Is this too high?

[moneyline702]

I am constructing a gameplan to wager on horses. My biggest concern right now is betting unit size. I know some have a per race unit (which is I think applicable in W/P/S wagering). I, as some already know, want to commit primarily to exotics. I was thinking of 2% of my bankroll per TOTAL wager.

For example, if I were to box three horses in an exacta and my bankroll is $15k I was thinking of placing a total cost of $300 on the whole box (not $300 per possible combination).

I want to know if this proposed 2% max wager is too high? In actuality it seems I would be making a per combination wager of 0.333% (not 3.33%) for $50.

Is this ok?

[cj]

It seems too high to me even for exactas. For P3s, P4s, tris, etc., I think it is way too high.

[Cadillakin]

I agree.. the number is too big...

And I'm not too sure about any strategy that relies on boxing 3 horses. It's very wasteful..

[Ian Meyers]

I agree with CJ, it seems way too high, especially considering the lower strike right on exotics vis a vis WPS wagering. I was thinking something along the lines of $100 max.

If you're good, your bankroll will grow quickly and you can increase your bet size. If you're not, well then even the $100 is way too much.

[Robert Fischer]

I am constructing a gameplan to wager on horses. My biggest concern right now is betting unit size. I know some have a per race unit (which is I think applicable in W/P/S wagering). I, as some already know, want to commit primarily to exotics. I was thinking of 2% of my bankroll per TOTAL wager.

For example, if I were to box three horses in an exacta and my bankroll is $15k I was thinking of placing a total cost of $300 on the whole box (not $300 per possible combination).

I want to know if this proposed 2% max wager is too high? In actuality it seems I would be making a per combination wager of 0.333% (not 3.33%) for $50.

Is this ok?

Safe from random risk of failure:
The way you do it is to make a low estimate of your hit% for that type of wager. Then you find out your max probable consecutive losses for that hit%. That 2% or whatever has to fit with your max consecutive losses estimate.
You can find the formula on a site search in some of my posts, i don't have the energy to do it for you right now.

Pool Impact:
The other consideration (and i'm not sure if you are asking about pool impact) is affecting your price. That is a simple precaution you should do on your own.

[cmoore]

I agree.. the number is too big...

And I'm not too sure about any strategy that relies on boxing 3 horses. It's very wasteful..

I agree with that..Especially if you bet lowered priced horses..If you spend 6 bucks and your average return is $24 for a 1 dollar based bet..That's a 25% clip needed on those type of bets to break even..Raise that to $300 bets and your asking for trouble..

You need to focus on what exactas are paying more then they should be..Mark Cramer has an exacta chart for exactly that in his book Money Secrets at the racetrack..I think he looks for exactas that pay 50% more then they should and only bets those..

[CBedo]

]If you google "sitngo poker bankroll requirement" or something similar you'll find some simulators. They are built for poker, but will show you quickly how disasterous overbetting your bankroll is. I see more people who are postive expectation players (poker and horses) go broke all the time overpushing their edge. Simplistically, think of it this way, even if you had a 1000% positive expectation and a win rate of 99%, if you bet 100% of your bankroll every bet, you will go broke eventually.

I'm not a huge Kelly criterion fan (in absolute terms), but looking at it and similar edge/odds bet sizing will get you give some more ideas of issues to think about.

[CBedo]

Also, I'd highly recommend a few books on horse racing money management: Mitchell's Commonsense Betting, Meadow's Money Secrets at the Racetrack, and even Crist's Exotic Betting.

[cmoore]

I agree with that..Especially if you bet lowered priced horses..If you spend 6 bucks and your average return is $24 for a 1 dollar based bet..That's a 25% clip needed on those type of bets to break even..Raise that to $300 bets and your asking for trouble..

You need to focus on what exactas are paying more then they should be..Mark Cramer has an exacta chart for exactly that in his book Money Secrets at the racetrack..I think he looks for exactas that pay 50% more then they should and only bets those..

