I need proof

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Question for all players who keep records.

Which wagering scenerio is more profitable

(A) Win/Place wager in a 1-2 ratio example 10 win 20 place

with two or three one way exactas using key horse win bet on top only

(B) Win/Place wager in a 1-2 ratio

with exacta boxes with two or three exactas

(C) Win only wager with exacta savers two or three horses used only on top of key horse

(D) Win wager with exacta keys only on top using key horse


What I am basically trying to see if it is best in the long-term profit scheme to avoid any hedge and use a win only wager with the win bet as a key over two or three other horses in order to receive the maximum payout when correct. It seems (though I can not validate this(, that all the hedging and saving combinations including the place bet back up is just a matter of spinning your wheels when it comes to long-term profit.


Thank you for any rersponses as it is greatly appeciated.

[acorn54]

what do your records show and how large of a sample is it?

[GameTheory]

It also depends whether you raise or lower your wagers as your bankroll ebbs and flows. In that case, spinning your wheels may smooth the ride and you'll have more bet on the winners in general. (Not always, it really just depends on the nature of your selections, usual odds, how often they win compared to coming in 2nd, etc etc.) There is no right answer for everybody. Despite what some will tell you (stick to win only), certain plays are actually more profitable in the place spot than to win.

What you really want to know is -- when my horses aren't winning, are they still placing? If they are the win or out-of-the-money types, then stick to win betting. If they always seem to be near the front at the finish, then those place wagers can carry you when you get 10 second places in a row and no winners, which really hurts when you only bet to win.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

what do your records show and how large of a sample is it?

No records for myself as I do not use exotic wagering.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

It also depends whether you raise or lower your wagers as your bankroll ebbs and flows. In that case, spinning your wheels may smooth the ride and you'll have more bet on the winners in general. (Not always, it really just depends on the nature of your selections, usual odds, how often they win compared to coming in 2nd, etc etc.) There is no right answer for everybody. Despite what some will tell you (stick to win only), certain plays are actually more profitable in the place spot than to win.

What you really want to know is -- when my horses aren't winning, are they still placing? If they are the win or out-of-the-money types, then stick to win betting. If they always seem to be near the front at the finish, then those place wagers can carry you when you get 10 second places in a row and no winners, which really hurts when you only bet to win.

Good point Game theory it varies according to the individual player as to how many times a key horse runs second. It is interesting to note that in Secrets of successful bettors the movie director Martin Ritt used to play 1X3 exacta keys and never turn it around for a dime. I would like to think provided that you are very selective the advantage is apparent as the bet is geared to maximum return.

[upset]

Good point Game theory it varies according to the individual player as to how many times a key horse runs second. It is interesting to note that in Secrets of successful bettors the movie director Martin Ritt used to play 1X3 exacta keys and never turn it around for a dime. I would like to think provided that you are very selective the advantage is apparent as the bet is geared to maximum return.
thats because exactas only come in on way unless there a heater

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

thats because exactas only come in on way unless there a heater

???????I am speaking of making key exactas KH/over two or three horses and not reverse using the two or three horses /over the key horse.

[windoor]

I have records that date back to 1996 and have always found the win bet to be more profitable over the long run. Assuming a flat bet.

The place bet can earn a profit and keep the long losing streaks from be too discouraging, but if your bank is strong enough and you have the patience, the win bet is the way to go.

Regards,

Windoor

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

I have records that date back to 1996 and have always found the win bet to be more profitable over the long run. Assuming a flat bet.

The place bet can earn a profit and keep the long losing streaks from be too discouraging, but if your bank is strong enough and you have the patience, the win bet is the way to go.

Regards,

Windoor

Thanks Windoor. That's the word from numerous tests done through out the years. Like a few others have stated it matters simply if your records show that your key horse runs second a great deal of the time in order to possibly bet win place...but the truth lies in the win slot, if you can stand the run outs.

[windoor]

Thanks Windoor. That's the word from numerous tests done through out the years. Like a few others have stated it matters simply if your records show that your key horse runs second a great deal of the time in order to possibly bet win place...but the truth lies in the win slot, if you can stand the run outs.

Happy to be of some help.

I can tell you, I once ran a system that required a $20, win, $40 place, and $80 show wager.

The key was getting on some long odd horses.
It did rather well for a time and losing days were few. But in the end, as many things I've tried over the years it went bust.

Regards,

Windoor

[Johnny V]

My records have always shown that win only betting, with some short term exceptions , has always outperformed win and place betting. The last 76 races in my records show the following: Win-Place 2:1 ratio 16.45% ROI. Win-Place ratio 1:3 ROI 14.88%. Win betting only 28.95% ROI.
I also looked at Win-Place betting ratio 1:3 when odds are 4-1 or better and that showed a ROI of 5.89%.

