Betting favorites

[pondman]

I'm so opposed to betting horses with low odds.

Just need to say-- save your money for a decent shot.

[benzer]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

A donkey is a poker term. It used to describe a player who knows a little(or maybe quite a bit) about the the game, but still makes a lot of dumb plays because faulty reasoning.

Thanks for the clarification of the term Robert. I never heard the word used in that context before.

[pondman]

Originally Posted by dav4463

My normal play is a horse at 9-1 or higher (preferably higher) and 6-1 or higher in a short field (7 or less horses).

It's much lighter on your emotions to bet 10 horses and have 2 horses win at 9-1, than to dump 17K and be ahead $1,000 at the end of the year. If your ROI stays positive for the year-- stick with the homeruns. Keep in mind, if you hit a 40-1 shot, you can continue to play consistently for a few months (at least I could.)

I'm not quite as restrictive as you. My line is 4-1. I think you are doing it right, which probably means you know what it feel like to make 17K on $200. This is a much better route.

[Phantombridgejumpe]

The 1-1-2-4-8 etc... plan doesn't really work if payoffs are less than $4.

The idea is that any win along the way will put you ahead, or at least even...but if you bet $2, lose, bet $2, lose, bet $4 lose, bet $8 and win -but the horse only pays $3.00 to win you have only made back $4 of your losses to that point.

It 'works' - in theory - for games like 21 and roulette because most of the time you either lose or double your money.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by Steve 'StatMan'

One might naturally feel that way. And maybe there are a select few that could do it. Unfortunately, there are plenty of very good handicappers that could pick 50% winners but they'd likey be betting 1/5 to 2/5 shots, not 4/5 to 6/5 shots.

Good point Steve, that's a more realistic assessment of the situation. The other problem, of course, being that these horses tend to get piled on late, so you could bet that 6-5 with 1 minute to post and the horse ends up 3-5. There goes your very, very slim margin for profit.

Trying to beat this game with 6-5 shots is very, very, very close to impossible. Maybe not totally impossible with rebates for someone out there, but very, very close to impossible. There's just no margin for error---I don't care how many rules and eliminations you have.

[CBedo]

Originally Posted by Phantombridgejumpe

The 1-1-2-4-8 etc... plan doesn't really work if payoffs are less than $4.

The idea is that any win along the way will put you ahead, or at least even...but if you bet $2, lose, bet $2, lose, bet $4 lose, bet $8 and win -but the horse only pays $3.00 to win you have only made back $4 of your losses to that point.

It 'works' - in theory - for games like 21 and roulette because most of the time you either lose or double your money.

This is called a martingale system and is a disaster of a betting system. You are always chasing to win one unit.

Martingale Wiki

[vegasone]

One BIG problem I see is figuring out who is going to be the favorite nowadays. (not sure if anybody mentioned this)

The other day got screwed betting several horses that were decent odds early. One was around 5 or 6 to one when bet....bet down to maybe 3/1 .. OK no problem. Looked up as they were coming around the track and is 1/1...ouch..they did win but not much money in that.

[jamey1977]

Originally Posted by castaway01

Good point Steve, that's a more realistic assessment of the situation. The other problem, of course, being that these horses tend to get piled on late, so you could bet that 6-5 with 1 minute to post and the horse ends up 3-5. There goes your very, very slim margin for profit.

Trying to beat this game with 6-5 shots is very, very, very close to impossible. Maybe not totally impossible with rebates for someone out there, but very, very close to impossible. There's just no margin for error---I don't care how many rules and eliminations you have.

Damn difficult. But if we have some solid D.Q rules. I know why 6 to 5's lose. So many reasons. I have 40 written down. Layoff- 11-12 horse field- 6 month break within last 3 races- Dirt To Turf- Turf To Dirt- slow speed, I have 40 of these. A horse that meets all of these 40 D.Q rules and is bet.You have a pretty damn good, strong horse. I have done a run for a month and got 46 wins out of 61. From 4 different circuits- Woodbine- New York- North And South Calif. At 4.10 average. A handsome profit. This takes a damn long time to do. I have to go to Brisnet and go through all of the past performances. A long time. It's not that hard to get more than half at 4 dollars. It is within reach. And yes, every damn 6 to 5 that pulls a boner , check the D.Q rules. It's the usual suspects. Layoff, more than 6 month break going back last 3 races, Foreign shipper, other coast shipper. The Usual Suspects.

