Betting to show

[dav4463]

Does anyone bet to show? Is it your main bet? Do you make a profit?

[lamboguy]

i do, and i lose like i do at everything else.

if you want a chance at winning, sign up for premier turf club, they have an inhouse clocker at the keeneland meet, and will have one there for the breeders cup.

i won following their report during the keeneland meet, and it could have been a lot bigger than it was if a few of their horses won instead of getting aced at the wire.

[Robert Fischer]

Does anyone bet to show? Is it your main bet? Do you make a profit?

In "Theory" Place and Show betting are the same as Win betting:confused:.

For example the following three wagers are the aprox. same value:

WIN $8.80 at 30%Hit Rate
PLC $5.20 at 50% Hit Rate
SHW $3.50 at 75% Hit Rate

For a small bankroll player the place and show wagers here are actually better, because of the fact that they offer higher hit% which guards against risk of bankroll ruin.

Win wagers should always be the core of your wagering strategy, and in reality Place and Show betting offers some challenges and difficulties that aren't worth every player's time and effort.
It is hard, especially if it isn't a common bet of yours, to estimate what percentage chance a place or show wager has of hitting. It is harder:bang: to estimate the payout.
Everybody else sees what you see - If the heavy favorite is going to pay upwards of $4 to show - trust that thousands of other dollars also see this "steal". It is harder to know the late money patterns and safely low-estimate the price you will get. You almost have to enjoy pool watching and playing the guessing-game.
Like other wager-types many players find it helpful to develop spot-plays or situations where they tend to get consistent results.

Something important as well is that when you have a longshot who meets your value demands for place or show, then you will also strongly consider that horse in a key in all trifecta slots.

[lamboguy]

most show pools cannot handle a $200 bet with out you betting against yourself. if you want to play pools like keeneland, churchill, nyra, or california tracks you have better pools to bet into.

you could be a minus pool better, but that is difficult too. the return on a minus pool is only 2.10 in most places. on paper those horses look like a good deal at the low ticket. however today with all the drugs that are being used in horses you get alot of crazy results. they are far more random, and lots more breakdowns than years ago. along with harder surfaces, it makes it tuff.

along time ago, i played new york tracks when they were 2.20 miniums, and there was no such thing as lasix. i made big money betting to show back then playing new york. now its almost impossible

[amazingD]

My place of wagering allows me to show a profit on win and place but not show. Seems if they dont run well then they dont hit the board. Or freak accidients are really not allowed in show betting, its too hard to make up one loss. All in all Place wagers are the best bet as far as safety, short losing streaks and if your on a non favorite, with the new net pools, the wagers pay more. I make exactly the rebate on all my accounts, thats how tough this game is. No rebate no profit, most my wins come from races with late scratches where all the spot players dont correct for scratches. They dont get hammered like the other plays that everyone knows about in the am.

[ryesteve]

In "Theory" Place and Show betting are the same as Win betting:confused:.Not entirely... what makes those pools more difficult is that as the payouts get lower, breakage represents a bigger proportion of what should've been your potential return. Given the tight margins most players operate under, that can be more than enough to swing you from black to red.

[SMOO]

what makes those pools more difficult is that as the payouts get lower, breakage represents a bigger proportion of what should've been your potential return. Given the tight margins most players operate under, that can be more than enough to swing you from black to red.

:ThmbUp:

Almost every study I have seen shows a lower payback to show than to win.

[oddsmaven]

My main objection to show betting is based on the following opinion of mine:

The winning horse is usually deserving as the best horse in the race that day, although some do lose with horrible trips.

However the 2nd and 3rd finishers are less likely to be the 2nd & 3rd best...IMO when the winner emerges, he may indeed discourage or break the will of another horse trying to win, who may fade, when they would have otherwise kept going strong...have you ever seen a horse passed and immediately shorten stride? It doesn't always work like that, but enough to sway me.

Then there are horses who lack winning punch (herd instinct) and hang instead of go by...I don't think these are necessarily good show bets because they are bet heavier to show or place, along with secondary slots in exotics.

