Software I would purchase.

[teddy]

I would like to see software that would make me superfecta tickets based on my contenders for first , second , third and fourth.

It would also be able to use the running style to make tickets that made sense. Granted thats alot but it would be nice to not have 3 speed horese in the top 3 slots. Yes you could manually just leave out speed horses for second and third if you already had them on top. If you thought they were all or nothing horses.

It would be nice to just give it my speed figure and let it decide if they should be in the top, middle or last groups.

[teddy]

LETS TRADEMARK IT SUPERFECTA BRAIN.... ANYTHING WITH BRAIN AFTER IT SAYS ITS INTELLIGENT DONT YOU KNOW

[speed]

LETS TRADEMARK IT SUPERFECTA BRAIN.... ANYTHING WITH BRAIN AFTER IT SAYS ITS INTELLIGENT DONT YOU KNOW
Explains why your name is not Teddy Brain. :)

[teddy]

U ACCOMPLISHED WHAT GOAL WITH THAT? THIS IS A SERIOUS POST.

[Dave Schwartz]

LOL - Come on, Teddy. Are you really the only on that is allowed to make jokes?

Okay, seriously, you could accomplish this pretty easily in a spreadsheet.

Not the picking of the horses but the structuring of the tickets. I bet one of those Excel gurus around here like Speculus or Raybo could take this on for you.


Dave

[speed]

U ACCOMPLISHED WHAT GOAL WITH THAT? THIS IS A SERIOUS POST.
My response was obviously a humorous one. Which is why i added the smiley face.
Best of luck

[raybo]

LOL - Come on, Teddy. Are you really the only on that is allowed to make jokes?

Okay, seriously, you could accomplish this pretty easily in a spreadsheet.

Not the picking of the horses but the structuring of the tickets. I bet one of those Excel gurus around here like Speculus or Raybo could take this on for you.


Dave

Yeah, would be fairly simple, and inexpensive, if he knows all the criteria for each wagering position. If I had to design the criteria myself, which would involve lots of research and testing, then we're talking $$.

[njcurveball]

I would hate to be the one supporting that software. Most people think if they put in $24 they "should" hit a Superfecta paying $1,000 or more every night. The mathematics of that is that either they start betting dimes and get $50 payouts or they have long runouts and give up.

I would be curious what you expect your typical Superfecta bet to be and your winning percentage and average payoff.

I would hit much less then 10% of the time and closer to 5% of the time when I was playing Supers regularly. It was a money maker due to the payoffs, but the long long losing streaks made it a tough pill to swallow.

Jim

[raybo]

I would hate to be the one supporting that software. Most people think if they put in $24 they "should" hit a Superfecta paying $1,000 or more every night. The mathematics of that is that either they start betting dimes and get $50 payouts or they have long runouts and give up.

I would be curious what you expect your typical Superfecta bet to be and your winning percentage and average payoff.

I would hit much less then 10% of the time and closer to 5% of the time when I was playing Supers regularly. It was a money maker due to the payoffs, but the long long losing streaks made it a tough pill to swallow.

Jim

Your experience is probably close to right on the mark. My hit rate is right at 8% and I've had losing streaks of 50+ wagers several times. The game is certainly unique, and definitely not for everyone.

[teddy]

It was hatched from an ideal based on how a large gambler wagers. First selecting only his contenders then from what i gathered he took ones that were pace biased and overlaid odds and wheeled them around in enough positions that he had an edge. I really figured someone had already come up with something by now and was selling it. Trying to manual figure all the combinations could be mind boggling even for this super brain. Does anyone think it would help to do as bris suggests and use reverse running styles in the first two slots. I have heard it both ways, meaning that the fastest horses more than likely run one/two reguardless of running style. I dont have any real stats on that one. I would think they run one two when they are total standouts and other than that the tendency would be for reverse running styles.

[TrifectaMike]

Your experience is probably close to right on the mark. My hit rate is right at 8% and I've had losing streaks of 50+ wagers several times. The game is certainly unique, and definitely not for everyone.

Raybo,

With 95% certainity you can expect to observe one sequence of:

55 consecutive losses in a 100 race session
64 consecutive losses in a 200 race session
74 consecutive losses in a 500 race session

That is a mighty tough game you play. And that is your 8% hit rate holds firm.

Mike (Dr Beav)

[raybo]

Raybo,

With 95% certainity you can expect to observe one sequence of:

55 consecutive losses in a 100 race session
64 consecutive losses in a 200 race session
74 consecutive losses in a 500 race session

That is a mighty tough game you play. And that is your 8% hit rate holds firm.

