Quote:
Originally Posted by maddog42
There are about 20 tracks where win bets showed a profit in the last year. No other bet showed a profit for me. At one stretch I was 0 for 35 at Oaklawn.
1891 bets on twinspires. 15.97% win rate.Sometimes 2 horses per race.
Lost $326.80 cents on win bets. -.11%. Bet $3087.00. For the most part I am a $2 bettor. Of the 44 tracks that I played if you eliminate the 5 worst, it leaves
1663 bets for a loss of -.03 percent and gets me to a loss of $83. A preliminary breakdown shows that I am a winner for the year on dirt sprints. But I relied on Twinspires for my record keeping and its going to take a while to totally be sure of this. I do know that there was a stretch of 50 turf races where I won only 4 races. Obviously I play too many longshots on the turf.
|
sometimes checking records can be an eye-opener.
e.g. not uncommon for a player to remember a nice tri they hit, but later see that their win and exacta out-performed their tri.
This is a tough game!
If you don't have a sizeable overlay and then bet a conservative slice of your bankroll each time, your bankroll, including any short-term success usually goes the way of the sandcastle...
My basic belief of adding length to a wager (exotics multis), is that I prefer that their be an edge/value-opinion in at least both the first and the last legs. When I have that, I feel somewhat confident that it's justified.
Arguably there are times that extending beyond value still adds value - Say you have a big enough bankroll to support Pick-5 and Pick-6 play, and you have a big opinion on an important horse or two in the sequence, - then I feel it's still justified (return/takeout vs parlay).
Within such a sequence, I would still try to stick to the first/last general guide.