And if you spot an "overlay" in the place and show pools, it is often a horse that has question marks, but is expected to win if all is well - such as a hot first timer, or a layed out class horse...if the latter is not fit off of a layoff he could just as easily run up the track as not win...hence people are betting them heavier to win, in hopes they are fit.

[dav4463]

I don't bet to show, but after having watched six of my picks run 3rd the other day.....I did think about the possibility of trying out some show parlays.

[Tom Barrister]

It depends. Lower priced horses generally have a better ROI to show than to win. Higher priced horses generally have a considerably worse ROI to show than to win. The main problem is finding large enough pools to bet into, and that more or less confines the show bettor to the bigger tracks.

[HUSKER55]

I think you have to match your wagering to your handicapping skills, whatever they are.

For example, my fist pick hits about 35% of the time however the place and show rate is less than that.

My 2nd picks generally will win or place but the show rate is not as good.

Reason is my picks either "do the trick" or you can drive a steak in the ground to see if they move at all.

For me I bet my first pick to win and 2nd pick to place and I forget the show pool.

(I hope I explained that good enough)

If you think I am making a mistake I would like to hear your response.

Thanks

husker55
:)

[Greyfox]

A waste of time.
You can't make a chicken sandwich out of chicken shit. It's just that simple.

[MONEY]

A waste of time.
You can't make a chicken sandwich out of chicken shit. It's just that simple.

You are right.
Over the last two weeks I posted Best Bet picks on another forum. (Why would I go to another forum?)
Anyway I posted 9 chalky picks in races that have show wagering.
My results, $18.00 into each pool,
7 wins $21.90
8 plac $19.50
9 shw $20.00
As you can see in the show pool, if I my next horse runs out, I would have to start from scratch, even though I would have hit 9 of 10.
If you play horses at higher odds you could expect for a smaller hit % and similar or worse results.
Just for the record I posted one horse in a race no show wagering and that horse won.;)

money

[john del riccio]

My POP used to describe show betting as a "slow death".


JOhn

[raybo]

I suppose, maybe, if you concentrated all your wagers on short fields (6 or less entries), and you were very good at recognizing the horse that will absolutely hit the board, you could eek out profits. You only have to defeat half the field for ITM consideration. I would think a very good handicapper could hit over 90% on show bets under this condition. However, strange things happen, even in small fields, so there is still some doubt in my mind if one could be successful.

This would, for sure, be a very slow grind, at any rate.

[showbet]

Does anyone bet to show?
I do.

Is it your main bet?
Yes. 94% of my bets in 2008 are show bets; 5% are place and 1% are place-show.

Do you make a profit?
Yes. My ROI this year on show bets is 11%.


I bet the pools, not the horses.

[MONEY]

I do.


Yes. 94% of my bets in 2008 are show bets; 5% are place and 1% are place-show.


Yes. My ROI this year on show bets is 11%.


I bet the pools, not the horses.

:ThmbUp:Very Nice.:ThmbUp:
I wish that I had the patience to do what you do.

money

[barn32]

Ryesteve had the answer. If a horse is going to pay $12.19 to win, then after breakage it will pay $12.10. If a horse is going to pay $3.59 to show, then after breakage it will pay $3.50--a much bigger percentage increase, therefore most of the breakage comes out of the show pool.

The effect of breakage can easily be seen in the attached chart. I picked a race from GG yesterday to illustrate effective takeout vs takeout.

[dav4463]

Showbet:

Any secrets on how you pick such solid horses? :)

[cnollfan]

Unless someone was going to specialize in the show pool and study the pools ala Showbet, I believe show betting is a losing proposition, particularly for longshots. In addition to the breakage issue, the back-breaker is that the way pari-mutuel bets are computed, all the money that is bet on the other in-the-money finishers is not available to pay off the longshot to show. If logical, low-odds horses round out the in the money finishers, there isn't that much left to pay off the winners, especially after the leftovers are divvied up three ways. The leftover crumbs are not enough to compensate for the risk of an out-of-the-money finish (a substantial risk, given the kind of horses I bet).