Mike (Dr Beav)

Mike,

Those stats are pretty close to what I have seen over the past 6 years.

The hit rate has hovered between 8.2% and 8.8% annually since 2004.

[teddy]

are you talking about straight combinations, granted if its 8% it surely is at least a $10 ticket. Im talking about a situation where you uses say 3 with 5 with5 with all. I know you already said u hit at 8%. Im not sure where my structure would land but im thinking more like 30%. With a 25% takeout and say a 13% rebate. I need to be able to eliminate enough non contenders to spread and still win. So somewhere in there I need to be better than the public by having more combinations and having ones that are overlays. Hopefully software would give me the advantage of not placing tickets easier.

[TrifectaMike]

are you talking about straight combinations, granted if its 8% it surely is at least a $10 ticket. Im talking about a situation where you uses say 3 with 5 with5 with all. I know you already said u hit at 8%. Im not sure where my structure would land but im thinking more like 30%. With a 25% takeout and say a 13% rebate. I need to be able to eliminate enough non contenders to spread and still win. So somewhere in there I need to be better than the public by having more combinations and having ones that are overlays. Hopefully software would give me the advantage of not placing tickets easier.

Teddy, I like your 3 x 5 x 5 approach. Test it on Trifectas. I don't like the all approach in the 4th slot. You need to be better than that.

Mike (Dr Beav)

[teddy]

I had a discussion earlier with another poster that played superfectas and he felt the last slot was less important because of the huge payouts when the long shot hit there. He played very contentious races where that slot as well as the top 3 were very in doubt. Playing only when you include horses 10-1 and above in the top slot , due to the race being wide open would be an interesting way to play. IE. mdn turf routes. In that case you might want all in the 3rd leg too.. for a dime.

[harntrox]

I have this working with C++ .NET and crystal reports.
...Basically it backfits the entire meet -using track profile and sartin pace- into a profitable Boxed Superfecta Simulation.

(see attachment)
Santa Anita Meet betting simulation.
The Win Condition has 3 states:
1.predicted weighting factor - IV's/weighting factors set by user during refactor
2.predictive order - number of *'s indicates how deep the bet was
3.actual order of finish - WPS4.

W* is the goal. (1st pick won)
W****** is failure. (7th pick won)

Results:
When you look at the Entire meet, you get +$6k profit, +43% roi, betting every day.

Of course, its not quite that simple ... theres (2) 6-week dry runs and all the payoffs come from 4 big days during the whole meet. And its extremely unlikely a non-Terminator can actually bet robotically every day. However, the simulation is accurate -- the *'s prove it is not 'redboarding' its picks.

The weighting factors are common sense: track profile (running style EPS,EP,PS), the 8 sartin pace values, 24 trainer angles, and the usual percentages and jockey/trainer attributes.

By weighting the track profile against the distance/speed plays, you get the best mix of horses shortening up/going long for the current track profile. Essentially you get what you want: the best E against the S's in a route for example.

Hypothetically speaking of course,

If the software and database for one year cost you $500,
and the custom engineering was another $500,
would the following combination of products and services fit within your budget ?

1.) Application with the above feature already working out-of-the-box.
2.) Custom Report -with internal processing- that extends the feature described above to meet your specific needs; such as entering a number of desired horses per leg.

[raybo]

are you talking about straight combinations, granted if its 8% it surely is at least a $10 ticket. Im talking about a situation where you uses say 3 with 5 with5 with all. I know you already said u hit at 8%. Im not sure where my structure would land but im thinking more like 30%. With a 25% takeout and say a 13% rebate. I need to be able to eliminate enough non contenders to spread and still win. So somewhere in there I need to be better than the public by having more combinations and having ones that are overlays. Hopefully software would give me the advantage of not placing tickets easier.

Certainly, with a 3 5 5 All ticket structure, your hit rate would yield a hit rate higher than my 8+%, however, your ticket costs will eat up all your profit, and then some. You will still experience losing streaks, and those losing streaks will be very costly.

I'll post later on my method and my reasoning.

[teddy]

both those methods sound interesting.. Harntrox sounds like he is getting what i was wanting. Im not educated on sartin methology but it sounds like its trying to put the best closers with early horses to come up with good combinations. Sounds like it has to be changed continually for each track profile.

