PDA

View Full Version : Connecting the Dots... Ticket Structure


Jeff P
05-11-2007, 04:12 PM
Before diving in I want to preempt anyone who would accuse me of redboarding. I posted my (pre-race) thoughts on the 2007 KY Derby... both in the 2007 KY Derby Software Picks thread of the PA Handicapping Software forum and on my own message board. This can be verified at:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36173
http://www.jcapper.ajthau.com/index.php?showtopic=852

Moving on...

My 07 Derby pick was HARD SPUN. I had him as a single. The algorithms I rely on liked him enough to make him 5/2 in a 20 horse field. Needless to say I liked him a lot.

Even though HARD SPUN ran a great race while being overlooked by the public (You really can't ask for much more than that from your selections can you?) he was beaten by another horse who ran an even better race. It happens. Even so I was able to catch the 7/8 exacta multiple times. It paid $101.80 for $2.00 - and turned a race where my selection was solidly beaten into a pretty nice payday.

From the postings in the 2007 Ky Derby Software Picks thread it's obvious to me that a lot of people did a good job of handicapping the race beforehand and getting to the right contenders. IMHO, after you've been playing for a while, getting to the contenders in a race becomes (almost) an automatic given.

But in talking to many people afterwards I've come to realize one thing. Very few are actually able to connect the dots and consistently get paid for their efforts. And after years of talking to other players, I'm starting to realize that this is a recurring theme.

Is ticket structure that hard to get right in the heat of the moment? If so, why?

Do strategies exist for basic ticket structure that players can (or should) consistently rely on? If so, what are they?

Some say that ticket structure is more art than science. I have some very solid theories on ticket structure of my own which I'll be happy to share. But I'm curious about the thought process of other players when it comes to connecting the dots.

Comments or input would be appreciated.


-jp

.

Overlay
05-11-2007, 04:53 PM
Since advance payoff information is available for exactas, I treat them the same as win bets: not excluding any combination outright; basing play decisions on which combinations project to provide a return greater than fair value (calculated beforehand); and sizing wagers according to the degree of overlay. For me, this helps keep "heat of the moment" changes to a minimum. And, similar to the way you're able to achieve a positive return on races where you miss picking the winner, excatas provide not only that benefit for me, but also the possibility of salvaging a race where my top choice to win is not offering value in the win pool, but where combinations involving the horse are (for whatever reason) being overlooked in the exacta pool.

boomman
05-11-2007, 06:45 PM
Before diving in I want to preempt anyone who would accuse me of redboarding. I posted my (pre-race) thoughts on the 2007 KY Derby... both in the 2007 KY Derby Software Picks thread of the PA Handicapping Software forum and on my own message board. This can be verified at:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36173
http://www.jcapper.ajthau.com/index.php?showtopic=852

Moving on...

My 07 Derby pick was HARD SPUN. I had him as a single. The algorithms I rely on liked him enough to make him 5/2 in a 20 horse field. Needless to say I liked him a lot.

Even though HARD SPUN ran a great race while being overlooked by the public (You really can't ask for much more than that from your selections can you?) he was beaten by another horse who ran an even better race. It happens. Even so I was able to catch the 7/8 exacta multiple times. It paid $101.80 for $2.00 - and turned a race where my selection was solidly beaten into a pretty nice payday.

From the postings in the 2007 Ky Derby Software Picks thread it's obvious to me that a lot of people did a good job of handicapping the race beforehand and getting to the right contenders. IMHO, after you've been playing for a while, getting to the contenders in a race becomes (almost) an automatic given.

But in talking to many people afterwards I've come to realize one thing. Very few are actually able to connect the dots and consistently get paid for their efforts. And after years of talking to other players, I'm starting to realize that this is a recurring theme.

Is ticket structure that hard to get right in the heat of the moment? If so, why?

Do strategies exist for basic ticket structure that players can (or should) consistently rely on? If so, what are they?

Some say that ticket structure is more art than science. I have some very solid theories on ticket structure of my own which I'll be happy to share. But I'm curious about the thought process of other players when it comes to connecting the dots.

Comments or input would be appreciated.


-jp

.

Jeff: Even though I do not post picks on message boards, I certainly concur that Hard Spun was the horse, and it took a great run by Street Sense (and a perfect trip) to defeat him on Derby Day. But to answer your question, I am a firm believer in "slotting" horses in positions and really believe that I get maximum "bang for my wagering buck" by doing so. I wrote far too many chapters in my 2nd book to go into detail here, but "slotting" is the ticket structure process (connecting the wagering dots) to which I believe you're referring. By the way, I remember in a previous thread you had mentioned if you reach a certain win during a day that you stop at that point even though you may have many qualified plays remaining. Are you still doing that or have you rethought that position? IMHO each new play is an independent one and should made within the confines of your bankroll regardless of your current "winning" position for a particular day, but of course to each their own.........

Boomer

ranchwest
05-11-2007, 10:01 PM
In a 20 horse field, value abounds.

In the PA Road to the Derby contest, I went wide and pulled about $330 out of a $100 (fake) wager allowance.

My actual wager was three horses over 8, $21 for a $50.90 return. I also had a $4 losing win ticket. Doubled up. (My 3 and 8 horses were posted in some thread on here, but I don't remember which one.)

In years where I feel more comfortable with a small group, I usually go wide and then add on bets where I hope to have a nice hit if my select group comes in. My suggestion is to try to ensure a profit, then consider going for the gusto.

In the Derby, it is all about getting the contenders. While some strategies will elevate the return, making a profit is almost assured with the right contenders.

mikejlb
05-14-2007, 09:15 PM
Even though HARD SPUN ran a great race while being overlooked by the public (You really can't ask for much more than that from your selections can you?) he was beaten by another horse who ran an even better race. It happens. Even so I was able to catch the 7/8 exacta multiple times. It paid $101.80 for $2.00 - and turned a race where my selection was solidly beaten into a pretty nice payday.

Comments or input would be appreciated.


-jp

.

JCapper made Hard Spun a very obvious choice. The tough question for any handicapping program is about ROI over a long run though. JC gives a person a chance to make a profit and the only real limitation is the effort that one invests into using it.