6h Choice by Prof Richard Nash Inquiry

[eddessaknight]

I am a first time writer, but first, I want to express a short but sincere note of appreciation to all the posters who have shared their generously informative and valuable insights.

Secondly, many blue moons ago, I read an gambling news racing post by an ostensible Professor Richard Nash who hobby was racing. Nash had worked up a straightforward mechanical non-handicapping system called "6th Choice". Obviously it was not intended to open any new accounts in Geneva :) but as I recall, the 6th did demonstrate some intriguing results.

So anyone with experience or knowledge with Prof Nash and or his 6th Choice.

Also be happy to post this simple, very short and non-commercial program for any desiring to review same.

Thanks in advance for your patience and consideration.

Best wishes to all for continued success.
eddessaknight

[Greyfox]

I am a first time writer, ...
Also be happy to post this simple, very short and non-commercial program for any desiring to review same.



Knight, I've never heard of Prof Nash. But I'd be interested in seeing this short non-commercial program. I don't want to review it though. Thanks for offering it here.

[eddessaknight]

Hi Greyfox, et al-

As you requested I am sharing the very simple straightaway and unabridged 6th Choice, no obligations of course, but I do welcome all constructive reponses that can be shared with the interested readership.

Sixth Choice:

I would go crazy betting one of these mechanical money movers, but if they work for you, I think that's great. I would, however, be skeptical about the one you propose here. In my experience fooling around with the tote board, your advice tends to direct attention directly at what I consider the weakest part of the field (ie, 3d betting choice). The problem with chalk (as we talk about a lot) is that it wins often but doesn't pay enough. By the time you get to 3d choice, there is a significant drop off in win percentage, but nothing like a compensating increase in price. For the very reasons you mention (being touted by selection services and program selections) third-choice odds are often quite low and seldom very high. Which leads me to my suggestion in response to your request: If you are going to do a mechanical watch-the-odds kind of play (where all the excitement comes before the race as you watch the numbers on the board), try this one. Restrict your attention to fields of 9 or more. In those races, bet the SIXTH choice. That's it; it's simple, elegant; and based on the premise that: chalk players will divide their money between first- and second-choice, trying to get a winner; and so-called value players will be disproportionately hammering third- and fourth-choices in hopes of "beating the chalk." As a result, you can get a surprisingly high combination of value and win % looking beyond those four. And of course, you don't have to try and figure out at three minutes to post how the final betting is going to push around the odds on those 2/1, 5/2, 3/1 horses. The wrinkle here is that you are looking to bet the clear sixth choice, and sometimes two horses will be very close together at that range (either 5th and 6th or sixth and seventh). My solution: where only two are close together, bet them both; if three are right together, pass the race. Sometimes when I am bored, I check out these results. Just to give you a sample from yesterday's Equibase charts, here's what would have happened at Fairgrounds. 2 FG: two horses close together as 5th and 6th choice (10.90/1 and 10.80/1); bet 'em both: 6th choice wins, returning 23.80. 4 FG: sixth choice runs second, paying 12.40 to place (I have never checked the place payoffs on this, but I suspect it would be a better bet as win only) 5 FG: sixth choice wins, returning 19.00 (9.00 to place) 6 FG: two horses close together as 5th and 6th choice (16.10/1 and 17.90/1); bet 'em both. 5th choice runs third, sixth choice nowhere. Total on the day: 4 races, 6 bets, 2 wins, 1 place, 1 show. Win bets: $12 returns $52.80. If you like watching the odds, try looking at this one.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~

Aside of my own limited back checking, I don't recall any real testing & evaluation reports, I do recall several Q & A commetaries with Nash. I will try digging back inro my dusty catacombs to see if I can retrieve them (if they are not too deeply embeded in my archives.) :)

Enjoy~
eddessaknight

[dylbert]

If 6th choice in 9-horse field is choice, wouldn't 7th choice in 10-horse field work too? Just kidding! You will bore yourself to tears (or drinking) waiting for races with exactly 9 starters. Go to today's past performance on DRF or Brisnet and check this system out. Let us know how it works. Thanks!

[Overlay]

If 6th choice in 9-horse field is choice, wouldn't 7th choice in 10-horse field work too? Just kidding! You will bore yourself to tears (or drinking) waiting for races with exactly 9 starters. Go to today's past performance on DRF or Brisnet and check this system out. Let us know how it works. Thanks!

"Restrict your attention to fields of 9 or more. In those races, bet the SIXTH choice."

It's not exactly nine. It's nine or more.

[dylbert]

Thanks, Overlay, I didn't read fine print so well... LOL!

GP 4 plays today, zero hits

Aqu 1 play today last race, sixth favorite finished dead last

Lrl 1 play today, no hit

SA 2 plays, zero hits

TP 4 plays, zero hits

12 plays @ $2.00 each = Minus $24.00

Don't think I will crawl in this HOLE... Professor Nash.

[Greyfox]

Thanks Knight,

I'll check it out.

"Restrict your attention to fields of 9 or more. In those races, bet the SIXTH choice. " Nash

[BetHorses!]