My Bad..Wrong author...CBedo had it right..Barry Meadows.

[njcurveball]

I am constructing a gameplan to wager on horses. My biggest concern right now is betting unit size.

My biggest concern would be the ROI performance I have had over the past 5 years. Just like baseball hitters can go in cycles, so can the best handicappers.

What is your performance for the past 5 years? If you have consistently hit 50% of the exactas boxing 3 horses and made 50% profit then I would say 2% of bankroll is way too small.

If you have hit 10% of exactas and you have a 10% profit then I would say 2% is way too large.

Given $15,000, I would also analyze each combination separately. As your 1-2 combo may be a loser and your 3-2 combo a big winner. I would bet each combo separately depending on win percentage and ROI.

Betting an exacta with 6 combinations as a flat bet box pretty much assures that either you will come up on the short end, or you have done such great handicapping you could have won a whole lot more money if you bet properly.

Good Luck! :ThmbUp:

[moneyline702]

If 2% per race is too high then what isn't ? 1%? 1/2%? I don't wanna make the mistake of thinking this is anything similar to sports betting. There 2% is high but not near ridiculous. And with the whole three horse exacta.. guys. It was just an example. Not MY strategy. I did say I was still collecting info. I feel like some are just zeroed in on that one thing and running home with it.

I used it as a way to illustrate what I was saying. So, if you have a $15k bankroll and wanted to put $300 on the #2 horse to win that's ok or not? Because if it is then how can you oppose someone asking for a $50, three-horse exacta box (again JUST AN EXAMPLE, OK?) that ultimately cost the same amount? Yes, they're vastly different bets but if they both lose you're still out $300. Not to be rude but I feel a lot of contrasting opinions are from straight wagerers but hell, I can be wrong...

[moneyline702]

And I do need to let go of the sports bettor mentality as well. This is no way the same. Like the guy above said, if I did have six possible combos then I need to determine their individual probability of success. Then tailor what amount to allocate to each wager. Hence my 2% per total race and not 2% per combo.

[cmoore]

If 2% per race is too high then what isn't ? 1%? 1/2%? I don't wanna make the mistake of thinking this is anything similar to sports betting. There 2% is high but not near ridiculous. And with the whole three horse exacta.. guys. It was just an example. Not MY strategy. I did say I was still collecting info. I feel like some are just zeroed in on that one thing and running home with it.

I used it as a way to illustrate what I was saying. So, if you have a $15k bankroll and wanted to put $300 on the #2 horse to win that's ok or not? Because if it is then how can you oppose someone asking for a $50, three-horse exacta box (again JUST AN EXAMPLE, OK?) that ultimately cost the same amount? Yes, they're vastly different bets but if they both lose you're still out $300. Not to be rude but I feel a lot of contrasting opinions are from straight wagerers but hell, I can be wrong...

If I was in your situation. I would start with $100 bets and go from there..If you lose 50 units from your starting point at any time. Then you need to improve your handicapping or pick better spots when betting..

[keilan]

For example, if I were to box three horses in an exacta and my bankroll is $15k I was thinking of placing a total cost of $300 on the whole box (not $300 per possible combination).




First off boxing 3 horses in an exactor wager is suicide, I prefer ab/abc and then you better be a pretty decent player.

wager amount - listen to cj

[ryesteve]

I used it as a way to illustrate what I was saying. So, if you have a $15k bankroll and wanted to put $300 on the #2 horse to win that's ok or not? It depends on what you think your odds of winning are.

[DanG]

% of bankroll will help with the swings of fortune, but hit rate must be addressed before you can arrive at a figure.

If you’re betting 2% into a 10% hit rate you must accept the fact that a run out of approximately 44 losses is theoretically probable. That’s $13,200 of your $15k stake and you’re probably going to reserve the remaining $1,800 clams for some Johnny Walker Blue at that point.

