WHAT BET IS MOST PROFITABLE

[pktruckdriver]

Which bet to you is the most profitable to you.

Which bet do you goto when you need to break-even , if you can?

[MarquisMark]

If I am looking for a break even bet, or one to get me out of the hole, I just bet win. I'll take odds of 7/2 on that if it's something like md clm or sp wt with a strong dropper or a second starter that looks like it could blow out the field. Normally I like the price to be a little sweeter, but if I just want to cash a ticket...

[GaryG]

Pick 3 and Pick 4.....for sure. I rarely bet anything else except a win bet if the odds are long.

[point given]

While I play alot of P3 bets, I find that the trifecta for me is sometimes more profitable. YOu can't rely on it as a get out bet as it has to be the right situation, so, I'd say the easiest would be the win bet to get out with. That said, I don't do it, but try to parlay it into a tri or exacta bet to get more out of it. Last week I tried a variation for me on this by making 2 straight exacta bets and then using tthose two under horses in the 3rd spot for the tri, with some long odds horses in the middle. It worked out well, so i may try this more often now.

[Fingal]

Win bets. I always thought the idea was to win, not run 2nd or 3rd. It may not be the sexy bet, but I remember something about the Tortise & the Hare....................

I never understood Superfectas or the High 5 - how the %$#@ do you select a horse to run 4th or 5th except by using a shotgun ?:bang:

[scgmhawk]

I play exactas and tri's mostly, but probably should be to win more. I had the misfortune of hitting 4 trifectas, almost in a row a few weeks back that had me thinking I was onto something. I was wrong!

[LottaKash]

I am a grinder of sorts, I usually make a win and place bet on my top selections when the price is to my specs.....I don't get a lot of action, as I am only interested in bargain bets....I almost always bet to place as well, as I am retired and on a fixed income, so the place bets keep me in the game, and they work well for me....Enough so that a mildly bad spell is breaking even or around that, thanks to the place wager along with the profitable win bets.....:jump:

I watch a lot of TV along with my race watching, for as a result of being so stingy, it's either that, or a lot of wasted time viewing the horses warming up or the gimmick matrix.......

best,

[cnollfan]

The Pick 4 is my most profitable bet.

[Zman179]

My post profitable bets are those that win. I've yet to find a way to get in the black with losing bets.

(figured I'd say that before Tom did.)

[Bruddah]

I never understood Superfectas or the High 5 - how the %$#@ do you select a horse to run 4th or 5th except by using a shotgun ?:bang:[/QUOTE]

I have been playing a Shotgun Trifecta system since 1992. It works, and it's very profitable. I use it primarily for one track with a good database of Trainers, owners, jockeys and horses. :ThmbUp:

[sammy the sage]

Your TRYING to fit a SQUARE peg into a ROUND hole...

Every CARD is DIFFERENT...every DAY is different...geez :bang:

SO just bet like you do the nfl... :lol: :D

[HUSKER55]

Except don't bet the Packers. 51 to 29 and NO took pity on them.:D

[Tom Barrister]

The most profitable bet for me is win. That's what works for me. I specialize in specific situations, and they rarely come up with two horses in one race or horses in adjacent horizontal races.

My get even bet is to keep doing the same exact thing I always do. I don't need to "get even" for any specific time. Tomorrow will bring more opportunities to find value plays. Trying to "get even" in a specific time frame (which for most people is no further than the end of the day) is a good way to get even worse off.

[whyhorseofcourse]

Postive ROI on pick 3's, pick 4's.
Everything else......:ThmbDown:

[Floyd]

I've got a bet to show method that hits in the money between 96% to 97% of the time, but the opportunities are few and far between, like every couple weeks or so. Not enough action for me. The last week in September I hit 3 trifectas in a row, figured I had that little trick mastered, then proceeded to regress that bank to the mean.
Since then I've been sticking with the win bets, which, according to my records show me the best ROI long term.
I'm still perfecting that Trifecta method on paper, though!

[2low]

Deposit. Hasn't failed me yet.

[rusrious]

paper betting:cool:

[raybo]

Superfectas, without a doubt, and I never play just to break even.

[ranchwest]

Win bets. I always thought the idea was to win, not run 2nd or 3rd. It may not be the sexy bet, but I remember something about the Tortise & the Hare....................

I never understood Superfectas or the High 5 - how the %$#@ do you select a horse to run 4th or 5th except by using a shotgun ?:bang:

Shotguns were developed, in part, to shoot something that was difficult to hit with a single bullet. Think about it.

[raybo]

Win bets. I always thought the idea was to win, not run 2nd or 3rd. It may not be the sexy bet, but I remember something about the Tortise & the Hare....................

I never understood Superfectas or the High 5 - how the %$#@ do you select a horse to run 4th or 5th except by using a shotgun ?:bang:

This is the reason that you must have adequate coverage (superfectas) on 3rd and 4th. Like:
W 1
P 23
S 2345
4th 234567

[Bluesthestandard]

I gave out the Late Pick 4 thursday for Hollywood Park on a $135 ticket.