[dav4463]

Originally Posted by jamey1977

Damn difficult. But if we have some solid D.Q rules. I know why 6 to 5's lose. So many reasons. I have 40 written down. Layoff- 11-12 horse field- 6 month break within last 3 races- Dirt To Turf- Turf To Dirt- slow speed, I have 40 of these. A horse that meets all of these 40 D.Q rules and is bet.You have a pretty damn good, strong horse. I have done a run for a month and got 46 wins out of 61. From 4 different circuits- Woodbine- New York- North And South Calif. At 4.10 average. A handsome profit. This takes a damn long time to do. I have to go to Brisnet and go through all of the past performances. A long time. It's not that hard to get more than half at 4 dollars. It is within reach. And yes, every damn 6 to 5 that pulls a boner , check the D.Q rules. It's the usual suspects. Layoff, more than 6 month break going back last 3 races, Foreign shipper, other coast shipper. The Usual Suspects.

You should have someone write a computer program that checks these 40 rules. Is that possible to do?

[mannyberrios]

Or if you can post these 40 rules, would like to see it!

[windoor]

All is possible when you want to check a possible play as long as there is data available that has the information in it that you require.

The problem is, most (or all?) of the database software out there was done by a handicapper with there own personal factor list as the basis for research.

There are few exceptions I think (I have a very good one) but even then, I had to have Harry (H/Cap) build be four different Excel programs to get what I needed to filter for my personal spot/angle plays.

I am oh so glad he did, as I have learned very much about my plays over the last few months and continue to develop more plays.

There is never a guarantee that things will work going forward, but if it showed a nice profit over the last two years, I think it makes for a very good place to start. At least it can tell you what not to play, and that alone is worth the effort.

Regards,

Windoor.

[TheGhostOfOscarB]

Piece of wisdom for the day, courtesy of "Now We Know Why He Works For A Living Inc." (c) 2011

Favorites lose for the same reasons any horse loses.

[crestridge]

Some handicapping software programs have "volatility numbers" to identify which races are more likely (statistically, speaking) to produce either a favorite or a longer priced horse. These kinds of numbers help. However, we all know the more horses in the race will decrease (statistically speaking) the chance of a fav winning, due to many factors, but ultimately, there's more chaos, etc. in increased numbers of "bodies" vying for the winners circle. Hence when making decisions with one's strategy, whether attempting to win with favs, medium or longshots, one might want to consider chaos, etc. into one's decisions for race investment.

[misscashalot]

Originally Posted by crestridge

Some handicapping software programs have "volatility numbers" to identify which races are more likely (statistically, speaking) to produce either a favorite or a longer priced horse. These kinds of numbers help. However, we all know the more horses in the race will decrease (statistically speaking) the chance of a fav winning, due to many factors, but ultimately, there's more chaos, etc. in increased numbers of "bodies" vying for the winners circle. Hence when making decisions with one's strategy, whether attempting to win with favs, medium or longshots, one might want to consider chaos, etc. into one's decisions for race investment.

Keeping records can't be beat
so far at Saratoga

Inner Turf first 2 bet choices win 35/70 .500
Main Turf 34/81 .419
Dirt 110/185 .594 (not counting off the turf)
Off The Turf 22/31 .709

2 racing days to take advantage of the numbers

[TrifectaMike]

Originally Posted by jamey1977

Damn difficult. But if we have some solid D.Q rules. I know why 6 to 5's lose. So many reasons. I have 40 written down. Layoff- 11-12 horse field- 6 month break within last 3 races- Dirt To Turf- Turf To Dirt- slow speed, I have 40 of these. A horse that meets all of these 40 D.Q rules and is bet.You have a pretty damn good, strong horse. I have done a run for a month and got 46 wins out of 61. From 4 different circuits- Woodbine- New York- North And South Calif. At 4.10 average. A handsome profit. This takes a damn long time to do. I have to go to Brisnet and go through all of the past performances. A long time. It's not that hard to get more than half at 4 dollars. It is within reach. And yes, every damn 6 to 5 that pulls a boner , check the D.Q rules. It's the usual suspects. Layoff, more than 6 month break going back last 3 races, Foreign shipper, other coast shipper. The Usual Suspects.

One of the most least known item about favorite is the level of competiveness of the favorite's last race.

Mike (Dr Beav)