As per Dick Mitchell, Mark Cramer, etc., I recommend trifecta wagers underneath the logical contenders as a "synthetic" show bet alternative. While not as certain as a show bet, the returns are much more lucrative.

[soupman2]

I was killing myself with exotics. One day I decieded to just bet show and parlaying anything I would win. I do that for three races then start the cycle over. I went from a loser to a positive ROI in less than 6 months. I got a little irritated watching 5-6 or 10-1 horses win when I only had show bets, so I started to place some win and show wagers. I am almost totally off tri's and only do an occasional exacta. Exacta payoffs have been much better because my overall handicapping has improved. I guess that is what my point was. I now look at the horses differently and so far it is working.

[showbet]

Showbet:

Any secrets on how you pick such solid horses? :)

My wagers are determined by the toteboard; I do not handicap the horses at all. I do not attempt to decipher which horse is faster than its rivals, but rather I try to find "inefficiencies" in the show pool.

In general, I bet horses that are well-bet in the win pool, but not nearly as well-bet in the show pool. I also bet against low-priced horses that are overbet in the show pool. It's not a new idea, and I know many here have heard of such a strategy.


Unless someone was going to specialize in the show pool and study the pools ala Showbet, I believe show betting is a losing proposition, particularly for longshots.

I completely agree that betting longshots to show is almost always a very bad idea. They are almost invariably overbet to show, relative to their win odds. I rarely bet anything over 5-1, unless it is very underbet in the show pool. About the only time I bet a 10-1 or higher to show is if there is a minus show pool caused by a "bridge jumper".

[amazingD]

It sure seems like anytime i try to catch the chalk to show when hes not being bet inthe show pool, someone with atr nails him the last minute and the second fav is the bargain in the show pool....

[misscashalot]

.......................... I rarely bet anything over 5-1, unless it is very underbet in the show pool. About the only time I bet a 10-1 or higher to show is if there is a minus show pool caused by a "bridge jumper".

Have you tried your approach in the place pool? Granted you cash fewer tickets, but have you determined if the higher return will result in a higher roi?

[amazingD]

THAT IS A TON OF BETS..seems like thier is often harness races that have skewed pools. If i have to pay an extra 4% dueto breakage, then my rebates out the window. Wonder how much I lose due to breakage on place bets?

[classhandicapper]

THAT IS A TON OF BETS..seems like thier is often harness races that have skewed pools. If i have to pay an extra 4% dueto breakage, then my rebates out the window. Wonder how much I lose due to breakage on place bets?

The reality is that in some circumstances the the place and show pools are so inefficient you are still better off in those pools despite the breakage issue.

[Tom]

BC races will be ones to keep an eye out for show overlays.....I'll take 8,9,10 buck on a show bet any day. Lots of possibilities the next two days.

[exactaplayer]

I do.


Yes. 94% of my bets in 2008 are show bets; 5% are place and 1% are place-show.


Yes. My ROI this year on show bets is 11%.


I bet the pools, not the horses.
hello,
I cannot find My Roi on youbet ? I just get my preferences,my trainers, my horses and my carryover ?

[Fingal]

Considering the slump I've been in where win bets run 2nd or finish where tickets get tossed, it's a viable option. Especially a parlay. At the end of the day, a $400 show parlay spends the same as hitting the $400 tri. :ThmbUp:

[oddsmaven]

My wagers are determined by the toteboard; I do not handicap the horses at all. I do not attempt to decipher which horse is faster than its rivals, but rather I try to find "inefficiencies" in the show pool.