That is actually a small sample from the last quarter that I kept those type of records and the ROI is higher over those races than normal. I had some very nice prices over that particular period but I think the relationships between the various betting strategies would probably hold up, albeit with a somewhat lower ROI over the long haul. I hope that helps you out somewhat.

[shouldacoulda]

The problem I had with place and show is if you run out of the money It takes longer to recoup losses. It adds up real fast when your hitting winners compared to place payoffs. IMO It also matters what your handicapping skills are producing. If you're winning 35-40% of your picks but placing 60-70% then it might make sense to play place and forget win and exotics and not take those losses. Lately I have been playing to win and exacta boxes to hedge but the payoff potential has to be there. If the potential for a 500% return or more isn't there (on the exacta's), I let the exacta or even the race go. I have finally gotten it through my thick head the reason most handicappers lose is we just play too many races.

[offtrack]

Next steps:
Once you decide on a betting strategy, you need to understand when to scrape a profit from the betting flow.
Take an occasional profit.

[upset]

???????I am speaking of making key exactas KH/over two or three horses and not reverse using the two or three horses /over the key horse.
Its a joke...why reverse it if it only comes in one way

[bobphilo]

Its a joke...why reverse it if it only comes in one way

Reversing your top pick over and under your next 1 or 2 picks is called an Excata Key Box by Twinspires. I might use it if I wasn't too sure if my top pick would finish 1st or 2nd.

Bob

[markgoldie]

Your question can be answered by basic wagering theory, without access to a large data base of results. Instead, you simply need a reasonably good idea of the average odds of the main selection.

If the average odds will be on the low side, let's say < 2-1, the proper strategy would be to play the horse to win only and forget gimmicks all together. As the average odds tend to go up, playing exactas and/or place wagers become much more viable. At a number of > 5-1 in average odds, it's highly likely that the exacta strategy will prove the most profitable, that is, the K/1,2,3 play. Also, I believe there is a good possibility that exacta reversals with the key horses minus the race favorite will prove profitable as well. That is, 2,3/K (where the #1 is the race favorite and is eliminated in the reversals).

As far as accelerating or decelerating place bets in a win/place betting scheme, it's clear that as separate pools and wagers you would only want to accelerate into your larger positive ROI vehicle (and this assumes that the size of the wager relative to pool size is not an issue). However, once again assuming we do not have the back data to determine which pool will carry the larger positive ROI, the average price lends us clues. If you are projecting an average win odds of < 2-1, you would likely dismiss the notion of a place wager completely and put the additional investment capital into the win position. This is due, in part, to the greater negative effect of breakage as a percentage of return.

As the average odds of the selections go up, place wagering becomes more viable and the possibility that the place ROI might exceed the win ROI becomes better. However, the potential for the place ROI to exceed the exacta ROI at an average odds of roughly > 5-1 becomes exceedingly small. Therefore, at such a point, I would consider using any potential place-ticketed capital to increase my exacta wagers.

[Track Collector]

Its a joke...why reverse it if it only comes in one way

Do you play exactas and if yes, how do you play them?

[Cratos]

Question for all players who keep records.

Which wagering scenerio is more profitable

(A) Win/Place wager in a 1-2 ratio example 10 win 20 place

with two or three one way exactas using key horse win bet on top only

(B) Win/Place wager in a 1-2 ratio

with exacta boxes with two or three exactas

(C) Win only wager with exacta savers two or three horses used only on top of key horse

(D) Win wager with exacta keys only on top using key horse


What I am basically trying to see if it is best in the long-term profit scheme to avoid any hedge and use a win only wager with the win bet as a key over two or three other horses in order to receive the maximum payout when correct. It seems (though I can not validate this(, that all the hedging and saving combinations including the place bet back up is just a matter of spinning your wheels when it comes to long-term profit.


Thank you for any rersponses as it is greatly appeciated.

I am a “win bettor” only; no place, show, or exotic wagers ever.

However to show a profit in my opinion you must bet amounts that is significant relative to your desired profit, you must minimize the number of bets you make per racing season, and the odds should be not less than 3-1.

[thaskalos]

Do you play exactas and if yes, how do you play them? I play exactas, and this is how I play them. I take my top choice, and I key it on top of my next 3 choices. I don't reverse, because I don't believe in overdiversification when it comes to my exacta play. I am convinced that we lose the most when we try to prevent losing. If there is no top choice, or if the odds are unappetizingly low, there is no bet. The idea is to have your betting reflect your opinion of the race. If I like the #3 horse to win, why key it in the second slot? To avoid losing a bet? If I lose, I am comforted by the fact that, since my combinations were limited, I lost the minimum amount possible.

