Field Size

[classhandicapper]

Typically I like large fields because there are always a few more dead horses taking too much money, but there is a potential downside besides the slightly greater randomness due to trip. For me, it's handicapping laziness. When I see a 6 horse field, I often look up every trip and bias (sometimes for multiple races), watch a couple of replays, look at field qualities, double check multiple sources for figure accuracy, check to see how horses are coming out out the races, look up any trainer stats that might be relevant etc... When I see a 12 horse field I feel like crying because I don't want to do that much work only to find out I agree with the board and can't bet. So I tend to be lazy about eliminating horses that don't look that good on paper and only dig deeply on the remainder. Unfortunately, the value is often on the horses that don't look so good at first glance.

[sjk]

Originally Posted by Cangamble

My point is that you will bet your money, you will find the larger fields to bet on. But all this is internal with respect to the existing horse players.
You will still bet the same amount for the year or close to it, whether national field size average is 7.5 or 8.5.
When I say new money, I am talking about money that comes from someone who doesn't play horses, who all of a sudden plays because field size jumped up.

The amount of money I bet in a year depends on the number of hours I spend at it times the proportion of races that provide value to bet. Both of these go up with field size.

[Cangamble]

Originally Posted by sjk

The amount of money I bet in a year depends on the number of hours I spend at it times the proportion of races that provide value to bet. Both of these go up with field size.

Again, I'm not denying this point. But my point is that you are going to bet X amount a year, regardless what the average field size is in horse racing overall. You will just pick out bigger fields to play along the way most of the time.

[rwwupl]

Small fields are poison for a horse player. They automatically become strategy races or jockey races rather than horse races.

I want the horse in any horse race and handicapping of past performance be the dominent factor to be considered.

When a race becomes a "stategy" race throw handicapping and past performance out the window

I do not want to bet on what is in the mind of a mans strategy.

Horsemen love small fields. That should tell you something. They get paid if their horse performs well or not. Grandmothers of horsemen can bet.

It is against all percentages the trouble the favorite has in a short field.

THe perception is not good.

I want full fields ,thank you.

[sjk]

Originally Posted by Cangamble

Again, I'm not denying this point. But my point is that you are going to bet X amount a year, regardless what the average field size is in horse racing overall. You will just pick out bigger fields to play along the way most of the time.

I guess this is repetitive but the amount I bet during the course of the year has nothing to do with losing a certain amount as your earlier posts might imply. It has varied considerably from year to year.

[Dave Schwartz]

I guess this is repetitive but the amount I bet during the course of the year has nothing to do with losing a certain amount as your earlier posts might imply. It has varied considerably from year to year.

SJK,

Could this not be a function of slight (or not so slight) differences in your handicapping/wagering approach over the past years?


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Jeff P]

I want full fields, thank you.

Bingo!

Personally, I very seldom bother to look at small fields. I know from years of experience (based on record keeping and large data samples) that I'm far better off passing races with small fields and focusing my time and energy on large fields where competition runs deep.

Personally, I'd like to see a track try something as an experiment:

Take two races with small fields (horses of similar class) and combine them into one race. Reverse split every small field race and do it for an entire meet. Run just 3 cards a week if you have to - but card races with 10 or more runners only.

I guarantee you you'll get the attention of a lot of players - and if marketed right - you'll grow handle instead of keeping the status quo and watching it shrink.

I want full fields, thank you.

-jp

.

[Imriledup]

Here's 4 reasons why i prefer 8 horse fields over 12 horse fields.


1) It doesnt' take as long to handicap an 8 horse field. Time is money and a 12 horse field might take me 33% longer to handicap.

2) I bet more than 2 dollars. If you are a 2 dollar player, you need that 12 horse field so you can hit the trifecta that pays 1500 for 1 dollar. But, for me, i'd rather have a tri in an 8 horse field that pays 500 for a dollar and have it multiple times. I don't need the tri to pay 1500 for 1 dollar, i can have a tri that pays 500 for 1 dollar and have it 3 times (or 30 times). Those 4 extra horses cause you to spend much more money chasing down that illusive tri score.

3) Much less of a chance that my horse will get bothered or disqualified. Its a 'truer' race because horsepower matters more than racing luck.

4) In the shorter field, you can really make a concentrated score if the heavy favorite is a dog. In a 12 horse field, you still have 11 bodies to navigate thru.

[fmolf]

Originally Posted by Cangamble

Do you think that adding more superfectas or triactors on 6 horse races actually add more players, or the new high five? I don't.
I think that if they were to make a lottery bet like there is in Sweden, it would bring in new players, not necessarily more long term handicappers though.

nothing kills my desire to play the pick 4 like small fields...too many favorites win... larger fields would definetly grow the p3 and p4 bettors...i will play pick fours with at least two large fields in them otherwise no.....small fields win bets and exactas only....the only way ti increase churn is to attract new money..without new money their is just the same qamount of old money being churned!

[DeanT]

Originally Posted by Imriledup

Here's 4 reasons why i prefer 8 horse fields over 12 horse fields.


1) It doesnt' take as long to handicap an 8 horse field. Time is money and a 12 horse field might take me 33% longer to handicap.

2) I bet more than 2 dollars. If you are a 2 dollar player, you need that 12 horse field so you can hit the trifecta that pays 1500 for 1 dollar. But, for me, i'd rather have a tri in an 8 horse field that pays 500 for a dollar and have it multiple times. I don't need the tri to pay 1500 for 1 dollar, i can have a tri that pays 500 for 1 dollar and have it 3 times (or 30 times). Those 4 extra horses cause you to spend much more money chasing down that illusive tri score.

