Constructing an exacta ticket

[PaceAdvantage]

Assuming your contenders are valid (let's say top 5 or so), what would be the best way to construct exacta tickets? I've never been much of an exotics player, which is why I am asking for advice.

Thanks.

[JustMissed]

Assuming your contenders are valid (let's say top 5 or so), what would be the best way to construct exacta tickets? I've never been much of an exotics player, which is why I am asking for advice.

Thanks.


exacta
Journeyman 11-03-2003 32
Exactaman
Registered User 01-07-2004 215
exactaplayer
Apprentice


JM :)

[ratpack]

I would use this for 4 contenders if the field was 9 or more

These are $1 Box

ABC
ABD
ACD
BCD

A IS FIRST CHOICE ETC

TOTAL OF $24

[Blackgold]

Assuming 5 contenders. . . here's some of the ways I go after the exacta.

5 longshot contenders- box.

Couple of 'shots with several low priced. . . key 'shots top and bottom and if no low priced combos pay more than $50, leave 'em out. . AND, box the 'shots.

Key FAV 2nd.

Key low priced, perpetual maidens 2nd.

FAV in stakes are good 2nd keys.

Key longshot top and bottom.

Key contra running style runner 2nd, such as S horse in E race.

Key Fulcrum or Reverse Winner 2nd (more on what those terms mean in other threads on this board).

Key seconidus runner 2nd.

ALSO, watch the prices- IF none of the combos pay over $50, I usually pass the race. IF the quinella offers better value, skip the exacta (In Barry Meadow's excellent book, "Money Secrets At The Racetrack", he says the quinella often IS a better value).

Often the prices being offered in the exacta determine whether my handicapping of the race will turn into a bet.

Good luck PA!

[JustMissed]

I would use this for 4 contenders if the field was 9 or more

These are $1 Box

ABC
ABD
ACD
BCD

A IS FIRST CHOICE ETC

TOTAL OF $24

Hey Ratpack, if your boxing four horses it is just ABCD boxed, cost $24.

If your boxing 'em, what difference does it make who is first choice?

If you have a preference of one over the other three wouldn't you just play
A/BCD for $3 and maybe include BCD/A in case A gets nipped at the wire and then your in for $6 total as opposed to $24.

JM

[ratpack]

Hey Ratpack, if your boxing four horses it is just ABCD boxed, cost $24.

If your boxing 'em, what difference does it make who is first choice?

If you have a preference of one over the other three wouldn't you just play
A/BCD for $3 and maybe include BCD/A in case A gets nipped at the wire and then your in for $6 total as opposed to $24.

JM

You are correct it would be easier.

[keilan]

Assuming your contenders are valid (let's say top 5 or so), what would be the best way to construct exacta tickets? I've never been much of an exotics player, which is why I am asking for advice.

Thanks.

If you can't narrow those contenders down some, I'd think of playing tri's and supers.

[sjk]

If you have a computer at hand and don't mind making a rough odds line, you can calculate your edge (if any) and the approximate probability of winning for each potential combination. Use these to divide the total bet among the overlaid combinations with the ones with the largest (edge x probability) getting the highest dollar amounts.

[ceejay]

If you can narrow down to 2 keys, a formula that works for me is:
AB w/ ABCDE
CDE w/ AB
$14 units

[andicap]

Tom Walters has a good out that includes a fine chapter on exactas for only $20 or so
He posits that your exacta bet depends on the race. You would play a race with a strong solid favorite different than a wide open race where you think the chalk is a false favorite and he gives you different ways of exploiting various situations. I don't agree with all of his plays but several of them are very good.

One example (I don't want to give his secrets away)
Here's one to use when you have 5 contenders but your key horse is decent odds and you don't have two low-odds horses among the five. A spread out race.
A five-horse box is $20 for $1 but with a lot of underlays in there.
Think of the bet as 10 seperate 3-horse boxes. That's $60. But
key one horse, the "A" for $36 or 6 boxes for $6 apiece.
You have
ABC
ABD
ABE
ACD
ACE
ADE

You can cash three tickets if the A wins or places (and the other horse comes in)
Even if the "A" finishes out, you can still cash one ticket.

