Quote:
Originally Posted by highnote
I still use the Dr. Z system. Sorry for red-boarding, but I really did have a big place bet on Justify in this year's Belmont Stakes. In fact, I told anyone that I discussed the race with after the Preakness that the bet to make was going to be Justify to place and show.
I don't remember what the expected value was to place and show, but it was definitely about the 1.14 cutoff. That means this type of bet has an expected ROI of greater than 14% over the long run. It is probably 50% or more.
Belmont Stakes Payouts
Based on a $2 bet:
Horse Odds Win Place Show
Justify 4-5 $3.60 $3.50 $2.80
Gronkowski 24-1 $13.80 $7.00
Hofburg 5-1 $3.70
Afleet Alex's 2005 Belmont Stakes comes to mind. There have been others, too. It happens regularly in the Belmont.
Afleet Alex $4.30 $3.60 $3.00
Andromeda's Hero - $8.20 $5.80
Nolan's Cat - - $7.20
Critics of the Dr. Z system often say, "Big deal. It paid $3.60 to show. There isn't much excitement in that." I say in response: If you don't find it exciting it's because you didn't bet enough. Try betting $500 or maybe $5,000 to place. You can get away with that size bet in the Belmont Stakes.
|
No one laughs at a $3.60 show payoff. What the critics of the Dr. Z system REALLY say is..."How can we make meaningful pool size-driven calculations when so much of the mutuel pool money gets wagered during the last seconds of the betting period?" But if you use the system only for the super-elite races a few times a year...then I guess this issue can be sidestepped somewhat.
