Quote:
Originally Posted by InsideThePylons-MW
Of course it's better for those that have an advantage...that's not what the initial discussion was.
24% takeout P-4 is much worse than a 16% win bet for 99.9% of horseplayers. It's not better cause it's four spots. I think crunk's data shows how really bad it is.
I can't understand how anybody who cares at all about horseplayers or the sport can defend or justify stuff like this.
|
Arguing against higher take-out pools is fine. However arguing that a 24% Pick-4 wager is a worse proposition than a 16% Win wager does not hold water.
Is a 10% takeout Pick-5 wager better than a 16% takeout Win wager? From a percentage perspective, the answer is yes, however the key is how much variance (or its square root, standard deviation) your bankroll can handle between wins.
As a side note, if a 10% pool is the natural choice for you, my suggestion is that the 0% pool - meaning not playing at all - is probably a better long term choice.