He has a bunch of others too.

It's Exotic Wagering Formulas and you can reach him at the HTR2.com board.

[Valuist]

I think the best way to play them is to look for the sleeper type horses, 12-1 or higher that maybe aren't strong win contenders but have a few decent lines in their pps. Key a horse like that underneath the 2-3 main contenders.

[formula_2002]

Assuming your contenders are valid (let's say top 5 or so), what would be the best way to construct exacta tickets? I've never been much of an exotics player, which is why I am asking for advice.

Thanks.

You look for the same thing you look for when betting into the win pool, "overlays".. 5 contenders can give you 20 possible plays. Generally, more overlays are found with the longer price horse over the shorter price horse.
Thats how I would bet it on a "fun" day at the track, long over the short, no box.

On a serious day, I would have been at home down loading the entire exacta matrix board in to a program that would find those overlays based on my "supposed" edge in the win pool.

[Exactaman]

at home in front of the computer? as has been said above make an exacta line, get the prices off the tote and let your computer find the overlays...

at the track? in general i like boxes a lot. usually if my computer finds that an exacta is an overlay, the reverse is too, or close. i would construct a ticket from two-horse boxes as you see fit. when those longshots come second on your ticket, i get just as excited as a win :) i would probably play more key boxes (i.e. 1 / 2 3 4 / 1) than three horse boxes, unless those contenders were really long. use a win line as a general guide and park yourself in front of a monitor showing the whole exacta grid. keep in mind each additional combination you play will take away from your winning overlay, personally my favorite bet is the two-horse cold box. i'll punch a whole bunch of numbers just as easily though if the prices are there.

[azibuck]

Try every method, then go back to straight win betting, or WP.

[Valuist]

Formula-

That is not true. Longshots over short priced horses tend to be overbet while the opposite is value. Why? Because of all the lazy bettors who box, instead of part-wheeling.

[ElKabong]

jmho....

I agree w/ Keilan on this. If you have 5 horses on a ticket, it's best to go w/ a tri or supe.

jmho again....Once you go beyond 4 combos (ab/abc), you're diluting the bet. Occasionally you'll find a race where you can box 3 hosses, but in the long run it's best to whittle ex tix down some.

Fwiw, most my ex bets are on 2 tix... (1) ab/abc, and (2) ab, boxed.

[andicap]

I agree. I've found from my records the best results from exactas where I play the fewest combos. The trick of course is to recognize the exceptional situations when it pays to spread. Tris or exactas in those instances? Not sure myself, but I respect Keilan's opinion on these matters.

Andy Cylke, professional player, former Prodigy board contributor swore that exacta plays were better bets than throwing a bunch of combos in the tris in most cases. Lot of players will try and put 6 or 7 horses in the 3rd spot -- or even hit "All" when they key a longshot for 1st and second. Cylke says best to stay with the exacta and bet more combos, as I recall.

I, too, have found that playing low-priced horses over longshots pay some surprisingly high bonanzas. For example, if you liked the 12-1 horse in Friday's 2nd race at AQI and paired it with a 2-1 chalk, you got $96 in a 7-horse field. Yet in 6th race 9-1 over strong 3-2 chalk entry with eight betting interests paid only $50. Yes the chalk was bet hard but you'd figure with the longshot WINNING instead of finishing 2nd you'd get something close to that $96 payoff especially with an additional betting interest.

[BIG RED]

I would say without a doubt, odds dictate. For intance, yesterday in the war room I;

Hit a 4 horse box for over $380, boxed four because all had good prices

Keyed one horse with 4 others, pd $31.20, key was 7/5 odds

Also played one exacta straight, fave over 5-1, pd. $48

This is not set in stone for me, but I make the decision on how much I like the top horse/his odds and how I organize the play. Note: Hit some fat ones yesterday, but the straight ticket still felt the best.

Good luck
BIG RED

[Big Bill]

Big Red,

Were you able to download and play the "races" audio clip I sent to you?

