exacta dutch

[teddy]

if I'm going to play my top selection when it is an overlay with the next 4 horses in my selection process. Should I Dutch my top pick with the next 4. $40 dutch or make 4 straight 10 bets. A with bcde. Or should it matter. In small fieldsI will use less horses in the place.

[traynor]

if I'm going to play my top selection when it is an overlay with the next 4 horses in my selection process. Should I Dutch my top pick with the next 4. $40 dutch or make 4 straight 10 bets. A with bcde. Or should it matter. In small fieldsI will use less horses in the place.

I think you are looking at it backwards, from strategy to reality rather than letting the reality of your selection process determine your strategy. That is, what do your records indicate is the optimal manner to apply your selection process in these cases?

It is a whole lot easier to alter your strategy to leverage reality than it is to alter reality to coincide with your strategy. Unfortunately, many seem to advocate (and claim to use) the latter.

[thaskalos]

if I'm going to play my top selection when it is an overlay with the next 4 horses in my selection process. Should I Dutch my top pick with the next 4. $40 dutch or make 4 straight 10 bets. A with bcde. Or should it matter. In small fieldsI will use less horses in the place.
If you can't answer this question for yourself...should you be betting $40 exactas? :)

[lamboguy]

in parimutuel wagering you are looking for other people to make mistakes. with your system you are guaranteed 3 mistakes before the result

[teddy]

I think you are looking at it backwards, from strategy to reality rather than letting the reality of your selection process determine your strategy. That is, what do your records indicate is the optimal manner to apply your selection process in these cases?

It is a whole lot easier to alter your strategy to leverage reality than it is to alter reality to coincide with your strategy. Unfortunately, many seem to advocate (and claim to use) the latter.
Working it out on paper. Lol. So many on here have probably used huge databases on this. Thought I might get free info.

[teddy]

With the overlay on top I'm trying to get one mistake. Maybe I should look for two overlays ?

[teddy]

I think you are looking at it backwards, from strategy to reality rather than letting the reality of your selection process determine your strategy. That is, what do your records indicate is the optimal manner to apply your selection process in these cases?

It is a whole lot easier to alter your strategy to leverage reality than it is to alter reality to coincide with your strategy. Unfortunately, many seem to advocate (and claim to use) the latter.
In 300 such races if my top selection is overlaid and it's a straight a with bcd play it is ahead with highest exacta $40.00.

[traynor]

In 300 such races if my top selection is overlaid and it's a straight a with bcd play it is ahead with highest exacta $40.00.

How do you calculate whether or not it is an overlay? Specifically, if you have a consistent method for selecting the key entry, you should have a good idea of what the probabilities are of that horse actually winning. That probability, multiplied by the probability of the place horse(s) placing is the A==>B probability. Meaning if your key for win actually wins 40%, and your key for place actually places 30%, your probability for that exacta is 0.4(0.3) = 0.12--about one in eight. You can calculate the odds of multiple horses to place in the same manner, regarding each combination as a separate, distinct entity for wagering purposes.

If you are serious about exactas, the next step would be applying the identical selection criteria to a new sample of races (the more the better) to see how well it translates. If you are working in the under $40 exacta range, you could be on to something. That is the area with most of the real profit.

[Overlay]

if I'm going to play my top selection when it is an overlay with the next 4 horses in my selection process. Should I Dutch my top pick with the next 4. $40 dutch or make 4 straight 10 bets. A with bcde. Or should it matter. In small fields I will use less horses in the place.
You mention about your top pick being an overlay to win, but that might not necessarily translate to combinations with that horse on top (or underneath) also being overlaid in the exacta pool. You should take advantage of the availability of advance probable payoff information for the various possible exacta combinations in determining your optimum wagering strategy by comparing those payoffs with the true probability of each individual combination coming in.

[sammy the sage]

in parimutuel wagering you are looking for other people to make mistakes. with your system you are guaranteed 3 mistakes before the result

perhaps...but if you KNOW a 3/5 shot not going to hit in top two....WELL...there goes 70% of your OTHER people...

[teddy]

How do you calculate whether or not it is an overlay? Specifically, if you have a consistent method for selecting the key entry, you should have a good idea of what the probabilities are of that horse actually winning. That probability, multiplied by the probability of the place horse(s) placing is the A==>B probability. Meaning if your key for win actually wins 40%, and your key for place actually places 30%, your probability for that exacta is 0.4(0.3) = 0.12--about one in eight. You can calculate the odds of multiple horses to place in the same manner, regarding each combination as a separate, distinct entity for wagering purposes.