In general, I bet horses that are well-bet in the win pool, but not nearly as well-bet in the show pool. I also bet against low-priced horses that are overbet in the show pool. It's not a new idea, and I know many here have heard of such a strategy.
Showbet, I realize that you noted that your strategy has worked for you, but I must say that on any given day I could predict those "ineffeciencies" ahead of time in the place & show pools - and there are almost always valid reasons that certain contenders are bet lighter ratios to show than to win...I explained some of it earlier in the thread but I'll give another example:

Take a horse who is the speed of the race and is stretching out...he may have a good chance of wiring the field & winning but if he gets some pressure, there's a good chance he will "stop" when collared...so you typically see a higher win ratio on him and that is appropriate...the light place & show play on the same horse are not bargains but are usually a reflection of him being a strong candidate to run out of the money if he doesn't win.

[Norm]

I gave up show betting 30 years ago. Back in the '70s I had developed a procedure that was giving me 95% winners (in the show pool) at Aqueduct. At the end of the meet, I had made a 4% profit. It was a lot of work for a return I could have made at the bank. Show betting just isn't worth it. It feels good to win a lot of races, but you don't make any money.

[applebee]

I do.


Yes. 94% of my bets in 2008 are show bets; 5% are place and 1% are place-show.


Yes. My ROI this year on show bets is 11%.


I bet the pools, not the horses.
anyone who shows a 11% roi over a 10000 race sample has my attention .keep up the good work!

[amazingD]

I only see them on small small tracks mostly and thats harness.. usually you have to guess where its gonnna be underlaid. The underlays in the one post pos get pounded late from what i can tell. But many times and co 8-5 fav is bet like hell inthe one hole and not bet in the 6 hole to show. I broke even betting them but then had 2 break stride... yikes....

[raybo]

I gave up show betting 30 years ago. Back in the '70s I had developed a procedure that was giving me 95% winners (in the show pool) at Aqueduct. At the end of the meet, I had made a 4% profit. It was a lot of work for a return I could have made at the bank. Show betting just isn't worth it. It feels good to win a lot of races, but you don't make any money.

That's 4% you wouldn't have had otherwise. In today's world it's possible to wager much more than you were able to do back then, and do far less "work" (computerized handicapping and wagering). 4% adds up to quite a bit under that scenario.

[showbet]

Have you tried your approach in the place pool? Granted you cash fewer tickets, but have you determined if the higher return will result in a higher roi?
I bet to place occasionally; my ROI this year on place bets is 4%. The place pool lacks something that you will find occasionally in the show pool: the "bridge jumper". My ROI on show bets would likely be at least a couple of percent lower if I didn't have the bridge jumpers to bet against.

...seems like thier is often harness races that have skewed pools.
You will find far more inefficiencies in the smaller pools. It's somewhat difficult to find them at the big thoroughbred tracks.


hello,
I cannot find My Roi on youbet ? I just get my preferences,my trainers, my horses and my carryover ?
The MyROI feature is on the "My Youbet" menu, but you had to reply to an email they sent in mid-September to have it activated. Contact them and they should be able activate it for you.

Back in the '70s I had developed a procedure that was giving me 95% winners (in the show pool) at Aqueduct. At the end of the meet, I had made a 4% profit.
I personally don't think 4% is bad, but if you hit 95% of your bets and only made 4% you must have been making very large bets (or you bet into a lot of minus pools), because that is an average mutuel of $2.19.

100 races x $2 bet= $200
4% ROI on those 100 bets would give you a total return $208
$208 / 95 winning bets = $2.19 per winning bet

[amazingD]

What percentage of the pool should a horse have in the show slot if hes even money to win?

[raybo]

What percentage of the pool should a horse have in the show slot if hes even money to win?

There is no correct percentage for the show pool. It's totally determined by the wagering public. There may be a very general rule of thumb but that would be suspect, at best.

[BMeadow]

Interesting thread, so I decided to look up my own numbers for show bets over the last ten years, which includes thousands of bets (show bets are only a small percentage of my total action):

Amount bet: $ 1,249,619
Amount collected: $1,233,131
Net loss: $16,488 (1%, or ROI of 0.99)
Approximate rebates earned (estimated at 4%): $49,984
Net profits on show bets after rebates: $33,496

Rebates are only estimates because rebate rates have varied depending on the track, where I've made the bets, what years the bets were made (rates have varied), what deals I had with whomever I was dealing with at the time, some show bets were made without any rebates, and most places offer no rebates if horses pay $2.20 or less.