Big Bill

[BIG RED]

Yes, Bill, and that's the exact one. Thank you

[Dave Schwartz]

Personally, I use one of three strategies:
(Note this applies to fields of 8 or more.)

1. The 4-horse box

First, determine if the race is playable as a box.

1. I assume that my top 4 horses will collectively win 75% of the races. (In our software this is measured more accurately on a race-by-race basis.)

(also called the "threshhold")

2. Once the collective win% is set, I add up the "dutching points" for the 4 horses.

Example:

2/1 = 33
3/1 = 25
6/1 = 14
10/1= 9

total dutch points= 81


3. Compare the total dutch points to the threshhold.

If the total dutch points are less than the threshhold (i.e. collective win%) then there is no play.

In reality, I have found that I can fudge one point. Thus, with 75% as the threshhold, I could play if the total dutch points were less that 76.


Here is an example of a "yes" play -

Assuming collective win% = 75%
2/1 = 33
6/1 = 17
8/1 = 12
10/1= 9

total = 71

This is a highly playable race that will likely result in long-term profit. At a typical track I see about 2 of the plays per day. They result in 43% exacta hits and a profit that ranges from around 30% and up.

At some tracks, such as Saratoga, this works better than at others (like Calder). As a general rule, the more contentious the races are at the track (i.e. the lower the dutch points on the top 2 public choices) the better it will work.

At Saratoga I have consistently run 70% or higher profit but cannot beat Calder.

Your mileage may vary.

[Pace Cap'n]

Then there is the simple method.

1) Watch me pick a 3-horse trifecta.

2) Box those three in the exacta.

[Glitchy]

As a "committed" Exacta player, I have a hard time with the concept of boxing. THe four horse box has 12 combinations, including the projection that 4 horses can win. One of the primary keys to EX play is to be able to focus on who will run second (or can't run 1st). This eliminates the number of plays, saving money and allowing you to "load up" on your best combinations.

We all know the seconditis types:

1. The 25-1-7-3 horse
2. The "best horse" who has something going against him (bad connections, bad race shape, bad surface, bad post)
3. The favorite in a Stakes race

The third one is my own, but I find it to be profitable. Someone mentioned that betting the fave second is an underlay, but I'm not sure. Ebony Breeze went off in the Manatee Stakes at Tampa Bay Downs yesterday an odds-on 3-5 fave and finished second to the 1 horse who, at 7-1, was a legitimate runner. A 39.60 EX was the result.

Obviously, this is only one instance, but I have found this type of play often to be the only successful EX bet under stakes race conditions.

Wish I had all the stats like some of you guys to prove it. As a new poster, I will try to bring more of that to the table in the future. My record keeping has improved thanks to this group;) .

Glitchy

[Overlay]

I've commented elsewhere that I have found an average of speed figures from those races out of a horse's last three efforts which were run on the same surface (dirt or turf, irrespective of condition) as today's race (or an average of all three if none were run on today's surface) to be the single most effective means of comparing horses in terms of victory potential today. I have found this same measure to be the most consistent way to separate the wheat from the chaff in terms of likelihood of finishing in the money, both as an absolute measure (overall in-the-money %) and in predicting which horses may not win, but will be most likely to finish second or third. Thus, after I've come up with overall ratings for a field, I always check the horses again in light of their relative ranking on speed, and make sure I give the top speed horses another look as possible exacta components, even if their overall rating (after other handicapping elements like class, pace, and condition have been factored in) does not put them among my top contenders in today's race in terms of pure winning chances.

[Glitchy]

azibuck, I'm curious - why do u think that WP betting is the only way?

Is it the difference in the house edge?

If so, we need to all play craps or basic blackjack strategy (to get the lowest minimum house edge). Give up the ponies forever.

The house take between WP and EX is a bothersome but largely irrelevant consideration, in my book. Why? Because you can't grind out a profit at -15 or -20 house edge. Therefore, you got to be playing the one you can do well at. You ain't gonna tell me you play WP because the Takeout pool is better (I Hope).

But, then again, I don't play for a living. That edge may get important as the number of bets creeps up. Still, it's somewat stupid of us to debate a 2 to 3 percent edge when the tracks are getting 15-20.