[teddy]

I have this working with C++ .NET and crystal reports.
...Basically it backfits the entire meet -using track profile and sartin pace- into a profitable Boxed Superfecta Simulation.

(see attachment)
Santa Anita Meet betting simulation.
The Win Condition has 3 states:
1.predicted weighting factor - IV's/weighting factors set by user during refactor
2.predictive order - number of *'s indicates how deep the bet was
3.actual order of finish - WPS4.

W* is the goal. (1st pick won)
W****** is failure. (7th pick won)

Results:
When you look at the Entire meet, you get +$6k profit, +43% roi, betting every day.

Of course, its not quite that simple ... theres (2) 6-week dry runs and all the payoffs come from 4 big days during the whole meet. And its extremely unlikely a non-Terminator can actually bet robotically every day. However, the simulation is accurate -- the *'s prove it is not 'redboarding' its picks.

The weighting factors are common sense: track profile (running style EPS,EP,PS), the 8 sartin pace values, 24 trainer angles, and the usual percentages and jockey/trainer attributes.

By weighting the track profile against the distance/speed plays, you get the best mix of horses shortening up/going long for the current track profile. Essentially you get what you want: the best E against the S's in a route for example.

Hypothetically speaking of course,

If the software and database for one year cost you $500,
and the custom engineering was another $500,
would the following combination of products and services fit within your budget ?

1.) Application with the above feature already working out-of-the-box.
2.) Custom Report -with internal processing- that extends the feature described above to meet your specific needs; such as entering a number of desired horses per leg.

This is a great result in my book, least it shows that you can be profitable in superfectas one time at least. So you are using only one box $24.00 box. if broken down to the dime you can miss the irs on all these tickets and the rebate would be 12 % or more. Does anyone else box supers?

I cant see why anyone would not pay for this software if it works. From what I hear the guys in Kitts paid nearly 500k.

[teddy]

what would be good to know is the number of closers that hit the ticket in races with different numbers of speed pts of Quirin pts. Races with


When QP6 =1 LONE SPEED.
QP6 =2 DUEL
QP6 = 3 OR MORE. EXTREME PACE BATTLE

FROM THIS WE CAN SEE IF THERE IS ANY WAY TO MOVE THE BOTTOM LINE TO PROFITABLITY.

[teddy]

LAST 30 DAYS FOR SPRINTS ONLY 6F T0 7F
THESE ARE RACES WHERE THERE WERE 3 OR MORE SPEED Q6 AND ABOVE HORSES.
RS IS RUNNING STYLE AND P = PRESSER S = SUSTAINED R = DEEP CLOSER

AVG PO
RS= P 11% 23% 36% 0.72 0.76 0.76 $13.0 1.01
RS= S 09% 19% 30% 0.80 0.81 0.76 $18.2 0.81
RS= R 05% 14% 24% 0.55 0.55 0.63 $20.2 0.51

CONTRARY TO WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT THE CLOSERS DID VERY POORLY AND IN FACT THE FARTHER BACK THEY RUN FROM THE WORSE THEY DID BUT THE ODDS OF THE HORSES WERE MUCH H HIGHER. CONSIDER USING FEWER DEEP CLOSERS PERIOD, IN SPRINTS. THE SHOW ROI IS .63 AND PLACE IS .55 THE PUBLIC GIVES THEM TO BIG A CHANCE EVEN IN SPEED LADEN RACES

[teddy]

LAST 30 DAYS FOR SPRINTS ONLY 6F T0 7F
THESE ARE RACES WHERE THERE WERE 3 OR MORE SPEED Q6 AND ABOVE HORSES.
RS IS RUNNING STYLE AND P = PRESSER S = SUSTAINED R = DEEP CLOSER

AVG PO
RS= P 11% 23% 36% 0.72 0.76 0.76 $13.0 1.01
RS= S 09% 19% 30% 0.80 0.81 0.76 $18.2 0.81
RS= R 05% 14% 24% 0.55 0.55 0.63 $20.2 0.51

CONTRARY TO WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT THE CLOSERS DID VERY POORLY AND IN FACT THE FARTHER BACK THEY RUN FROM THE WORSE THEY DID BUT THE ODDS OF THE HORSES WERE MUCH H HIGHER. CONSIDER USING FEWER DEEP CLOSERS PERIOD, IN SPRINTS. THE SHOW ROI IS .63 AND PLACE IS .55 THE PUBLIC GIVES THEM TO BIG A CHANCE EVEN IN SPEED LADEN RACES

all races sprints any speed situation shows hit rate is higher for non speed in the races that arent speed duels GO FIGURE

RS= P 13% 26% 40% 0.76 0.77 0.79 $11.6 $219 1.14
RS= S 09% 20% 33% 0.70 0.71 0.73 $14.9 $259 0.84
RS= R 06% 15% 25% 0.57 0.57 0.59 $18.3 $255 0.55

[raybo]

Certainly, with a 3 5 5 All ticket structure, your hit rate would yield a hit rate higher than my 8+%, however, your ticket costs will eat up all your profit, and then some. You will still experience losing streaks, and those losing streaks will be very costly.

