Betting the No.1 (odds even to 3-1)

[Flysofree]

Obviously I like simple stuff and numbers. A recent post where someone said racing was random, while that was proven wrong, brought questions to mind.

What would be the results by % of wins in betting the no.1 horse each and every race where it's odds were between 1/1 and 3-1 only. (no other handicapping factors considered).

I've read so many good stats here, but don't know if anyone has this from their database or can venture an educated guess if no data exists..

Happy 4th to all.

[thaskalos]

What do you mean by "no. 1 horse"?

[Flysofree]

What do you mean by "no. 1 horse"?

The Number 1 horse in the program.. Most of the time this horse will be racing from the 1 post, but not always if coupled. Just the No. 1 .

[Flysofree]

May or may not be the favorite. Of course at the lower end at 1-1 and nearby, will likely be...

[Dark Horse]

Study rail bias, and look at tracks in the East during winter months.

[Dave Schwartz]

Why would program #1 be any different than another program number?

Are you thinking that the post position would help?

[senortout]

Why would program #1 be any different than another program number?

Are you thinking that the post position would help?

Dave, I do think he believes the 1 post is the shortest way around, and work from that angle.....but that is pretty obvious, no? Maybe I missed something.

[cj]

Just for 2015, I have this. Was a little tricky at first because a 1A does not necessarily mean there is a 1, and I also found some 1X's.

#1:

4238 starts
1164 wins (27.47%)
$6729.60 return (ROI 79.4 per $1.00)

I'd do other years, but it won't get any better. Any simple system like this will lose much more than the takeout.

[Flysofree]

Why would program #1 be any different than another program number?

Are you thinking that the post position would help?

LOL
I'm trying not to think too much...Just the No. 1 and odds of (1/1 to 3-1).

[cj]

Dave, I do think he believes the 1 post is the shortest way around, and work from that angle.....but that is pretty obvious, no? Maybe I missed something.

He specified Program number, not post, which is a simple query to run and will be equally as bad I'm sure.

[senortout]

There are so many other factors involved here, but, yeah, if the odds board says the 1 pp horse is a likely winner, you have probably narrowed your chances for losing the wager somewhat. In disclosure, I keep no statistics which would confirm this. Others probably do.

[Flysofree]

Just for 2015, I have this. Was a little tricky at first because a 1A does not necessarily mean there is a 1, and I also found some 1X's.

#1:

4238 starts
1164 wins (27.47%)
$6729.60 return (ROI 79.4 per $1.00)

I'd do other years, but it won't get any better. Any simple system like this will lose much more than the takeout.

That is interesting. Thanks.

[senortout]

Further, would the original poster clarify as to actual post position vs program number please? Sorry to other posters, I went back and reread the original.

[cj]

I fixed the data, forgot to change the total return to include all 1s. ROI a little better, but still not good.

[cj]

Further, would the original poster clarify as to actual post position vs program number please? Sorry to other posters, I went back and reread the original.


The Number 1 horse in the program.. Most of the time this horse will be racing from the 1 post, but not always if coupled. Just the No. 1 .

There it is.

[senortout]

alright, I can't read! thanks DJ

[Flysofree]

I didn't mean for this to be a complicated question.
The only % I am interested in is. The No.1 in the program with odds between 1-1 and 3-1. No other issues whatsoever. If there should happen to be a 1a or 1x, it doesn't matter as long as there is a ONE. No1, with the stated odds..

[Show Me the Wire]

I didn't mean for this to be a complicated question.
The only % I am interested in is. The No.1 in the program with odds between 1-1 and 3-1. No other issues whatsoever. If there should happen to be a 1a or 1x, it doesn't matter as long as there is a ONE. No1, with the stated odds..

This makes no sense. The number :1: in the program has no different or significant probability than any other number listed in the program with odds between the even money to 3-1 inclusive. Unless you are conflating program number :1: with post position number :1: .

[Flysofree]

This makes no sense. The number :1: in the program has no different or significant probability than any other number listed in the program with odds between the even money to 3-1 inclusive. Unless you are conflating program number :1: with post position number :1: .

Maybe yes and Maybe no.... But I'm keeping it simple for my brain.

Do races run on Tuesdays, have the same outcome as races on Saturdays...
Ignore that question...

[therussmeister]

This makes no sense. The number :1: in the program has no different or significant probability than any other number listed in the program with odds between the even money to 3-1 inclusive. Unless you are conflating program number :1: with post position number :1: .
It does make sense since you will often be betting the rail horse, and when you are not, you are often getting two horses for the price of one.

[whodoyoulike]

He specified Program number, not post, which is a simple query to run and will be equally as bad I'm sure.

He also specified odds between 1/1 - 3/1.

Did your query include only those races?

[Dark Horse]

Maybe yes and Maybe no.... But I'm keeping it simple for my brain.


Find another venue to keep it simple for your brain. Horse racing doesn't fit into that mold.

[Flysofree]

Find another venue to keep it simple for your brain. Horse racing doesn't fit into that mold.

It amazing what I've learned when doing something simple FOR ME! If it upsets you ask PA to ban me.

[Dark Horse]

Simple is good, but you confuse it with lazy. I already gave you a real answer earlier on, but the very thought was obviously too much work for you.

Other than that, the more like you the better. Really.

[Flysofree]

Simple is good, but you confuse it with lazy. I already gave you a real answer earlier on, but the very thought was obviously too much work for you.

Other than that, the more like you the better. Really.

You told me to study rail bias.... I'm not looking to study or buy more handicapping software. It's not a job for me, it's fun . Nothing to do with lazy.

[Show Me the Wire]

Maybe yes and Maybe no.... But I'm keeping it simple for my brain.

Do races run on Tuesdays, have the same outcome as races on Saturdays...
Ignore that question...

I know you asked me to ignore your question, but yes they all have winners,

My point is there is no fixed probability based on program numbers. Yes the horse nearest to the rail may have an edge depending on the size of the field, the :1: in short fields more often or not really physically starts in second gate or third gate of the starting gate and not the actual one hole. As for as the two for one, with all the scratches it is getting rarer for both entries to actually run.

Yes, you are entitled to have fun, so have fun.

[cj]

He also specified odds between 1/1 - 3/1.

Did your query include only those races?

Yes, of course, though I didn't ask and included horses that were exactly 1.0 or 3.0.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

This approach makes no sense in North America where the program numbers are the result of a random draw.

This approach makes more sense in Australia and Hong Kong, where the :1: horse is the top weight/rated horse in the race. Odds on that horse between even money and 3-1 would indicate it's a contender, of course.

I don't see that being profitable, but you never know. It's amazing how the :1: horse often wins at good odds in the overseas races, simply justifying the handicapper's view of the ability of the horses. They have to carry more weight, but many handicappers feel that's an overrated factor.

[Some_One]

This approach makes no sense in North America where the program numbers are the result of a random draw.

This approach makes more sense in Australia and Hong Kong, where the :1: horse is the top weight/rated horse in the race. Odds on that horse between even money and 3-1 would indicate it's a contender, of course.

I don't see that being profitable, but you never know. It's amazing how the :1: horse often wins at good odds in the overseas races, simply justifying the handicapper's view of the ability of the horses. They have to carry more weight, but many handicappers feel that's an overrated factor.

According to my HK db, Program #1 at odds <=3-1 is a minus 17% ROI over a sample of about 400. So nothing signficant.