Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle r
Lets consider. We are talking gambling. Winning gambling is a function of understanding probability. And probability is a branch of mathematics. So, what does the math say? The math says the only way to profit in the long run is to make bets where the probability, ie the odds, are in your favor. No betting system can negate or alter that reality. Even if multiple horses in any particular race offer, in your opinion, overlaid odds - considering the reality of high takeout and breakage a likely occurrence of uncommon frequency - one horse will always be the biggest overlay. And betting on any but that entry is the wrong tack. In summation, dutching is not mathematically sound. Now, if psychologically you need to cash more frequently to keep you off tilt there may be a price and value to that. But you must not pay too dear. And buying insurance race in and race out is obviously too dear a price to pay.
|
Looking at it from a slightly different angle - just quickly thinking out loud, absolutely willing to have it torn apart.
Our estimations of probabilities in setting our odds lines need to be very good, but they won't be perfect. Some will be set too high, some too low. So our one "biggest overlay" may not be the actual biggest overlay. Dutching can potentially catch more of our internal errors and smooth overall performance. (Your point about keeping off tilt here is relevant - that's less of a concern with an "automated" way of estimating true odds, but VERY applicable if you arrive at your odds line "manually".)
With so many small fields today, one can envision the dutch as setting up a virtual "coin flip" situation (my 2 against the other 3 or 4, my 3 against the other 4) where you may be essentially getting 6 to 5 for your win and only paying the 5 when you lose, if you dutch to bet a flat amount per race. I'd flip that coin as many times as I can, and if I'm not trying to split hairs between two contenders, I'm liable to put more into play.
