Small ball or Grand Slam?

[misscashalot]

You can play 500 races a year, show a profit of $350 based on $2 bets,
and have an roi of +.35

Or bet 150 races, show a profit of $240 and a roi of +.80

What are the important factors to think about in making a decision
which way to go? The capital risk or comfort level or bottom line
or whatever

[CBedo]

You can play 500 races a year, show a profit of $350 based on $2 bets,
and have an roi of +.35

Or bet 150 races, show a profit of $240 and a roi of +.80

What are the important factors to think about in making a decision
which way to go? The capital risk or comfort level or bottom line
or whateverNo brainer for me, more net profit in the first case. Also, more races means more opportunity for your real edge to show and not run into a losing streak or volatility that could kill your return if betting the second sequence of less than 1/3 the number of races.

Saying you have a big edge is fun, but having more total money in your pocket is what really matters. Your return on assets is a function of not only your edge, but your asset turnover as well.

[cmoore]

You can play 500 races a year, show a profit of $350 based on $2 bets,
and have an roi of +.35

Or bet 150 races, show a profit of $240 and a roi of +.80

What are the important factors to think about in making a decision
which way to go? The capital risk or comfort level or bottom line
or whatever

The profit of $350 looks good. This is what you'll have to do to get.

30% win clip = $9.00 average payout
25% win clip = $10.80 average payout
20% win clip = $13.50 average payout
15% win clip = $18.00 average payout

[TimesTheyRAChangin]

Personally?
If #2 is also based on a $2 wager,and considering there are less than 1/3 the races,I would have no problem betting 3 times the amount of #1.
Giving me $720 profit on less risked.

[46zilzal]

Most of us do both as the opportunities come across.

[TimesTheyRAChangin]

Most of us do both as the opportunities come across.

46,
For most,that goes w/o question.
But mcal did ask for an opinion on a choice between the 2.
TTRAC

[Track Collector]

More money (profit) in your pocket is certainly the preferred choice.

Another danger of plays which have really high ROI's (like +0.80) associated with them is that the high ROI is achieved by being very very selective. This "fitting to the data" often yields far inferior results when viewed over a longer period of time. (I consider +.35 ROI to be a very high ROI too, but that was not your poll question.

BTW, beware of comments and/or advise from someone with only 8 vCash. ;):lol:

[misscashalot]

More money (profit) in your pocket is certainly the preferred choice.Another danger of plays which have really high ROI's (like +0.80) associated with them is that the high ROI is achieved by being very very selective. This "fitting to the data" often yields far inferior results when viewed over a longer period of time. (I consider +.35 ROI to be a very high ROI too, but that was not your poll question. BTW, beware of comments and/or advise from someone with only 8 vCash. ;):lol:

The perspectives given here by my friends, are sometimes contrary, however they are mostly valid and in total fit well. True 500 gives a better feel for mean than 150. True bet 3x more in the 150 sample, True roi +.80 is achieved by being very selective, thus having only about 150 plays a year. Let me say that at this time the numbers I gave are actual, and that I have 2 tiers of bets, the basic bet and 4 times the basic bet, that obtain the +.8, so TimestheyRAchangin is on base with his post. The reason I have 2 tiers is that with the high win percentage tier of 4x the basic bet I would have only 55 bets a year and an roi by itself of +.95, but I feel that the sampling is too small and it would become boring for so few plays. The basic tier has 85 plays with an roi of +.60. These figs are actual and the 150 number is a projection to years end, and the 150 yearly keeps me in the game. I play only NYRA. CBedo is also on the right track given my original question omitting the specifics I just added. CMoore adds to CBedo's thoughts. 46Z's answer was interesting as it covers all bases I would like to hear more about it from him. Track Collector hit home, though he left out the words comfort level which is an important element in my chosing which way to go. So you see there's more than 1 way to blah blah. I posed the original question giving it much thought, and purposely was vague as I wanted to see in what direction it would go. I want to keep this thread going if possible, and I want to thank you now for your thoughts. Oh yes, the 500 is also valid, but as you can see there's better pickings for me with a lot less financial exposure in the fewer number of races.

[stu]

What is the strike rate of each case?

If the one of scenarios included 5 winners and the other 50 winners. I would rather chose the one with the higher strike rate to reduce volatility impact on my psyche and increase the chance that results could be repeated from year to year.

[misscashalot]

What is the strike rate of each case?

If the one of scenarios included 5 winners and the other 50 winners. I would rather chose the one with the higher strike rate to reduce volatility impact on my psyche and increase the chance that results could be repeated from year to year.

Here's the breakdown of bets I made from Jan 1st.
Basic unit based on $2 win bets.

Basic bet tier of $2
30/83 .36 win %
Average win $8.85
Won $265 Cost $166 Net +$99
roi. +.60

Tier bet of $8
29/54 .54 win %
Average win $7.25
Won $$841 Cost $432 Net+$409
roi +.95

Composite of the 2 tiers
137 Bets
59/137 .43 win%
Cost $598
Won $1106
Net +$508
roi +.85

The win $ are track prices
I pay no vig
I have no overhead. I get all info free from the internet