3) Much less of a chance that my horse will get bothered or disqualified. Its a 'truer' race because horsepower matters more than racing luck.

4) In the shorter field, you can really make a concentrated score if the heavy favorite is a dog. In a 12 horse field, you still have 11 bodies to navigate thru.

Have you kept track of ROI by field size IRU? In my experience anything less than 8 horses just grinds my bankroll to death. I dont think I could come close to staying afloat in short fields with the take.

Not saying that is you, but that is what happens to me. Shorter fields, takeout wins.

[PrairieMeadows]

Below is the Average $2 Winning Mutuel for each field size. TB's only from a personal database I have of Prairie Meadows Races 2005-2008. I am not entirely sure if it is a complete database, but this may shed some light on the current topic. (not sure how to get the HTML to work)

 <HTML>
<TABLE BORDER="1"> <TH>EQB Racetype</TH>	<TH>n</TH>	<TH>4</TH>	<TH>5</TH>	<TH>6</TH>	<TH>7</TH>	<TH>8</TH>	<TH>9</TH>	<TH>10</TH>	<TH>11</TH>	<TH>12</TH>	<TH>13</TH>
<TR> <TD>ALW</TD>	<TD>363</TD>	 <TD>$4.93</TD> 	 <TD>$6.59</TD> 	 <TD>$9.08</TD> 	 <TD>$10.25</TD> 	 <TD>$11.55 </TD>	 <TD>$12.94 </TD>	 <TD>$17.23 </TD>	 <TD>$17.04 </TD>	 <TD>$30.80</TD> 	
<TR><TD>AOC</TD>	<TD>269</TD>	 <TD>$3.60</TD> 	 <TD>$9.78</TD> 	 <TD>$8.35</TD> 	 <TD>$10.25</TD> 	 <TD>$12.50</TD> 	 <TD>$10.18</TD> 	<TD> $19.76</TD> 			
<TR><TD>CLM</TD>	<TD>1025</TD>	 <TD>$3.33</TD> 	 <TD>$7.75</TD> 	 <TD>$10.10</TD> 	 <TD>$11.02</TD> 	<TD> $11.58</TD> 	 <TD>$14.23</TD> 	 <TD>$17.01</TD> 	<TD> $14.96</TD> 	 <TD>$8.77</TD> 	
<TR><TD>MCL</TD>	<TD>419</TD>		 <TD>$5.31</TD> 	<TD> $8.41</TD> 	 <TD>$9.15</TD> 	 <TD>$12.74</TD> 	 <TD>$14.51</TD> 	<TD> $14.27</TD> 	 <TD>$11.29</TD> 	<TD> $19.94 </TD>	
<TR> <TD>MSW</TD>	<TD>433</TD>		 <TD>$7.63</TD> 	 <TD>$8.66</TD> 	 <TD>$10.42</TD> 	 <TD>$10.75</TD> 	 <TD>$13.25</TD> 	 <TD>$15.50 </TD>	<TD> $12.93 </TD>	 <TD>$10.20 </TD>	
<TR> <TD>STK</TD>	<TD>153</TD>	 <TD>$3.80 </TD>	 <TD>$9.66</TD> 	<TD> $9.03 </TD>	 <TD>$10.32</TD> 	 <TD>$14.45</TD> 	 <TD>$10.47 	 <TD>$15.60 	 <TD>$16.04 	 <TD>$5.70 </TD>	 <TD>$48.30 </TD></TABLE></HTML>

[fmolf]

Originally Posted by Imriledup

Here's 4 reasons why i prefer 8 horse fields over 12 horse fields.


1) It doesnt' take as long to handicap an 8 horse field. Time is money and a 12 horse field might take me 33% longer to handicap.

2) I bet more than 2 dollars. If you are a 2 dollar player, you need that 12 horse field so you can hit the trifecta that pays 1500 for 1 dollar. But, for me, i'd rather have a tri in an 8 horse field that pays 500 for a dollar and have it multiple times. I don't need the tri to pay 1500 for 1 dollar, i can have a tri that pays 500 for 1 dollar and have it 3 times (or 30 times). Those 4 extra horses cause you to spend much more money chasing down that illusive tri score.

3) Much less of a chance that my horse will get bothered or disqualified. Its a 'truer' race because horsepower matters more than racing luck.

4) In the shorter field, you can really make a concentrated score if the heavy favorite is a dog. In a 12 horse field, you still have 11 bodies to navigate thru.

i agree with your assessment... our only difference of opinion is i play the exacta pools in the small fields more than i will play in the tri pools...in small fields my favorite play is exacta box of the two speed horses in the race...their must only be two..does not come up too often but when it does and both horses are in form... makes a nice betting situation..then wheel a few horses in the third slot of your tri!

[PaceAdvantage]

The HTML tags are for displaying and formatting HTML CODE...it's not for actually executing html...

[HUSKER55]

run a shorter week if you have to but keep the fields between 8 and 10 entries. I think if that were to happen owners and trainers might start providing better horses and I think THAT would increase handle. Bigger purses, bigger handle and better fields.

JMHO

[BombsAway Bob]

lets dumb it down..
Owners/Trainers want 5 horse fields(before scratches)..
ANY bettor worth his/her salt wants fields of +10..
New bettors have no point of reference, so it's moot to them..