wagering strategy

[ernie simons]

Just curious as to how many people use this wagering strategy.
Win goal per race is, say, $50. post odds are roughly 5-1, requires a $10 bet. Lose this wager, next race post odds are 4-1, need a $25 wager to recoup $50 loss on last race and hit $50 win goal. So on and so forth. Every win brings you back to even with a $50 profit. Kind of a martingale with odds so to speak.
Just a matter of setting a realistic win goal according to bankroll to avoid running out of capital before something fires.
Also, on the conservitive side, why not quit after 2 wins? Lock up a $100 profit on the day? If you don't hit your 2nd win before the last race (god forbid), carry your losses over to the next day, or track, and pick up where you left off.
Personally, I don't see a down side, unless you run into a schneid.

Anybody?

[cj]

The down side is huge...see what the bet size would be after 10 or 15 straight losses. If you don't think a string of losses like this is very likely, you are probably not very realistic. No betting strategy can turn a negative expectation to a positive result, and if you have a positive expectation, you don't need to use bad betting strategies like the one above!

CJ

[ranchwest]

I think either flat bet or confidence bet, pick your potential plays before you get to the track and play those horses unless you decide to pass because of additional info acquired. No percentages against losses or percentages of bankroll, no quitting. Play advantages only.

[FortuneHunter]

You need to know your Average Payoff to know what the next bet in the progression should be.

If the bet hits and pays less than the Average Payoff, then that money is used to reduce the "debt" column. (Modified Progression).

If the bet hits and pays more than the Average Payoff you make your goal $50 dollar profit plus more (don't worry, you are going to need the "more").

Yes, stop for the day when you make your goal, don't get greedy.

Here is the killer... the losing streak. Using computer selections over 1000's of races that has HIT% of 25% (1 out of every 4) the losing streak can get in the 15 range. You can't stand a losing streak of 15, the progression kills you. So you have to know when to take eat the loss and start the progression over.

The hope is that the "more" you get back when you hit for more than the Average Payoff cancels out the time you hit the losing streak.

In fact sometimes, you hope for the short priced bet to lose early in the progression to build up the bet, and then for the long priced bet to come in so you make your $50 plus 15% of the wager you made.

That is the theory, I have not personally used it, but I know people who have.

[hurrikane]

anouther down side. you lose a few and then you are looking for horses with long odds or you are betting a lot of money on short odds horses. I don't like either scenario.

[FortuneHunter]

Originally posted by hurrikane
anouther down side. you lose a few and then you are looking for horses with long odds or you are betting a lot of money on short odds horses. I don't like either scenario.

No, No never change the handicapping strategy. From research you know that your average payoff is 3.21 to 1. You have verified it, you absolutely believe it. You have built your bet progression around it. You NEVER look at the odds on a individual race. You bet the same way every race every day. No value line or any of that stuff. If the horse goes off at odds under the average payoff and wins, you reduce your debt and keep going. If he goes off at the average odds, you make your $50, and quit. If he goes off at higher than average odds, you make your $50 plus more, and quit.

You know your ship comes in at 3.21 to 1, on average.

The trick is losing streak management, bankroll, and intestinal fortitude to:

A) Walk away happy with $50 bucks after the 3rd race

B) Bet $250 to win on a 5-1 shot in the 7th with a 4/5 shot in the race, while you are down 4 honey bees ($400)

FH

[andicap]

Why quit after winning $100 per day? A day is an arbitrary measure. You need to look at the races at thousands of events in a continuum not how much you win or lose in a day. That hurts a lot of bettors who try to break even by upping their bet or chasing longshots in the 9th race (chalks pay more in the 9th-10th race for that reason BTW), or if they are up, waste money trying to hit a big one, figuring if they lose, well I took a shot at the big one and I'm still even.
Why quit if you're having a good day. If you're up $100 after the 2nd race, why couldn't you win $1,000? Maybe you're seeing the races real good that day, you're in touch with a bias, or your biorhythms (not the horse's. -- where's Scoop?) are hot and you're on the top of your game.
Quitting after winning $100 is like Derek jeter coming out of a game after he goes 3 for 3, figuring the odds are against him going 4 for 4.

[FortuneHunter]

Andicap, good point.

I will say that I believe the answer lies in the losing streak management. But that is a weak answer.

I would like to study both ways. First way, quit for the day when the goal is reached. Second way, reset the debt column and go back at it on the next race. Someday...

[karlskorner]

erine simons;

Why quit if you are having a good day ? (quote Andicap)

Simple answer. Don't fool with the Gods of wagering. Take your winnings, go sit with some friends and badger the hell out of them. Tomorrow is another day. If you think you are on a roll and can't do any wrong, go to the infield and try to walk across the pond.

Take your "daily" bankroll, divide it evenly over the races you intend to play, dont't be concerned if you loose, you are that much closer to your next win.