Just my opinion....

[alysheba88]

I only make money on exactas in two specific situations. So thats where I focus all of my exacta play now.

1. Boxing two horses
2. Playing one horse, over two others equally.

No other situation do I make money. Sure have hit the occasional multi horse box before but again overall dont make money. I make money when I have strong opinions.

[rrbauer]

alysheba88 wrote:
"... I make money when I have strong opinions."

Comment:
Ditto! My strong opinions aren't always correct, but I believe in backing them and when I'm right then the money follows. Since, I'm primarily a "Pick" player, I tend to only use exactas when I can take a stand on one horse being in the exacta. Then I do part wheels using that horse up/down with others. No limit on how many others I use, indeed if the key horse is a price then it's up/down with "all" at least once; and, in the latter example (key=price) there will be an assortment of tri's there too. I do pay some attention to what the various exacta combo's that are in my play are paying and will apply extra money accordingly. The downside of this approach is that often you will find the key horse to be the favorite which leads to the lower-priced results that we all dislike; that leads to tossing the fav as a primary tactic rather than from a handicapping perspective.

There was a time when I would do a lot of multi-horse boxing but on too many occasions I found myself using four, five horses and still getting beat. Eventually, I figured out that the reason that I was using that many horses was that I didn't have a good handle on the race. Back in the days when there was only on-track wagering there were many more "overlay" possibilities in the exacta pools even with the higher takeout in those pools. Today, with so many people looking at the pools via computer and with the large last-minute avalanche of betting, after the dust settles, the exacta prices are seldom out of line (in large-pool venues).

Finally, the trap with any of these bets is the tendency to become enamored with making a particular type of bet; rather than looking at the race from the perspective of risk/reward and "what is the best way for me to extract some money from this race (or set of races)." (Some of this results from not looking at the entire card before hand and just handicapping/playing on a race-by-race basis as they come up.) In my own case, playing mainly SoCal venues, I went to the multi-race bets because the short fields there limit a lot of the single-race opportunities. But, when I started playing Tampa I learned quickly that the larger fields and less consistent performances limited my abilities to win as many multi-race bets; so, there are more single-race plays, fewer P3's, etc. and more races get passed (because I don't have a clue).

[azibuck]

Who said "only"?

I was being sarcastic. I'm a generally crappy exacta player, and I don't play for a living. I'm a spot player now, almost exclusively maidens, and my personal best success is betting WP.

[Glitchy]

Understand Azibuck,


Maybe you can teach me a little about spot playing Maidens:D

[Fwocco@BTW]

As a "committed" Exacta player, I have a hard time with the concept of boxing. THe four horse box has 12 combinations, including the projection that 4 horses can win. One of the primary keys to EX play is to be able to focus on who will run second (or can't run 1st). This eliminates the number of plays, saving money and allowing you to "load up" on your best combinations.

We all know the seconditis types:

1. The 25-1-7-3 horse
2. The "best horse" who has something going against him (bad connections, bad race shape, bad surface, bad post)
3. The favorite in a Stakes race

The third one is my own, but I find it to be profitable. Someone mentioned that betting the fave second is an underlay, but I'm not sure. Ebony Breeze went off in the Manatee Stakes at Tampa Bay Downs yesterday an odds-on 3-5 fave and finished second to the 1 horse who, at 7-1, was a legitimate runner. A 39.60 EX was the result.

Obviously, this is only one instance, but I have found this type of play often to be the only successful EX bet under stakes race conditions.

Wish I had all the stats like some of you guys to prove it. As a new poster, I will try to bring more of that to the table in the future. My record keeping has improved thanks to this group;) .

Glitchy

i agree with alot that glitchy mentions here . You can load up on Boxing four or whole bunch of seperate box combos, but you can still lose every combination and every bet , or just hit only one of the box combinations and it may only pay 50% return. I tend to save my cash and load up on straight combinations of a/bc . your return is normally much higher levels 200+ . Generally if a race is Wide open i wont box more horses and spend more cash ...cuz its basically a crapshoot.