Breakdown--Pick 3 --6/7/8 returned $182
Pick 3-- 7/8/9 returned $198

The Pick 4--6/7/8/9 returned $1,324.00 (risk vs. value) Paid 3 1/2 times the value of the two Pick 3's combined.

[joelouis]

The one that does not involve Betting Money. Tell me one person that has gambled for yrs and showed a profit over the long run.

[raybo]

The one that does not involve Betting Money. Tell me one person that has gambled for yrs and showed a profit over the long run.

I'm in the black. Is it gambling if it's the public's money? :lol:

[Lefty]

Mostly win bets at 7-1 and up.

[Robert Fischer]

win is the best of the basic wagers
pick6 is the best of the exotics and the best in racing

the smaller your bankroll is, the more place and show compete with win wagers for profit AND risk aversion

[green80]

I bet win only and stay in the black long term. If you kept a record of 1000 bets you would be money ahead (roi wise) with win only rather that win/place or w/p/s.

[kyle2227]

The most profitable bet will be the new V75 bet because you have to pick the winners of 7 races with mostly 12+ horse fields. You have a chance to participate in the world's largest wagering pool the V75. You may start placing your wagers on the V75 on Thursday for Saturday's card of Swedish racing.

[jonnielu]

The Pk3 is probably the best overall bet for those that prefer to bet an entire card, for conservative spot players that know what they are looking for, win betting would win out as most profitible over an amount of time.

Those with the discipline to play catch-up, probably also have the wisdom to know not to do it.

jdl

[raybo]

The Pk3 is probably the best overall bet for those that prefer to bet an entire card, for conservative spot players that know what they are looking for, win betting would win out as most profitible over an amount of time.

Those with the discipline to play catch-up, probably also have the wisdom to know not to do it.

jdl

If a player is playing "catch-up", they are probably not profitable in the first place. In that case, then they should be giving their opinions on the bet type that is less of a failure, not which one is most profitable, rebates aside.

[Bubba X]

The only wager I believe can be profitable is one where I'm betting on a horse I perceive to have a far greater chance of running well vs public opinion in the same race there is a horse I believe has a far lesser chance of running to its short odds.

I spend 80% of my time watching replays, grading every horse's performance and I keep two lists; one of horses I am looking to play next out at what I feel will be an overlaid price, the other of horses I am looking to play against at odds well under what I perceive is fair.

I wager only when a "play" horse runs against a "play against" animal in a race I anticipated they each would run bak in AND I'm correct about the prices they are going off at.

I do not believe I can beat any race (or sequence of races) with any favorite worthy of its betting odds. Some people excel in horizontal wagering but the time I have (about 20 hours a week) to dedicate does not allow for successful horiz wagering, at least in my view.

Essentially, I wager against what I perceive to be false favorites, wagering on what I feel are overlaid runners. I will play into the win, exacta, tri and, occasionally, super pools, keying my "play" runner and excluding my "play against" horse.

I follow just one circuit and bet anywhere from 0 to 3 races a week.

I think different approaches to wagering can be successful. This is just the one that works for me. However you play, good luck.

[raybo]

The only wager I believe can be profitable is one where I'm betting on a horse I perceive to have a far greater chance of running well vs public opinion in the same race there is a horse I believe has a far lesser chance of running to its short odds.

I spend 80% of my time watching replays, grading every horse's performance and I keep two lists; one of horses I am looking to play next out at what I feel will be an overlaid price, the other of horses I am looking to play against at odds well under what I perceive is fair.

I wager only when a "play" horse runs against a "play against" animal in a race I anticipated they each would run bak in AND I'm correct about the prices they are going off at.

I do not believe I can beat any race (or sequence of races) with any favorite worthy of its betting odds. Some people excel in horizontal wagering but the time I have (about 20 hours a week) to dedicate does not allow for successful horiz wagering, at least in my view.

Essentially, I wager against what I perceive to be false favorites, wagering on what I feel are overlaid runners. I will play into the win, exacta, tri and, occasionally, super pools, keying my "play" runner and excluding my "play against" horse.

I follow just one circuit and bet anywhere from 0 to 3 races a week.

I think different approaches to wagering can be successful. This is just the one that works for me. However you play, good luck.

Sounds like an intelligent method to me.

As I'm only interested in superfectas, I'm not quite as concerned with favorites. I love to see a false one though because that makes the payout explode, especially if he misses the board completely. I live for those hits. However, I can stay ahead with favorites on my tickets, they keep me in the game until the monsters come around, and they will come around.

One good payout can make my whole month or even my whole year.

[jagerfury]

Key my top contender over/under my other probables. If my numbers are on, the hits come in bunches. If I haven't profiled the track to confirm my numbers are working for this track chances are I will not cash many tickets.