If you are serious about exactas, the next step would be applying the identical selection criteria to a new sample of races (the more the better) to see how well it translates. If you are working in the under $40 exacta range, you could be on to something. That is the area with most of the real profit.

I look at my top selection. Must be 2.5 to one off odds or greater. Played with my next three selection in equal amounts shows 1.20 roi thru 600 plays. 34% strike rate. Two exactas paid $70. All pulled from separate months old results. I am not handicapping place yet. May do so based on running styles and removing front only types from place slots.

[Track Collector]

I look at my top selection. Must be 2.5 to one off odds or greater. Played with my next three selection in equal amounts shows 1.20 roi thru 600 plays. 34% strike rate. Two exactas paid $70. All pulled from separate months old results. I am not handicapping place yet. May do so based on running styles and removing front only types from place slots.

My "feeling" is to be wary of the sample size, and of course the old familiar fitting to the data concern. Excluding the two $70 exactas, the ROI is about 0.97, which may still be ok if a rebate can be added on top of that. If not done already, don't forget to adjust/consider how much lower your ROI would be when YOU start getting a slice of the payout pie. This could be more significant than you think if also playing tracks with small to medium size exacta pools.

It will be interesting to see the ROI from the NEXT 600 to 1000 races going forward. Case in point......I found something that had returned a VERY healthy ROI on about 500-600 plays a year. The ROI held up over the past 3 years, making the sample size about 1500-1800. This year the "pattern" tanked, and I will be highly surprised if it even returned even close to its former profitability level. That's how these "data mining" exercises go most of the time.

[Dave Schwartz]

I would say that wagers should be structured around your advantage.

(I think this is where Traynor was headed with his comment as well.)

For example, if you have determined that there is a 12/1 overlay, then you have to ask the question, "How do I leverage this horse?"

Logically, you begin with a win bet, not an exacta.

Why? Because you do not have conviction on the other half of the exactas!

If you wish to add exactas, then you must determine who, among the rest of the field, will produce bottom-side profit in the exacta. If you are simply wheeling the key horse, then you would (logically) be better off making a larger win bet on the 12/1 horse.

This scenario changes if you are wagering so much in the win pool that you will begin to tilt the pool. In that case, you might have to find other pools to wager in, which MAY dilute your profit but increase your total win.

[traynor]

My "feeling" is to be wary of the sample size, and of course the old familiar fitting to the data concern. Excluding the two $70 exactas, the ROI is about 0.97, which may still be ok if a rebate can be added on top of that. If not done already, don't forget to adjust/consider how much lower your ROI would be when YOU start getting a slice of the payout pie. This could be more significant than you think if also playing tracks with small to medium size exacta pools.

It will be interesting to see the ROI from the NEXT 600 to 1000 races going forward. Case in point......I found something that had returned a VERY healthy ROI on about 500-600 plays a year. The ROI held up over the past 3 years, making the sample size about 1500-1800. This year the "pattern" tanked, and I will be highly surprised if it even returned even close to its former profitability level. That's how these "data mining" exercises go most of the time.

One of the unavoidable problems in wagering is that whatever happened was not known before it happened, but became known after it happened. With the number and skill of those data mining race results factored in, almost everything that looks good (based on past results) can be virtually guaranteed to perform less profitably than it did in the original sample(s).

Fortunately, most are still scraping the data searching for "long term profits"--some degree of (real or imagined) certainty--and fail to understand that by the time they have "discovered" something, a whole lot of other people have discovered the same thing, and those other people are both more aggressive in wagering and more skilled in data analysis than the discoverer.

[teddy]

I read the article about structuring the wager around your analysis and that is working very well for me playing the trifecta since a couple days ago. the last race I analyzed three horses here to be head and shoulders above the rest so I can go three horses in first and second with the clunk ups for third. instead of fighting the race the handicapping let me to see that any money on anything but those three horses made no sense. And what are the chances that all three Pretty slim I would think and I would think third would be for one of the plodders.If the race is wide open I am looking for a longer priced horse to key around.

[teddy]

One more question on structure. I'm one of my top two horses is in the trip 93% of the time does anyone have an idea of trip structure.my first inclination is to find another horse then I feel is Long odds and play him with those too keyed around all three positions.