Karl

[Lefty]

It's called a due column and one of first strategies I learned way back in '50's. I played on paper for a couple of weeks and quickly discarded it. It's a dangerous strategy but it looks good because when you get a win you quit, but the streaks can kill you and they will come.

[thoroughbred]

The best wagering strategy is "No Strategy."

Of course when I explain this, you can say what I'm explaining is a strategy in itself, but I think you will know what I mean.

Every race is an individual race. What happened in the race before doesn't affect what will happen in the next race. Similarly, the outcome of the present race will not affect the outcome of the next races.

We should consider each race, one at a time. We should ask, what does our handicapping tell us about the likely outcome? What odds would make our choices good bets?

Then if the odds meet our criteria, we bet, otherwise we skip the race.

In a nutshell: One race at a time is the way to manage things. Don't be constrained by what happened before. If you come upon a race where, say, you think your horse should be 3/1 and he is going off at 5/1, why limit your bet to just make up a previous loss? Doing that will cause you to miss great opportunities.

[ranchwest]

Thoroughbred,

I think you have the right idea about each race standing on its own. One of the best pieces of advice I ever got was that when the race is over, turn the page. Yes, you should review it LATER, but let it go until you get home, it is over. The only reason to stop betting on an individual day is if you can't focus and it is affecting your success.

IMHO, the idea is to invest based on advantage. A progression scheme skews the objective off of a search for an advantage on the track toward a risk off the track. Risk is not investment, it is gambling. I prefer either flat bets or confidence bets, whatever an individual is most successful with.

What is luck? Good luck is when opportunity and preparation meet. Bad luck is what the people who don't prepare have. Yeah, I know, stuff happens, but there are enough predictable opportunities to not worry about it.

[FortuneHunter]

ranchwest,
When you say "flat bets" , I assume you mean WPS? If so, why would you limit your bets to WPS?

[ranchwest]

I mostly bet WPS (win, actually) and so I guess I am predisposed to looking at this discussion from that angle. In that context, I prefer flat bets or confidence bets, though I prefer strict limits on confidence bets.

Of course, exotics are much different.

I mostly confine my bets to Win because it provides me with the most consistent results.

Others are very successful with other strategies. I don't argue with success. I also don't feel obligated to try to embrace every successful strategy.

Mine is not the best way or the only way. It is... well, it is my way. :)

[GR1@HTR]

I had toyed w/ some mild progression and had moderate success. Only thing was that I was hitting about 33% playing all races using a mechanical system. For fun I will keep track of a progression system at AQU using nothing more than the MLO favorite. Lets see how well or poorly we do.

[GR1@HTR]

Actually instead of using MLO since we might have some ties, I will just use top Average Pace horse from last race.

[takeout]

The first I ever read about due column or debit goal betting was in Vogel's book. I tried it a couple of times, went broke a couple of times, and moved on. Like so many things in this game, it sounds good in theory but doesn't do so well in the real world. I loaned the book out and never saw it again. Hopefully the new owner suffered the same fate.:D

[FortuneHunter]

Originally posted by GR1
I had toyed w/ some mild progression and had moderate success. Only thing was that I was hitting about 33% playing all races using a mechanical system. For fun I will keep track of a progression system at AQU using nothing more than the MLO favorite. Lets see how well or poorly we do.

GR1, there are several progression schemes. Can you explain which one you will be testing?

For your scheme, do you need to know your Average Payoff? Losing Streak Stats (Max, Min, Avg, Std Dev)? What is your seed in the debit column? ($50?). Will you reset and take a loss after x losers? Are you going to quit for the day when your debit is cancelled or restart the next race?

If we use ML favorite with ties broken by Final Odds Favorite I can whip out the average payoff, win%, Losing Streak stats, broken down by distance, class (M,C,A,S) for the last 3 Big A meets.

If your going to spend the time, might as well do it right. Be happy to work with you on it.

FH

[GR1@HTR]

Originally posted by FortuneHunter


GR1, there are several progression schemes. Can you explain which one you will be testing?
FH

Home grown. I made a post on the selections area explaining it. Time will tell... For the sake of humanity, I urge no one to wager on those selections.


:p

[thoroughbred]

Originally posted by GR1
I had toyed w/ some mild progression and had moderate success. Only thing was that I was hitting about 33% playing all races using a mechanical system. For fun I will keep track of a progression system at AQU using nothing more than the MLO favorite. Lets see how well or poorly we do.

GRI,

That will be very interesting. According to studies, if you hit 33%, and BET EVERY RACE TO WIN ONLY, you should just about break even, or do slightly better. If you do less than about 30% you will tend to lose money, but if you manage to achieve a greater percentage of wins you could make good money. Achieving 40% wins is just about impossible.

Let us know how it turns out. Your data could be a test of the analyses.

[GR1@HTR]

Sure TBred. The factor I'm using at AQU should hit only 28%-ish...But some prices could be found.