[dav4463]

Usually the most profitable bet is the one you didn't make.

Example: You have the win for $11.20, but you also had the exacta for $150 and didn't play it!

You have the exacta for $78...nice hit, but you also had the trifecta for $550 and the superfecta for $2000, but didn't play!

Another is you played the exacta and trifecta and one horse knocked you out and you squandered a $22.00 winner on top! :bang:

[badcompany]

I'm in the black. Is it gambling if it's the public's money? :lol:

Given that you're gonna catch more taxable numbers playing supers do you still find it more profitable than catching tris multiple times?

[raybo]

Given that you're gonna catch more taxable numbers playing supers do you still find it more profitable than catching tris multiple times?

Yes! I played TRIs before making the jump to SUPERs several years ago, I am doing much better, net, with SUPERs. And, with the advent of dime SUPERs there's no reason to even consider TRIs, or EXACTAs anymore. I don't even use them as hedges, I'll just buy a dime or 2 super with other win/place combinations. Usually when I miss supers it's on the win or place line, not the show or 4th line, because I have less coverage on the top of the ticket.

Supers are all about ticket structure and combining different running styles on the tickets. For instance if you want to you can play 2 win horses using the best early horse and the best late horse, by betting a $.50 ticket instead of your usual $1 ticket. Cuts down on the net profit when you hit but you hit more of them.

You have to stay in the game with the smaller payouts until the larger ones come around, and they will.

[mountainman]

This is the reason that you must have adequate coverage (superfectas) on 3rd and 4th. Like:
W 1
P 23
S 2345
4th 234567

This is the wisdom your book will be based on?

[Robert Fischer]

one of those anecdotal things that i am not sure if they are true; longshots filling up the the 3rd spot in supers...

it just seems that in the big stakes races the 3rd spot gets more than it's share of the 5th/6th/or7th choices... :confused:

[raybo]

This is the wisdom your book will be based on?

The "example" ticket structure was in response to another poster saying he didn't understand how you could pick the horses below the win line in a superfecta. All I was trying to get across was that you have to have adequate coverage below the win line and a good way to do that is with a box/wheel ticket like the one I posted. That ticket is not the only structure I use because each race is different.

If and when I were to write a book on my superfecta method, it would be all encompassing, not just the ticket structure, although that is an important aspect of my method, as any full time superfecta player will confirm.

[badcompany]

Yes! I played TRIs before making the jump to SUPERs several years ago, I am doing much better, net, with SUPERs. And, with the advent of dime SUPERs there's no reason to even consider TRIs, or EXACTAs anymore. I don't even use them as hedges, I'll just buy a dime or 2 super with other win/place combinations. Usually when I miss supers it's on the win or place line, not the show or 4th line, because I have less coverage on the top of the ticket.

Supers are all about ticket structure and combining different running styles on the tickets. For instance if you want to you can play 2 win horses using the best early horse and the best late horse, by betting a $.50 ticket instead of your usual $1 ticket. Cuts down on the net profit when you hit but you hit more of them.

You have to stay in the game with the smaller payouts until the larger ones come around, and they will.

Thanks,

I'm gonna try supers the next Saratoga meet.

IMO, horseracing is about betting a little money to win a lot. Supers seems to offer the best opportunity to do so.

[gopony]

Win bets. I always thought the idea was to win, not run 2nd or 3rd. It may not be the sexy bet, but I remember something about the Tortise & the Hare....................

I never understood Superfectas or the High 5 - how the %$#@ do you select a horse to run 4th or 5th except by using a shotgun ?

Shotgun does work best. in most cases. But the main thing is to make sure that the four or five horses you are betting on have a reason to win or will win. I have seen to many horse races where the horse in fourth will pull up.
It's a hard bet to win, so that's why the high odds, but occasionally you'll find a race where 4 or 5 horses are are going to race even for third.
But in small purse races the shotgun works best.

[citygoat]

I like to tell the seller my choices and then I look at my tickets until I find the sellers mistake.Then I wheel that horse on top of the trifecta.

[raybo]

Thanks,

I'm gonna try supers the next Saratoga meet.

IMO, horseracing is about betting a little money to win a lot. Supers seems to offer the best opportunity to do so.

Good deal!! I wish you the best, badcompany. Let me know how it goes.

[ezrabrooks]

I'm in the black. Is it gambling if it's the public's money? :lol:

I have never understood the use of the terms 'house/public money". Once funds are in my pocket, the are 'mine', and not subject to increased wagers and fliers..

Ez

[raybo]

I have never understood the use of the terms 'house/public money". Once funds are in my pocket, the are 'mine', and not subject to increased wagers and fliers..

Ez

It relates to your original investment. Anything above that original bankroll, including any subsequent "rebuys", in poker terms, comes from the public, not from your wallet or savings account, etc..

I understand that all money made from wagering is now your money, but you are only operating "in the black" if your original bankroll + subsequent rebuys can be removed without depleting your present bankroll.