I'll post later on my method and my reasoning.

Every successful superfecta player I've ever talked to uses either a "box/wheel" or a "key" ticket structure. Simple box tickets are not used by any successful superfecta players I know of. The ticket cost vs number of combinations/depth in the field is way out of line with simple box structures.

I use a modified box/wheel. My base ticket is:

1
23
2345
2345

That's 12 combinations, or, $12 for a $1 super ticket.

I look at the projected pace, early or late, to determine which type of horse is likely to win. Once I have decided on an early or late winner, I use my top rated early or late horse on the 1st line (win line). On the 2nd line (place line) I use the top graded horse with the opposite running style and the 2nd best rated horse with the same running style as the win horse.

For the 3rd (show) and 4th lines I include the horses from the 2nd line, and add other horses by grade rank.

Ties, pool size, number of runners, race contentiousness, specific track patron wagering tendencies, etc., will add horses to the ticket.

I only wager if I estimate that the 4 lowest odds horses on my ticket, if they all come in, will pay $300 for a $1 ticket. This estimation cannot be taught, it must be learned by looking at thousands of odds spreads and their resulting payouts. I've gained the ability to do this over the years and can usually estimate pretty closely if the minimum payout will be $300 or not. If it won't pay that, I pass the race.

I bet these minimum odds spreads to stay in the game, pay the bills, and just wait for the larger payouts to hit. These larger payouts are where my 45+% ROI comes from.

The only time I would even consider buying a ticket like the one you mentioned would be races like the Kentucky Derby, where there are many runners, many contenders, and huge pools. Otherwise, that large of a ticket will eat you alive over time.

[teddy]

fr3 equals 1 or 2
heavy speed laden races...'
so the R horse did even worse , even when they were the best closers or second best. Tons of speed made them overbet worse

myth busted

RS= P 26% 37% 49% 1.01 0.76 0.79 $7.6 $17 2.21
RS= S 13% 27% 37% 1.35 1.07 0.84 $20.1 $129 1.18
RS= R 00% 11% 17% 0.00 0.21 0.41

[teddy]

Every successful superfecta player I've ever talked to uses either a "box/wheel" or a "key" ticket structure. Simple box tickets are not used by any successful superfecta players I know of. The ticket cost vs number of combinations/depth in the field is way out of line with simple box structures.

I use a modified box/wheel. My base ticket is:

1
23
2345
2345

That's 12 combinations, or, $12 for a $1 super ticket.

I look at the projected pace, early or late, to determine which type of horse is likely to win. Once I have decided on an early or late winner, I use my top rated early or late horse on the 1st line (win line). On the 2nd line (place line) I use the top graded horse with the opposite running style and the 2nd best rated horse with the same running style as the win horse.

For the 3rd (show) and 4th lines I include the horses from the 2nd line, and add other horses by grade rank.

Ties, pool size, number of runners, race contentiousness, specific track patron wagering tendencies, etc., will add horses to the ticket.

I only wager if I estimate that the 4 lowest odds horses on my ticket, if they all come in, will pay $300 for a $1 ticket. This estimation cannot be taught, it must be learned by looking at thousands of odds spreads and their resulting payouts. I've gained the ability to do this over the years and can usually estimate pretty closely if the minimum payout will be $300 or not. If it won't pay that, I pass the race.

I bet these minimum odds spreads to stay in the game, pay the bills, and just wait for the larger payouts to hit. These larger payouts are where my 45+% ROI comes from.

The only time I would even consider buying a ticket like the one you mentioned would be races like the Kentucky Derby, where there are many runners, many contenders, and huge pools. Otherwise, that large of a ticket will eat you alive over time.

Km at Htr says his superfecta ticket is most effective at using only the 4 horses, his top pics. 5 horses had much lower roi. He probably should have listed his roi for something like Raybo suggested. That all burger roi is not that telling because roi in races where the fav is vulnerable vs strong fav has to be quite different in a superfecta where you beat the bad fav.