At a 20% hit rate the run-out is “theoretically” 21 and while 42% of your stake can still go bye-bye; you’re not quite ready to drive off the Triborough Bridge yet.

1% is far more realistic and betting an adjustable % of bankroll vs. a fixed amount will keep you in the game longer and help to allow the inevitable peaks and valleys to run their course. As was said; there is little ambiguity in gambling…your account keeps absolute score.

[moneyline702]

First off boxing 3 horses in an exactor wager is suicide, I prefer ab/abc and then you better be a pretty decent player.

wager amount - listen to cj


PLEASE, CAN WE GET OFF THE 3 HORSE BOX ALREADY? HOW MANY TIME DO I HAVE TO HEAR HOW BAD IT IS? FOR GOD'S SAKE IT WAS AN EXAMPLE. HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY THAT? I DO NOT DO THIS. I DON'T DO ANYTHING YET. I'M STILL GETTING INFORMATION.

Guys, I am truly grateful for all of the advice. Ok 2% is a bad unit size. My focus should (and is) ROI. Ok but instead of jumping on the doggone exacta thing nobody offered much else. I do thank cmoore and cbedo for the book recommendations.

I posted the questions in hopes of getting more than criticized for a hypothetical situation. C'mon guys. I asked for advice...

[moneyline702]

% of bankroll will help with the swings of fortune, but hit rate must be addressed before you can arrive at a figure.

If you’re betting 2% into a 10% hit rate you must accept the fact that a run out of approximately 44 losses is theoretically probable. That’s $13,200 of your $15k stake and you’re probably going to reserve the remaining $1,800 clams for some Johnny Walker Blue at that point.

At a 20% hit rate the run-out is “theoretically” 21 and while 42% of your stake can still go bye-bye; you’re not quite ready to drive off the Triborough Bridge yet.

1% is far more realistic and betting an adjustable % of bankroll vs. a fixed amount will keep you in the game longer and help to allow the inevitable peaks and valleys to run their course. As was said; there is little ambiguity in gambling…your account keeps absolute score.


Thank you, DanG. From what you said, I gather that a "rolling" percentage of 1% is more tolerable. Not to say it's ideal, but far more tolerable than 2%. Thanks.

[riskman]

What is your win percentage and the average odds on your win bets? If you know this you can estimate your winning edge. Your edge is equal to your win percentage multiplied by your average odds on winners, and that product minus your loss percentage.

The amount of money you can expect to win is equal to the amount you bet during the year multiplied by your edge.

A handicapper whose win % is 30% with an average mutual of $7( 2.5 to 1 odds) . The edge is:

E(x) = 2.5 x .30 -70 = .05

The edge is equal to your return on investment (ROI). If your edge is .05%, that means for every dollar you bet, you can expect to get back $1.05

Handicappers who improve their skill by 10%(30% to 32%) can tripled their profits (.05 to .15). It pays to improve your handicapping.

The point that I am trying to make here is that you should be able to make a profit on your win bets before getting into Exacta wagering. I would open up an account on line or go to the track or off track wagering facility and bet real money on your selections. Two, four or six dollar bets are fine but bet real money. I would suggest you bet at least 200 races, keep detailed records of your results and review every 20 races or so. Not only do you have to handicap the races---you have to handicap yourself.Keep at it to you feel that you are confident enough that you can at least not lose money. If you think that is an easy goal, you are not being realistic.

If you have to go into the exotics ,I would first recommend Dailey Doubles and then Pick 3's where the takeout it is lower and you are concentrating on winners. Handicapping the "place" horse is a whole different game.

There are plenty of seasoned cappers here that will help you. Read everything that you can-- and validate what you read. Good luck.

[PaceAdvantage]

C'mon guys. I asked for advice...Sounds more like a demand at this point...lol

Ease up a bit...this is a message board...not every reply is going to be to your exact liking...

