Question for all

[kev]

This has nothing to do with handicapping methods or the way you cap, on a scale from 1-10, if you had the skill ( which from time to time we all do ) if you knew a false fav. was not going to hit the board, how big is that?? Also what types of wagers should be looked into playing. Thats my problem sometimes, I'm good at picking out say 7-5 shots that are not going to fire, but trying to cash big is another thing. Thanks.......... ;)

[twindouble]

This has nothing to do with handicapping methods or the way you cap, on a scale from 1-10, if you had the skill ( which from time to time we all do ) if you knew a false fav. was not going to hit the board, how big is that?? Also what types of wagers should be looked into playing. Thats my problem sometimes, I'm good at picking out say 7-5 shots that are not going to fire, but trying to cash big is another thing. Thanks.......... ;)


kev; It all depends on how you see the race overall. For example, if you think that 7-5 shot is going to be an also ran just exclude him from the race and look at the rest and determin if who's going to be compitive, I say competive because with that 7-5 shot out your looking at some nice value, Under those pervailing conditions it's great if you can find the 3 or 4 competitors, you can choose to either key the one you like the best, or box up in the gimmicks a key won't dilute your bet as much as a box. The other thing to concider is, if you think the 7-5 shot is beatable on the win but could hit the board, nothing wrong with using him in your wagers, Ex tri or super, ESP with nice value on the others. I catch many $30 to $70 ex that way, $20 or $40 ex. Mostly $20 ex. What your asking is what all handicappers look for and that's to beat the chalk but you just play other horses just because you want to beat the chalk, it can make money for you as well.

[kev]

Good points, yes I know for most of us, were trying to beat the fav. but there are times that you know he/she is not going to fire. Thanks.

[kingfin66]

I say it depends. If the 2nd favorite is also very low odds and looks like it will hit the board, and the field is short, big deal. If on the other hand, there is a nice size field, the favorite was lukewarm to begin with, and the 2nd favorite is marginal at best, then I will go heavily into the race if, and only if, I have a strong Key Horse.

Having the ability consistently toss a false favorite is a HUGE talent.

[twindouble]

Good points, yes I know for most of us, were trying to beat the fav. but there are times that you know he/she is not going to fire. Thanks.


I worded the last paragraph wrong.




"What your asking is what all handicappers look for and that's to beat the chalk but you just play other horses just because you want to beat the chalk, it can make money for you as well."
Kev;

I worded the last paragraph wrong.

I meant to say don't play other horses just because you want to beat the chalk, the chalk can make you money as well.

Sorry about that but I assume you knew that anyway. Just wanted correct for others.

[the little guy]

It's an easier question to accurately answer in theory than in actuality. Let's assume, for example, that there is an 8:5 shot that you KNOW won't hit the board. That means, in a 15% win takeout pool, that about 33% of the money is bet on that horse. So, you could effectively dutch your win bets on every other member of the field and guarantee a reasonable profit. Now, obviously to make any real money, the pool has to be large enough to both reap real rewards and not have your wagers significantly effect the diachotamy of the betting.

Now moving on to exactas, where the takeout is probably higher, while the horse has 33% of the win end, it also has a bigger percentage of the " place " action ( i.e. second in the exacta ), probably at least 40% of that remaining money. If you assume the exacta is divided between 50% first and 50% second, the horse has 33% of 50% ( 17% ) and 40% of 50% ( 20 % ) or 37% of the pool. However, with a higher takeout, say 18%, your exacta reward will be only a little higher than the win pool. For example, in the win pool ( assume $100K in both pools ) with 67% of the money, or $67K, bet on the rest of the field, and $15K coming out for takeout, there is $18K left to divy up ( $33K bet on the favorite less $15K Takeout ). 18K into 67K is just under 27 cents on the dollar. In the exacta pool you have 63% of the money ( 37% is on the favorite ) vying for 82% of the pool ( takeout is 18% ) or just over 30 cents on the dollar.

In the triple, the favorite will have 33% of the " win " action, 40% of the second position and 45% of the thrid position, or 39% of the total pool. However, as the trifecta takeout is often 25%, your remaining 61% ( or $61K ) is vying for only $14K, or just under 23 cents on the dollar. So, using these takouts, the best pool to play in would be the exacta.

However, this is where rebates significantly alter the playing field, as rebates are takeout sensitive, and most rebate shops give back 18% on trifecta wagers, as opposed to say 9% on win action and probably 12% on exacta bets ( under a similar takeout structure ). And, frankly, the example you have come up with is the major driving force behind so-called " rebate driven handle ", as by eliminating favorites even from the win slot, or even a second or third choice, a smart player can dutch his bets ( by using the often referred to " batch betting ) to guarantee himself ( assuming he's right ) a small loss, which is easily overcome by the rebate.