[harntrox]

Races where you have a solid favorite - for whatever reason - can be very profitable when you back-wheel the favorite in a superfecta.

where ABC are your top picks, F=Favorite

L1: ABC
L2: F
L3: 50% of field + F
L4: All

With simple boxed-superfecta simulation you can refine and filter to determine which races the favorite hits ITM but doesnt win. Going for Overlays Only, of course. Heavy lifting with simple percentages works, once you get 2000+ races analyzed. These stats are Specific to each track. Software is required to gain from this persepctive.

[Kelso]

Races where you have a solid favorite - for whatever reason - can be very profitable when you back-wheel the favorite in a superfecta.

where ABC are your top picks, F=Favorite

L1: ABC
L2: F
L3: 50% of field + F
L4: All
Doesn't this distribution limit one to collecting only if the favorite places ... making its inclusion in L3 and L4 superfluous? Shouldn't there be additional runners in L2?

[raybo]

Doesn't this distribution limit one to collecting only if the favorite places ... making its inclusion in L3 and L4 superfluous? Shouldn't there be additional runners in L2?

Correct

[teddy]

GETING THE CHALK TO RUN SECOND ONLY SOUNDS TOUGH. CAN THAT SUPER REALLY BE OVERLAYED?

[raybo]

Km at Htr says his superfecta ticket is most effective at using only the 4 horses, his top pics. 5 horses had much lower roi. He probably should have listed his roi for something like Raybo suggested. That all burger roi is not that telling because roi in races where the fav is vulnerable vs strong fav has to be quite different in a superfecta where you beat the bad fav.

I've run box structures through an Excel database, a few years ago, just to see how the different box structures performed and the 4 horse box was by far the most efficient, of the box structures, but still produced a heavy negative ROI.

The more horses I boxed, the worse the ROI was.

There is a limit to how many horses you can put on the 1st line. With smaller pools and/or smaller field size, 1 is optimum, 2 is max, and only when you have a good minimum odds spread on the 4 lowest odds horses.

With medium pools and larger fields, rarely, you can put 3 horses on top, but not recommended.

With large pool sizes and large fields, sometimes you can put 4 or more on top, but the race must contain lots of contenders and lots of money to shoot at, like the Derby, as I mentioned earlier.

By far, my tickets are structured with only 1 horse on top, and then I will load up the bottom lines more if circumstances demand it.

The most efficient ticket structure of all, of course, is the straight ticket, with good odds spread. The hit rate is extremely low but the ROI is really good. At tracks that have supers in every race (with enough runners) it is nothing to wager a $2 super in every race, straight ticket structure, and just wait for one to hit. $20 per track per day is very cost efficient and if you watch your odds spreads you will definitely show profit long term. Plenty of action, but long, long losing streaks. Not for the average player, they can't handle all the losers.

[Bruddah]

Since 1992, I have played $1 tri part wheels with 4x6x6 tickets. I used to play a couple of tracks in one circuit. Since 1998, I have only played Oaklawn. I play $80 tickets and play 3 or 4 races per day. Until my heart attack a couple of years ago, I made $12 to $20k per season. (Dr. wouldn't let me play for awhile, He said it was too stressful). It was/is a profitable hobby. I keep meet stats on trainers, jockeys and stock.

It's the only way to make money at the track and enjoy the sport. (JMHO) :ThmbUp:
I should have also said, I call my system "Shotgun Tri's)

[raybo]

Since 1992, I have played $1 tri part wheels with 4x6x6 tickets. I used to play a couple of tracks in one circuit. Since 1998, I have only played Oaklawn. I play $80 tickets and play 3 or 4 races per day. Until my heart attack a couple of years ago, I made $12 to $20k per season. (Dr. wouldn't let me play for awhile, He said it was too stressful). It was/is a profitable hobby. I keep meet stats on trainers, jockeys and stock.

It's the only way to make money at the track and enjoy the sport. (JMHO) :ThmbUp:
I should have also said, I call my system "Shotgun Tri's)

Like the name of your system, quite appropriate. I agree with the statement about making money and enjoying the sport. I'm enjoying the game much more since I cut back the number of tracks, number of days, etc..

With a solid exotics method, you don't need to work yourself to death to make money. But, for most exotics players, the losing streaks are unbearable. So, if you aren't a patient person, and a good loser ;) , beware, but if you are both of those, then just play, sit back and wait for the big hits.