[DeanT]

My swings with exotic bets are brutal because I never take anything logical and my hit rate is so bad. I bet around 0.25%. I am working on the right sizing every day, and I do not think I will perhaps ever know what is exactly, or know even close to best bet size. I just try to play it really safe because I lose so many in a row at times.

Good luck.

[keilan]

Sounds more like a demand at this point...lol

Ease up a bit...this is a message board...not every reply is going to be to your exact liking...


On second thought I think you should be wagering at least 2% of your bankroll, stayed tuned I'll let you which tracks I'm playing. :ThmbUp:

[moneyline702]

Sounds more like a demand at this point...lol

Ease up a bit...this is a message board...not every reply is going to be to your exact liking...

You are right and I came off a bit brash. My apologies.

[moneyline702]

On second thought I think you should be wagering at least 2% of your bankroll, stayed tuned I'll let you which tracks I'm playing. :ThmbUp:

whatever..

[keilan]

whatever..


Another idiot and someone else that will "kiss your ass Mike" -- welcome to the board

[PaceAdvantage]

Another idiot and someone else that will "kiss your ass Mike" -- welcome to the boardFirst off, he didn't kiss my ass. Second, stop being such a tool.

[fmolf]

And I do need to let go of the sports bettor mentality as well. This is no way the same. Like the guy above said, if I did have six possible combos then I need to determine their individual probability of success. Then tailor what amount to allocate to each wager. Hence my 2% per total race and not 2% per combo.
i play $20 dollar exactas usually and they are the only exotic bets i make.I play $100 to win on a strong opinion win horse that goes off as an overlay.
I never box exactas because you end up with too many losing bets over the long haul.Here is how i play when i have two overlaid win prospects.

a/c,d x $20 b/ c,d x $10 if horses are mid priced horses and i feel the other win horse may run second i will throw him in the second slot but not usually... betting too many combos is a sure way to erode your bankroll in my opinion.most races i bet though i only use one horse on top.

[Warren Henry]

It seems to me that you are starting in the wrong place.

Unless you know your hit rate and ROI, you can not accurately figure out the correct bet size.

If you know your hit rate and ROI, please post them and several of us will give you good advice on bet size.

If you do not have a positive ROI, money management theories or bet sizing just alter the amount of time it takes you to go broke.

[Cadillakin]

If you do not have a positive ROI, money management theories or bet sizing just alter the amount of time it takes you to go broke.

I like that line. It's not only true, but it's funny. :)

[cj]

I like that line. It's not only true, but it's funny. :)

While true, and funny, it is still better to have a sound money management strategy even if losing. You can have a ton of entertainment losing $3,000 a year, and certainly more than you have losing $3,000 per week. A person with a -5% ROI could achieve both depending on how he wagers.

[Cadillakin]

While true, and funny, it is still better to have a sound money management strategy even if losing. You can have a ton of entertainment losing $3,000 a year, and certainly more than you have losing $3,000 per week. A person with a -5% ROI could achieve both depending on how he wagers.
No doubt.. but the idea that somebody would be asking a bunch of strangers how to bet 15 grand is a characteristic of somebody who shouldn't be playing with 15 grand.

$500 maybe, but 15 grand.. Nope.

[cj]

Could just be theoretical, who knows really?

[Robert Fischer]

No doubt.. but the idea that somebody would be asking a bunch of strangers how to bet 15 grand is a characteristic of somebody who shouldn't be playing with 15 grand.

$500 maybe, but 15 grand.. Nope.

lol that is funny and true.

I guess it all depends. For some people 15K is a fun little write-off
for others a 15K bank is goal one may strive for :blush:

it isn't a bad idea to ask others and consider the advice you hear, just not to follow it blindly!

I think like I was trying to say about hit% and what Dan G said as well, you are going to base your % of bank wager around staying safely below a risk of failure by consecutive losses. - You are in effect attempting to take the "gamble" out of the investment.
Whether it's 15 Grand or $500 the principal will be the same, the only thing that can change is pool impact(limiting wager size in many situations) and of course "pressure".