Advantages of show betting are low volatility and possibilities for rebate profits. Disadvantages include high breakage, lack of payoff predictability, your own impact on the toteboard, the late pounding of seeming overlays (even after the race begins), and the fact that most longshots are horribly overbet to show (even though they run third more than they win).

As Showbet points out, pool inefficiencies are the key. Ideally, you would monitor all the pools at every track on your home computer, then place the bets at the last second with a place where your bet doesn't go into the pool. Or, you can bet into the pool but must be careful not to overbet, and make sure you're getting strong rebates.

As Oddsmaven says, some horses are win-or-out types who are underbet to place and show precisely because they figure either to win or run out (they run Beyers of 75-48-72-50), while the Steady Eddies are often overbet to place and show because they run their same old 65 Beyer every time out.

The problem with studies that show win betting is more profitable than show betting is that invariably, we never hear about these studies unless they do well on the win end. You never hear about tests that lose 18% to win but only 13% to show. Most show bets involve low-odds horses, not the ones that look great in surveys. The way to check this is to run a large test with no predispositions--say, for instance, you checked 20,000 horses from post 1 or whose name begins with the letter M and compared their total payoffs in the win, place, and slow shots. My guess (and it's only a guess): there wouldn't be a huge difference, though show wouldn't do as well as win betting due to the larger effect of breakage. I'm certain that a number of players on this board can easily check this on their databases.

Thanks to SuperTote, we can easily check the percentage of money bet to show on every horse in every race. The problem, though, is that many people (including me, for every race in California) are doing the same thing. So while there is some money to be made to show, it's a lot harder than you might think. Hats off to Showbet.

[rrbauer]

Ryesteve had the answer. If a horse is going to pay $12.19 to win, then after breakage it will pay $12.10. If a horse is going to pay $3.59 to show, then after breakage it will pay $3.50--a much bigger percentage increase, therefore most of the breakage comes out of the show pool.

The effect of breakage can easily be seen in the attached chart. I picked a race from GG yesterday to illustrate effective takeout vs takeout.

I guess it depends where you're betting, but the payout after breakage on the $12.19 (before breakage) at most venues would be $12.00; and, the payoff on the $3.59 example would be $3.40. Only at venues with "nickel" breakage would the examples cited be correct. I think it's correct to say that breakage as a percentage of the pool is larger from the show pool than the other pools; but, with the win pools being many times larger than the show pools, to say that "most of the breakage comes out of the show pool" is arguable.

[Norm]

100 races x $2 bet= $200
4% ROI on those 100 bets would give you a total return $208
$208 / 95 winning bets = $2.19 per winning bet
That sounds like a good assessment of what I was experiencing. I was more than 30 years younger at the time. At first I was sure I had found the keys to the mint, half-way through the meet I was still hopeful, but wondering when a significant profit would emerge. By the end of the meet, I realized that I was engaged in an exercise in futility. I abandoned both the procedure and show betting. There are easier ways to make 4%.

Horseplayers have to learn lessons as they go along and I learned that one long ago. A high winning percentage on carefully screened, rock-solid horses does not a rich horseplayer make. I think it might be worse today since it is not unusual to see pay-offs of $2.10 in the show pool on truly solid horses.

If anyone is profiting in the show pool today, I tip my hat to them. I've learned to play a different kind of game.

[andicap]

Showboat,
I had often understood that those show overlays had gone the way of active 4 yr old Ky Derbt wubbers because whales with sophisticated software programs can pinpoint them just before post and get as their getting in the gate. Thus your $3.40 overlay on a 6-5 horse now becomes $2.40.

You say there are more ineffiiciencies at smaller tracks. Are those tracks more profitable playing to show because you don't see the whales there due to the smaller pools??

If that's the case you have problems because in a smaller pool your bet could move the odds considerably.