Limiting our betting choices to the two top Bris Prime Power horses

[DeltaLover]

Let's assume that we limit our betting choices to the top two bris prime power horses of the race and we have discovered a way to detect with 100% accuracy, which of the two will beat the other one.

Betting on this horse will show a 1.7 ROI

This assumption is of course impossible to achieve but it raises the question of how frequently our assessment needs to be correct, to guarantee a positive ROI or to just break even.

In other words, selecting our bet between the top two BPP, how many times we need to be correct, to have a fair game with a 1.0 ROI ?

What the optimal rate of first vs second choice should be?

Can you suggest of related methodologies that can be used for this purpose?

[Flysofree]

I don't understand your question..... Are you asking what should be the odds of both horses or one horse???

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by Flysofree

I don't understand your question..... Are you asking what should be the odds of both horses or one horse???

I do not think I have mentioned odds anywhere in my posting.

The problem is the following:

(1) We restrict our selection to one of the top two BPP horses.

(2) We bet our selection for the same amount every time

The question is the following:

What percentage of the races we need to be correct in our selection between the top two horses in order to break even and start making a profit?

Is something like this possible at all?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

Let's assume that we limit our betting choices to the top two bris prime power horses of the race and we have discovered a way to detect with 100% accuracy, which of the two will beat the other one.

Betting on this horse will show a 1.7 ROI

This assumption is of course impossible to achieve but it raises the question of how frequently our assessment needs to be correct, to guarantee a positive ROI or to just break even.

In other words, selecting our bet between the top two BPP, how many times we need to be correct, to have a fair game with a 1.0 ROI ?

What the optimal rate of first vs second choice should be?

Can you suggest of related methodologies that can be used for this purpose?

Have we finally run out of REAL topics...and we are now venturing into "impossible assumptions"?

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Have we finally run out of REAL topics...and we are now venturing into "impossible assumptions"?

The real topic is following Thask !

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

The real topic is following Thask !

Alright then! Let's get with it!

[Flysofree]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I do not think I have mentioned odds anywhere in my posting.

The problem is the following:

(1) We restrict our selection to one of the top two BPP horses.

(2) We bet our selection for the same amount every time

The question is the following:

What percentage of the races we need to be correct in our selection between the top two horses in order to break even and start making a profit?

Is something like this possible at all?

Yes, you need to be right in 50% of your races (if the winner pays 1-1) to break even.
Check other odds to see how often to break even.
This is betting on one horse...
To bet on two horses just find a dutching chart... Google the words betting dutch in horse racing.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I do not think I have mentioned odds anywhere in my posting.

The problem is the following:

(1) We restrict our selection to one of the top two BPP horses.

(2) We bet our selection for the same amount every time

The question is the following:

What percentage of the races we need to be correct in our selection between the top two horses in order to break even and start making a profit?

Is something like this possible at all?

Delta, you are in the realm of possibility, but must first change rule (1) to this: #1- We must use our top two BPP horses. Secondly, the odds on these horses must be dutched in proper ratio, as to achieve a doubling of the amount invested, thus needing a 50% strike rate to begin showing profit. At first glance it appears a player would be passing at least 60% of all races to have a possibility of success. This is just a starting point, but I believe you're on the right track (no pun intended).

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by Flysofree

Yes, you need to be right in 50% of your races (if the winner pays 1-1) to break even.
Check other odds to see how often to break even.
This is betting on one horse...
To bet on two horses just find a dutching chart... Google the words betting dutch in horse racing.

My question, has to do with been right in selecting between the top two horses (NOT BEEN RIGHT ABOUT WHO IS GOING TO WIN THE RACE)..

The given is that having a fictitious method of always selecting the right horse (between 1st - 2nd) or in other words been 100% RIGHT, our ROI is going to be 1.7...

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

Delta, you are in the realm of possibility, but must first change rule (1) to this: #1- We must use our top two BPP horses. Secondly, the odds on these horses must be dutched in proper ratio, as to achieve a doubling of the amount invested, thus needing a 50% strike rate to begin showing profit. At first glance it appears a player would be passing at least 60% of all races to have a possibility of success. This is just a starting point, but I believe you're on the right track (no pun intended).

I am not referring to dutching. Just bet a single horse every time

[Flysofree]

Must be something in the water....

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I am not referring to dutching. Just bet a single horse every time

I saw the title of thread-Limiting our betting choices to the two top Bris Prime Power horses and thought of a refinement starting point......my bad.

[cj]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

Let's assume that we limit our betting choices to the top two bris prime power horses of the race and we have discovered a way to detect with 100% accuracy, which of the two will beat the other one.

Betting on this horse will show a 1.7 ROI

This assumption is of course impossible to achieve but it raises the question of how frequently our assessment needs to be correct, to guarantee a positive ROI or to just break even.

In other words, selecting our bet between the top two BPP, how many times we need to be correct, to have a fair game with a 1.0 ROI ?

What the optimal rate of first vs second choice should be?

Can you suggest of related methodologies that can be used for this purpose?

I would say it doesn't matter how often your assessment is correct if you don't know how often the horse wins when you are correct.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by cj

I would say it doesn't matter how often your assessment is correct if you don't know how often the horse wins when you are correct.

The winning frequency is already part of the problem. Remember that we are betting top two bris prime power who win with a specific frequency.

[Overlay]

You say that betting on the correct horse with 100% accuracy will show a 1.7 ROI. That translates to an average, race-in/race-out mutuel of $3.40 on a $2.00 wager. Based on that, wouldn't the break-even point for selecting the winner out of the top two horses be 59 (rounded up from 58.82353) times out of 100, or 59% of the time? (For example, over the course of 100 races, you'd bet $200. At an average mutuel of $3.40, you'd have to hit 59 (59 x 3.40 = $200.60) winners in order to at least break even.)