But that's a bigger discussion.

[JackS]

Kev- In the situation your describing, I like to play the horse that I like best as a key with two or three others in Exacta Boxes plus the key on top in straight exactas.
If you have two or three contenders that appear about the same (excluding the favorite which you don't like), I often take the horse with the best tote odds and use this horse as the key. The odds are still against you when you do this but in the long run should be more profitable.
One last thing to consider. If you think the chalk will be competitive but probably not win, add a small Tri using this horse as a hedge in the 2 slot with two or three of your legitamate contenders.

[the little guy]

I think I screwed that up :cool:

[twindouble]

I think I screwed that up :cool:

LOL and I was thinking about saying I'd be a fool to question your stats.


Anyway, you know I don't pay much attention to that stuff, I just look for value and play accordingly. I have question though, when you hit that big one, what percentage of the pool did you take down. :)

[the little guy]

The horse actually has a SUBSTANTIALLY larger percentage of the exacta and especially the trifecta pools.

In the examples I gave, where he has 33% of the win slot, 40% of the REMAINING second slot, and then 45% of the REMAINING third slot ( in trifectas only obviously ) the percentage is much greater. In exactas, he will have 33% for first PLUS 40% of the remaining 67%, or 27%, thus he will be on 60% of the tickets. In the trifecta he will have that same 60% PLUS 45% of the remaining 40% of the tickets, or 18%, for a total of 78% of the pool.

So, using my examples, with a takeout of 18% in the exacta, 40% of the pool, or $40K, is vying for $82K, thus your return would be $2.05 for every dollar wagered. And, in the trifecta, with a 25% takeout, 22% ( or $22K ) would be vying for $75K, thus your return in the trifecta would be $3.4 for every dollar wagered. So, if you " knew " a 2-1 favorite couldn't hit the board you can make serious money by betting the tri.

[Vegas711]

Bet your top horse to win, if the heavy fav is also bet heavy in place pool bet your top pick also to place.

A horse even with a bad wheel can still come in third. This is the problem with betting tris and supers... 40-1 shots with no form at all can still come in 3rd or 4th. The reason for these I feel is that often the riders on legit contenders will quit riding if they can't get atleast 2nd. It is like they don't care if they have a shot at 3rd or 4th, better to save the horse for next time.

This is why when I used to play trifectas I always took the field for 3rd. ( i singled my top pick for 1rst , took 3 or 4 solid contenders for 2nd ). It also is the reason why I quit the exotics and only play win or win/place.If you screw up a large tri it is something that will bother you for a long time, on the other hand you will not lose any sleep if you srew up betting a 5-1 shot.

[cnollfan]

If you have spotted a false favorite and also like a horse in the same race, I doubt you would be asking this question -- you would bet your horse to win and key him all the exotics, leaving out the chalk. So I suspect the heart of the question is what to do when you dislike the favorite and don't have much of a clue about the rest of the field.

A handicapping book I like but have never seen mentioned anywhere is "Horse Racing Logic" by Glendon Jones. In his opinion, if the favorite is an underlay, the most likely overlay is the second favorite (and vice versa). If there was a race in which he disliked the favorite and had no other strong opinion, Jones would bet the second favorite to win, with confidence.

Marc Cramer advocates a similar strategy in "Eleven Winning Exacta Situations." Against a false favorite, Cramer recommends betting an exacta of the second favorite on top of the two horses most likely to finish second. He prefers this to boxing the second and third favorite. "We are simultaneously rebuking and respecting the betting public. We defeat our enemy by respecting him."

In real life, I have not been able to apply these strategies successfully in the win or exacta pool. I don't have the imagination or constitution to bet low-odds horses (i.e. second favorites) that I have no real opinion about. I have been able to do it successfully in serial wagers like the double, pick 3 and pick 4. It's easy for me to single the second favorite in a serial wager if I don't like the favorite, and I'd rather single one leg and spread out in another instead of buying a 2 x 2 x 2 ticket.

[Valuist]

Kev-

IMO, that's my favorite situation. I much prefer having a strong negative opinion on a favorite to really "liking" one horse. Maybe its because most of my bets are in exotics. Of course each situation is different, but the first pool I'd probably look toward would be the exacta pool. If say, you have a mildly positive opinion on a couple big bombs (maybe 25-1 or 30-1), start looking toward tris. Of course the Pic 3 pool should be considered; once you get a couple favorites out, the payoffs increase exponentially. Even Pic 3s with a bunch of 2nd thru 4th choices often pay shockingly well.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Trifectas if the fav is 6-5 or less; exactas if over 6-5.
A 10 in importance.