12 plays @ $2.00 each = Minus $24.00

Don't think I will crawl in this HOLE... Professor Nash.


You should chart at least 15 plays :rolleyes:

[bobphilo]

Welcome to the board, eddessaknight. I have to admit that I’m skeptical of Prof Nash’s system. Studies show that horses basically win not only in order of their favoritism, but about in accordance with their odds. Because of this, their return on investment (R.O.I) is fairly consistent with a 17-20 % loss from the takeout. In some studies, exceptions are at the extreme ends of the scale with odds-on favorites winning more than their share (because a lot of bettors are put off by the low price) and extreme longshots win less than their share (because they attract additional money from those that want to go to moon). Other studies (Fabricand) show a gradual decrease in value as the odds go up.

Interestingly I did find an old study (1982) by Asch, Malkil and Quandt that shows that the 6th choice is underbet and wins slightly more often than its odds indicate. I wonder if this is the basis of the Nash’s theory? In any case, it still shows a negative R.O.I..



Bob

[Greyfox]

Interestingly I did find an old study (1982) by Asch, Malkil and Quandt that shows that the 6th choice is underbet and wins slightly more often than its odds indicate.


Bob

Knight, even if the 6 th place horse is not producing a + R.O.I in the win position, you may have given those of us who play "vertical exotics" an idea.
This "6 th choice" would certainly magnify payouts if it's also hitting the second and third tiers of exactas and trifectas more often than the odds would indicate.

[Good4Now]

IMO there are better and worser times to employ the pursuit of longshots.
Results of last week and yesterday suggest the time may be NOW!
Could be one of those times of year when it will continue for two or three more weeks. Good luck in finding them!

[bobphilo]

[QUOTE=Greyfox]Knight, even if the 6 th place horse is not producing a + R.O.I in the win position, you may have given those of us who play "vertical exotics" an idea.
This "6 th choice" would certainly magnify payouts if it's also hitting the second and third tiers of exactas and trifectas more often than the odds would indicate

Greyfox,

Knight was just presenting a simple straightforward win system he got from Nash, as a beginer. Whether or not one wants to apply it to a more sophisticated Exotic strategy is another issue.
One problem with the Asch study is that its findings have not been duplicated by other studies (maybe it used a biased sample?). Even so. I'm not sure that it would apply to Exotic wagering since people's strategies in these bets often differ from win betting. One always has to be careful in applying findings from one situation to a different one. I only mentioned it as a possible source for Nash's system.
Of course, that is not to say that it wouldn't work for Exotics. You could always test it. Good luck.

Bob

[JPinMaryland]

There is nothing wrong w/ the concept of trying to find a mid range bet horse that may have somehow escaped the public's eye. Instead of a mechanical system, per se, one could add more variables, presumably psychological (rather than speed figs, etc.) that would make the public undervalue, e.g. new trainer, ran at obscure track, etc.

There was a similar idea to this expressed on another forum, if I recall correctly. It had to do with certian "break pts." that departed from the general idea that horses win at about the rate that they are bet on. And that is that at about 5/2 and 6/1 odds, the ROI just about matches 100%minus take out, so you are geting just about the right value for your money. whereas at the other pts along the continuum it is just slightly less at the longshot end and slightly more at the chalk end.

Dont know where I read this, perhaps on the forum w/ initials "D.T." (hate to plug another forum as PA does such a good job here).

THere was a name for the theory or observation.

Definitely something to consider if you try to apply psychology to beating the parimutual game.

Hmm, I wonder where Bluegrass Cat's was in the odds list at Ky Dby? Damn, I wished I had spotted that horse..(think he was 13-1??)

[eddessaknight]

Many thanks to all the posters who responded, especially for the extra input efforts & welcome by bobphio and JPinMaryland :ThmbUp:

I finally managed to locate some relevant Q & A commentaries (below)with Prof Nash and thought that they might make for interesting additions for your consideration.

Wonder if a program exists to back test races looking for 6th Choice results over X amount of races?

Really do apperciate the good people here.....

Good Luck,
eddessaknight :)


__________________________________________________ ________________
(from RN)
"I'd urge you to extend your analysis at least as far as number 6; you may be right about 85% of all winners coming from the top 5, but there are some tremendous underlays in that 85%. By the same token, you are likely to find nice value in the sixth spot. A few years ago (before I discovered the internet), I devoted one Keeneland spring meeting to the simplest odds system in the world: sixth choice to win, every time, and had a remarkably profitable meet. The difference in win % between 3d choice and 6th choice is not great, but the difference in average price is remarkable.
Richard


You should only be looking at fields with 9 or more starters. And, of course, you have to give it some time and accept a relatively low win percentage. If you get an average price of 12/1 (not unlikely in the range we are talking about), you only need to cash 3 of 39 to break even. Yesterday may have been a losing day (I don't know), but I doubt that it was very bad if it produced three winners.



Do you play the 6th choice for money??



