Which is better? +3% or -2% ROI....

[Ray2000]

Let's say there's this guy, let's call him Ray, and turns out he likes to play trifectas at small harness tracks and likes to bet 4 horses ABCD in this manner... 1$ AB/ABC/ABCD for 8$ total ticket cost. He could 4 box the same 4 horses for 1$ ...but that would cost $24.

So he plays on paper for 5 years, 100,000 races, and sees the ROI on the AB/ABC/ABCD is 1.03 (3%) but only 0.98 (-2%) on the 4 box play, and so he thinks I'm much better off buying 3$ Trifectas on AB/ABC/ABCD than 1$ Box4 and the cost would be the same, my limit $24.

But here's the rub...as can be seen in the attached calculator spreadsheet buying into a small trifecta pool with 3$ ticket drops the total return much more than buying in with 1$ box4 ticket. This can amount to as much as 15% lower return on the higher pay off prices (>$250 for 1$), and that's where most of the profit is made.

So with today's high trifecta rebates, it makes much more sense to go for the negative ROI 4box. :lol:

[barn32]

I love excel, but I am so un-hip. Those slider bars are so cool. Thanks for sharing.

[Charles54]

Yes, Excel is a fun program to play around with and the pari-mutuel math is interesting.

This is a good example of why WEG has chosen to offer guaranteed pools rather than lowering takeout. Larger pools actually help the public and promote the game better. You can see even clearer evidence of this in Swedish harness racing which has million dollar double pools daily and $10 million v75 pools every week.

But, getting back to the point of the original post, let's take it a step further.

Let us say this fellow called Ray, decides to post his picks on the internet and distribute an app which five followers use to bet $2 each. As a result, what would have originally have been a nice, profitable exactor bet, has turned into a big loser.

Now, our hero tracks his diminished results and posts how it has become laughably impossible to show a profit. Eventually, this discourages his followers and others, who think "well, if a brainy guy like Ray can't win, what chance do I have?"

Many of these former racing fans decide to switch to casino games with a lower takeout or try on-line poker, where they know there are lots of people making money. Horse racing pools shrink further and voila, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The shame of this is that, in reality, horse race handicapping is a fun, challenging and skillful past time and, yes, there are actually many people making money at it. Including a number who turn a substantial profit at harness racing -- even at the small tracks.

Of course, if you would rather broadcast your picks publicly, or play someone else's public picks, then you are destined to lose. Nobody has ever bet someone else's picks and won consistently -- that is contrary to the nature of a pari-mutuel game

I don't mean to be ragging on our friend "Ray" in particular. But, I do hope harness fans realize that the pessimistic analysis in the original post, is not an inevitable truth. An alternative reading of the data might be, "discuss your theories, share your general knowledge and enjoy the process, but make your own picks and play the game the way it was intended to be played."

Harness race handicapping is a fun and potentially rewarding intellectual exercise. You aren't going to get rich, but if you make your own picks and do it well enough, who knows?

[Ray2000]

....But, I do hope harness fans realize that the pessimistic analysis in the original post, is not an inevitable truth.

Charles, I disagree with that one point. The original post is not pessimistic... to end up with -2 to +3 % ROI playing Trifectas with horrible Take-outs, BEFORE REBATES should be optimistic or at least encouraging.

I've been posting picks at this Forum since 2008, precisely to show harness fans and players, particularly newbies, that the game can be beat if you're willing to the work. I no longer post my yearly summary like I did for 2008 (+19% on 1400 races) because of the time it takes to separate out the wagers that I post here from all my other regular wagers. I guess my picks here do get bet down somewhat but they are less than 10% of my action and are still on the positive side, excluding paper test runs.

