Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
I spread my wagers in accordance with my opinion of the profitability potential of each individual race. If my handicapping opinion coincides with that of the public's, and I can bring no added insight to the given race, then a single may be the chosen option...or I may elect to refrain from betting altogether. But if I don't like the favorite in the race, then the horizontal wager presents more value potential...and a wider net should be the tool of choice.
IMO...our betting decisions can't be made by pre-conceived "formula thinking". We should be flexible, and treat each race individually with its particular risk/reward aspect always in mind.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pandy
You don't need a single, it depends on the sequence. Some players only play the Pick 4's that look the most competitive because they want to try for the bigger payoffs, and in that case, they may be using several horses in each race or even something like 2-4-4-6, which would be $96 for 50 cent wagers. If you think the Pick 4 looks wide open, there's nothing wrong with a ticket like that.
|
Singles seem to make a lot of sense when you feel that one strong fav or public choice is the only horse worth betting.
If you are singling long-shots, you probably are using the 4,5,6 race multi as an extension of your primary play into the 'Win' and more basic exotics pools. In these cases, you should be advising me, not vice-versa!
If you feel that several contenders are all equally worth betting, then you are probably out of your element, to force a single of a horse in order to fit 'formula thinking' or budget.
**Tomorrow race 1 and race7 at Kentucky Downs have early/late Pick-5s
would be cool to see some tickets