Absolutely not. As I said, this sort of exercise would drive me nuts in the real world, because I like handicapping too much. It's only a pattern I have looked at to pass time, occasionally. The longest I ever checked out was a three-week run from one track. If you are going to look into this in any sort of systematic way, I would suggest you keep detailed records on a number of races, recording the following information: Public choice (ie., favorite, 2d choice, etc.), win %, actual win payoffs. We all know (because it is so often studied), that for favorites the win % is good, but not good enough to offset the small actual payoff. In my experience keeping these kind of records (and I say, it's not terrible extensive experience), that still turns out to be a better value than 3d choice, where the win % is significantly lower and prices don't improve dramatically. When I was looking, I found that horses in the 5th, 6th, and 7th positions won only a little less frequently than horses in 3d and 4th range, but the payoffs were significantly better. I don't recommend blind betting of the tote, and I don't have the temperament that allows me to do it myself; but if someone put a gun to my head and made me invest their money that way, I would look for the clear 6th choice in fields of nine or more; and wherever two horses were within a couple of points of each other as 5th and 6th, or 6th and 7th, I'd bet both; if three horses were right together, I'd pass the race. I'd feel happy if I was getting 8-10% winners, because long-term I would expect my payoffs to average enough to make some money.



Robert writes: > > > > >

By blindly betting horses based on odds alone, you will have a negative > > >return on intvestment (ROI) whether you bet favorites or longshots or > > >anything in between. > > > >



I don't have data, but anecdotally I would expect negative expectation to increase as you move from favorite to second-choice to third-choice > (probably the worst bet on the board), and then rapidly decrease in the > middle ranges, before increasing again at the far end of the spectrum. > In a full field of 12 horses, I would expect the best pure-odds wager > would be sixth choice. > > But that's based on seat of the pants anecdotal long-term study, not > verifiable number crunching.
Richard

[bobphilo]

[QUOTE=Greyfox]Knight, even if the 6 th place horse is not producing a + R.O.I in the win position, you may have given those of us who play "vertical exotics" an idea.
This "6 th choice" would certainly magnify payouts if it's also hitting the second and third tiers of exactas and trifectas more often than the odds would indicate

Greyfox,

Knight was just presenting a simple straightforward win system he got from Nash, as a beginer. Whether or not one wants to apply it to a more sophisticated Exotic strategy is another issue.
One problem with the Asch study is that its findings have not been duplicated by other studies (maybe it used a biased sample?). Even so. I'm not sure that it would apply to Exotic wagering since people's strategies in these bets often differ from win betting. One always has to be careful in applying findings from one situation to a different one. I only mentioned it as a possible source for Nash's system.
Of course, that is not to say that it wouldn't work for Exotics. You could always test it. Good luck.

Bob

Greyfox,

I just realized I misread your post to Knight. For some reason I thought you were criticizing him for not suggesting the theory be used in Exotics when actually you were making it as an original suggestion yourself. Sorry about that. I hope it works out for you.

Bob

[Greyfox]

[QUOTE=bobphilo]

Greyfox,

I just realized I misread your post to Knight. Bob

Hi Bob. No problem. I took your original comments as positive.

[eddessaknight]

"You could be walking around lucky, and not even know it." :jump:
~Let It Ride


"Did I win? Did I WIN? SON-OF-A-BITXX ! GOD LIKES ME! HE REALLY, REALLY, LIKES ME! WHAT A DAY! WHAT A FABULOUS DAY! "
~Jay Trotter (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000377/)


"Good Vibes" a most entertaining book aka 'Let It Ride' humorous movie, now available on DVD.

eddessaknight :)

[Pace Cap'n]

It's getting harder to find a race with six horses, much less nine.

[eddessaknight]

@Pace

After back checking past races on Equibase, I see your point about limited races for the Sixth Choice wagering opportunities; looks like this will have to stay with the big tracks?

Any appropriate track application suggestions?

Thanks again-

eddessaknight :)

[misscashalot]

On the NYRA circuit there were 14,341 races with 9 betting entries or more. The 6th bet choice won 848 (.059)

The cost for $2 each $28,682

The return was $23,446. Average odds 12.85-1

Loss $5,236

ROI -.182

[eddessaknight]

Ladies & Gentlemen of the forum jury....

Kindly indulge my inexperienced racing naiveté, but do these input fctors input help or relate to the aforementioned 6th Choice opportunity ?


previously posted by: #1 (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=362670&postcount=1) misscashalot (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/member.php?u=3824)


Favs won .355 of all races

Race 1 .336 winning favs
Race 2 .359
Race 3 .387
Race 4 .356
Race 5 .357
Race 6 .369
Race 7 .360
Race 8 .350
Race 9 .328

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Winning post positions for the past 44 races at Aqu Inner dirt ending Mar 7
all distances
1- 3 wins
2- 5
3- 5
4- 9
5- 3
6- 8
7- 5
8- 4
9- 2

What's your opinion about biases?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Thank you in advance for consideration and all earnest replies-

"You could be walking around lucky, and not even know it."
~Let It Ride


eddessaknight :)