[melman]

Charles I also think you did Ray a disservice. Far from being a downer I think his posts over the years have been a very strong indication that you can win at harness racing. As Ray pointed out he is listing only a small % of his plays and really just how many people are just going to the Pace harness section and betting his picks blind?? Public handicapper Matt Rose of drf harness has a MUCH larger number of people who view his picks yet with over 800 races listed he is still showing a flat bet profit on win bets. That's for having a pick on all races not cherry picking your best picks. Do you think people should also be discourged by that?
Ray I think your basic idea is correct. If I remember correctly cj is in our camp also. (I'm sure he will correct me if I'm wrong). In today's game of high rebates ROI is not really the standard, it's money won. There are two big players I know (one who used to post here) who play a lot of tri's and super's because the rebates are so large.
While I agree that it's more "fun" to make your own picks and in the end more profitable when betting Yonkers I always check out Matt Rose. Or at the BigM Bob Pandolfo's picks. Not so I can bet them blind but why ignore people who you know are very good at what they do.

[Charles54]

Fair enough. You are right Ray, that is an excellent result given the difficulty of the game.

I was thinking that a 2% profit or loss might seem pessimistic for a top notch player, compared to on-line poker where fans see the best players making millions of dollars. I am not a big-time bettor, but I consistently have a much higher ROI than that (admittedly I only find bets in about 15% of the races.)

Anyway, I do think, for the long-term health of the sport, it is important to encourage people to make their own selections (after all, poker sites ban the type of software that gives automatic recommendations) However, the more important point is that both race track managements and organizations like H.A.N.A. should focus on increasing pool sizes, rather than gnashing their teeth over how to divide up an ever-shrinking pie. That is a point your Excel spreadsheet makes quite nicely

In my opinion, rebates are short-sighted and simply damage the game. Takeout is a factor, but takeout should be the same for everyone. Racing has enough integrity issues without having to defend favoring betting cartels over the average guy. As I mentioned the Swedish v75 has huge pools and their takeout is 40%.

As your spreadsheet suggests Ray, I would much rather bet into a $100,000 triactor pool with a 22% take than a $2,000 pool with an 18% take. And that means far more money for management, more for the horsemen as well as more for me.

You are one of the main contributors to one of the best harness racing presences on the web Ray, and I certainly applaud your efforts. But do you think Andy Beyer (or Bob Pandolfo) would have had the same impact if he had made public picks or sold computer programs, rather than teaching people how to make their own picks? teach a man to fish and all that...

[RaceTrackDaddy]

Ray:
Could you increase the ROI just by avoiding the worst retention tracks (ie Meadows and their 35 percent tax on trifecta wagers commonly referred to as retention)? Or does your hits produce larger payouts at these higher taxed tracks?

rtd

[melman]

Charles--Bob Pandolfo DOES make public picks (on every race at the BigM) and on selected races at his web site. Plus he does sell a harness computer program. At the same time Pandy does a lot of teaching with his excellent book on harness capping and his many free articles at drf or ustrotting. I agree with you point about the large rebates but that is just the reality of racing today. Did you read Pandy's interview with John Campbell? The smaller tracks are in real trouble because of so many races with low priced winners. The BigM and Balmoral can still attrack new players. I think the Swedish bet with it's high takeout is more of a suckers bet. It will only get the "lotto" type of player interested. Not the serious "make you own plays" type of guy. At least IMO.

[Ray2000]

thx Charles
Sometimes I have to read and re-read a reply to get the true drift of the poster.

mel thx... and you're right on about what info and picks are available on the net.
maybe someone, someday will track all the tipsters for year and publish the results..hnmmm :)

bobby
The best tracks for me on Trifecta wagering, before rebates since jan 2012 are in order, (all positive)
I believe the high Trifecta Take Outs at Meadows, drives away the hi-rollin Sharks leaving me an easier group of competitors to bet against. BUT this is changing, see comment below on Pa rebates..

TGDN..best
VD
PPK
LON
MAY
STGA
BMLP
RP
BTVA
MEA

the worst are, all negative

WDB
BR
ACES
HAR
RIDC
HOP
GEOD
SCD
CALX...worst

I'm reluctant to give my rebate percentages out because
it depends on total volume and there are frequent changes.

but, depending on which ADW you use..
I'd guess you'd be shocked on the rebate percentages available for Pennsylvania tracks .



also
I must confess, I based the ROIs for "Character Ray" on my own experience but I shifted both of them down slightly to make one method (box4) negative. It did this to be "cute", to show that sometimes a negative ROI is a better way to play (ie higher return with rebates) for small pool tracks where even a bump of $3 in the base amount could flipflop the ROIs.