I find Prices as high as ever

[skate]

Or, might just be Higher than ever before.

Recently, past two months, i've taken note, top 10 tracks ($), are posting very high pay outs, win, exacta, tri, super, all seem to pay good on average.

Has nothing to do with me winning or losing.

A lot of cappers have noted to me, "they used to win". Also noted, little by little, they change, either their bet or capping method.

So, rather than ask the question "has the game left me behind", maybe you can ask "have i left the game".

I mean to say, prices (payout) are Humongous, take is big. So, where is the problem?

[Pell Mell]

Or, might just be Higher than ever before.

Recently, past two months, i've taken note, top 10 tracks ($), are posting very high pay outs, win, exacta, tri, super, all seem to pay good on average.

Has nothing to do with me winning or losing.

A lot of cappers have noted to me, "they used to win". Also noted, little by little, they change, either their bet or capping method.

So, rather than ask the question "has the game left me behind", maybe you can ask "have i left the game".

I mean to say, prices (payout) are Humongous, take is big. So, where is the problem?

I think what these cappers are refering to is that there was a time when big odds could be had on very playable horses. Most of the time now-days, if the chalk doesn't win and a big long shot wins, it's usually an "Impossible" horse by most standards. :mad:

[skate]

yes, i think you are right.

But, for sure , i can not take each race into account. Me, not being even close to 'Good', i usually find a reason for outcome of the majority of times that i want to check on the outcome of a race.

If the 'Price' does not come close, no problem. But when the 'Price' wins, meaning in the money. I can mostlikely find a reason. That's is not to say, "a Capping reason" always exist, some times the reason is Not public available.

If we look for 100%, each and every time, then forget coming up with a reason of 'why we do not win'.
I think the reason for not winning, has more to do with not betting/capping correctly. Keeping in mind, even if we win 35% of the time, the end result is in the 'Payoff' and not just a high winning %.

[skate]

I put a race on here, S.A. 4th about a week ago.

Came;
3-19.00
1-61.0
10-3.40

Tri pays $9000 for $1.00, biggest i've seen with Chalk aboard.

Two guys next to me had the Three, he was a drop in class, very available.
The #1 was the second best closer, playable for a tri at least.
The #10 was chalk and did look the best.

So , i do agree with what you say, but the cappers are off base, since the Prices are very big, lately, everyplace i look.
Adjusting must be the key. The person that puts the race together, does not figure "to the make results the very same for every race", quite the opposite.
As long as the price is available, if i lost, it's most likely my fault.

[cj]

Prices are shrinking because field sizes are shrinking. Sure, there are always going to be some big prices, but in the end the numbers don't lie. The average mutuel is getting smaller.

[wisconsin]

The prices are not indicative as to what is actually happening. When I started playing, contenders were still often bettable. Now, you have races with 3 horses all at 5/2, two even money shots in one race, or a field of 8 where the "longshot" is 8/1. You saw an odds-on horse maybe once a day, otherwise, it was not that common in everyday racing, such as maidens and 6250 claimers. Once in awhile maybe, but not several times a card. There were longshot winners, too. But it happened more so when races "fell apart". Now, you have unplayable bombs pressing, leading, battling and drawing off like well meant horses, or they have records like 1 for 33 and suddenly they are a good thing? That never happened the way it does now, or at least didn't seem to.

[Charlie D]

The prices are not indicative as to what is actually happening. When I started playing, contenders were still often bettable. Now, you have races with 3 horses all at 5/2, two even money shots in one race, or a field of 8 where the "longshot" is 8/1. You saw an odds-on horse maybe once a day, otherwise, it was not that common in everyday racing, such as maidens and 6250 claimers. Once in awhile maybe, but not several times a card. There were longshot winners, too. But it happened more so when races "fell apart". Now, you have unplayable bombs pressing, leading, battling and drawing off like well meant horses, or they have records like 1 for 33 and suddenly they are a good thing? That never happened the way it does now, or at least didn't seem to.


Hi wisconsin

Could this be down to a lot of people betting more than one in a race??

[wisconsin]

Hi wisconsin

Could this be down to a lot of people betting more than one in a race??


Don't know the answer to that Charlie. Just seems tougher to get a price even on a fringe horse these days.

[Stillriledup]

The high prices are an illusion and here's why. Whether a horse pays 4 dollars or 40, it has to provide value. If a horse's real chances are 20-1 and it PAYS 20-1, there's no value and thus, is a break even proposition.
Even though the price is high, there's no value.


I think that there's always going to be longshots no matter how good the handicappers become, the problem is that these longshots are paying what they're supposed to pay and not paying overlaid prices.

[skate]

Welp, i guess , all I can say would be I tried.

And I sure as hell do not agree that fields are smaller, payouts are smaller and you can NOT win anymore.
There is no logic to the above.

Let me add, not only are fields bigger than 25 years ago but it never used to be that 13 and/or14 horses run in a race, as they do today and this is common.
Looking at FG today, 6 races are for 10 or more horses and that's for a tuesday.
Looking at GS today 7 races are for 9 or more horses.

This is what i see, almost everyday:bang: A lot more tracks today will run 10 or even 11 races per day with full fields:eek:


A 20/1 horse is exactely a 20/1 horse it does not mater if you cap that horse at 5/1 or 50/1. When it goes at 20/1, that is IT.

Might be that the fault was yesterday, if your winner was that easy to cap.

Hey, you cap and you win and you are likely to think "i Knew Something".
You cap and you lost, you might think " somebody cheated" and sometimes you are correct, but...

Final... Almost always, if i lost, i can later find a justifiable reason. But that brings me to a point that says ' I'm better', and THAT is not where I'm coming from, thanks.

[cj]

Welp, i guess , all I can say would be I tried.

And I sure as hell do not agree that fields are smaller, payouts are smaller and you can NOT win anymore.
There is no logic to the above.



You are right, there is no logic if you add in the third part.

However, the first two are correct and there is data to back it up. I think you are just guessing. Actually, I know you are, because both are true.