IMO, too many bettors gravitate to the exotics because they think win betting is too risky, and they want to avoid the losing streaks associated with it. They feel more comfortable spreading a bunch of combinations around, rather than betting the whole amount to win. That's the wrong approach. You don't play to avoid losing. YOU PLAY TO WIN. It is much more difficult to win in the long run, betting exotics, if you spread yourself too thin trying to avoid the unfortunate reality of the the losing streak. Play within your bankroll, and maintain your composure. Like fellow poster Tom has said in the past: "If you lose a bet, don't worry. There will be another bet coming up in a few minutes...and you will probably lose that one too..."

[Track Collector]

I play exactas, and this is how I play them. I take my top choice, and I key it on top of my next 3 choices. I don't reverse, because I don't believe in overdiversification when it comes to my exacta play. I am convinced that we lose the most when we try to prevent losing. If there is no top choice, or if the odds are unappetizingly low, there is no bet. The idea is to have your betting reflect your opinion of the race. If I like the #3 horse to win, why key it in the second slot? To avoid losing a bet? If I lose, I am comforted by the fact that, since my combinations were limited, I lost the minimum amount possible.

IMO, too many bettors gravitate to the exotics because they think win betting is too risky, and they want to avoid the losing streaks associated with it. They feel more comfortable spreading a bunch of combinations around, rather than betting the whole amount to win. That's the wrong approach. You don't play to avoid losing. YOU PLAY TO WIN. It is much more difficult to win in the long run, betting exotics, if you spread yourself too thin trying to avoid the unfortunate reality of the the losing streak. Play within your bankroll, and maintain your composure. Like fellow poster Tom has said in the past: "If you lose a bet, don't worry. There will be another bet coming up in a few minutes...and you will probably lose that one too..."

My question was directed to Upset, who told the thread initiator that is was a joke to play reverse exactas when exactas (without involvement of a dead heat) only come in one way. My question was to seek clarity on Upset's response. Does he really believe that exactas should be bet cold, that is, one single combination, or was he just trying to say that he does not believe there is value in playing exactas where a key horse is sloted in the place position with several other choices on top?

Thanks anyway for sharing, and I agree with you 100% that the fear of losing sometimes causes one to bet too many combinations which keep us from winning overall, even though we cash a few more tickets. I recall an article on this very same subject in one of the Sartin Follow Up publications with the title something like "Do you need to improve your Losing percentage?".

[thaskalos]

Sorry...I should have read through the entire thread...

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Gentleman, One and all. Many thanks for the well though responses. I am a win bettor and do show profit from this wager. However, the large place payouts that ocasionally show up still affects my game.

I would like to start using the exacta key as a vehicle to add profit. I agree 100% to never use my win horse in the second slot of the exacta, as I liked the horse to win. I have seen so many players use so many combinations in the exotics(combinations that are undervalued), for the purpose of hitting the bet without any thought of return on investment. Turning 30/1 into 2/1 is not uncommon.

Once again thank you and have a great day.

[upset]

My question was directed to Upset, who told the thread initiator that is was a joke to play reverse exactas when exactas (without involvement of a dead heat) only come in one way. My question was to seek clarity on Upset's response. Does he really believe that exactas should be bet cold, that is, one single combination, or was he just trying to say that he does not believe there is value in playing exactas where a key horse is sloted in the place position with several other choices on top?

Thanks anyway for sharing, and I agree with you 100% that the fear of losing sometimes causes one to bet too many combinations which keep us from winning overall, even though we cash a few more tickets. I recall an article on this very same subject in one of the Sartin Follow Up publications with the title something like "Do you need to improve your Losing percentage?".
No i meant it's a joke you know laugh haha "So I was talking to my friend at the track yesterday and he told me he was gonna box the 1/2 so i said(punchline) why box it if it only comes in one way?" Its my attempt at racetrack humor

[markgoldie]

No i meant it's a joke you know laugh haha "So I was talking to my friend at the track yesterday and he told me he was gonna box the 1/2 so i said(punchline) why box it if it only comes in one way?" Its my attempt at racetrack humor
Brings up something I have noticed: As a man who has used what he believed was clearly meant as humor on this site only to be taken literally time and time again, might we ask if horse players (and possibly gamblers as a whole) tend toward clinical depression? Interesting thought... maybe I should start a new thread devoted to this question.

Anyway, you're attempt at humor is a variation of a very old joke which tells the story of a guy driving the wrong way on a one-way street. The cop stops hims and says, "I'm giving you a ticket because this is a one-way street." To which the driver replies, "But officer, I was only going one way."

[upset]

Thats a good one

[Sham]

No i meant it's a joke you know laugh haha "So I was talking to my friend at the track yesterday and he told me he was gonna box the 1/2 so i said(punchline) why box it if it only comes in one way?" Its my attempt at racetrack humor

Can't remember where I heard this...

"how'd you do at the track today?"
"I asked for a hot dog and a Coke...they gave me a Coke and a hot dog"