those contenders that meet or exceed that minimum odds criteria.

That's about it. Good enough contenders and betting only those that will make you profit over time.

Of course, that is the easy part. Discipline, Patience, and Consistency in following your proven success formula is the hard part. Deviating from that negates the success formula completely. This means deviating in the contender selection/handicapping portion, or in the wagering portion, will have negative effects on your bankroll, and your confidence level/psyche (which in turn will negatively affect both your handicapping and your wagering, leading to a snowball effect and eventual loss of bankroll, and confidence in your overall method, which means you'll have to start all over, again (how many times have you done that already?))

[wiffleball whizz]

Gotta avoid bad plays....at all cost

[detective]

Once you reach a good hit rate with your contenders, then you know what your minimum odds need to be. Bet only those contenders that meet or exceed that minimum odds criteria.


If your average mutual is 5/2 you need 30% winners to just stay a touch ahead. You can do this with any bet, tri pick three ect. The exotics are more value bets and as long as you don't bet more than the bet needs and your return rate is good you should be ok. For a pick three with 12 hores first leg 10 horses second leg and 8 horses third leg 50-60 dollars is max for that ticket. Jerry Samovitz in betting and beating the exotics explains the calculation.

[acorn54]

i second raybo's advice
you have to keep records.
an example- my brother at tax time this past year didn't realize he bet 50000 for the year at otb until he got his otb statement. i pointed out to him if he bet like me getting a 10% rebate on exotic wagers he would have made an extra 5000 dollars.
you have to keep records, otherwise you are in the dark.