Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Handicapping Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 03-18-2019, 07:29 PM   #31
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper View Post
I think the "bet more on your longshots" strategy has its roots in people looking at their historical results.

Theoretically, you should make an odds line and bet more on the biggest overlays with the highest probability of winning. But for most, theory and reality have little to do with each other.

Most people start off betting more on the horses they think have the greatest chance of winning (usually shorter prices) but eventually find out they are losing money on those 2-1 shots and lower they liked but perhaps doing fine at 3-1 and above. Real vs perceived overlays in the low price range seem to be tougher to find. So they slowly shift their game towards medium priced horses and live longshots.
The key part of that equation is the highest probability of winning. Betting large amounts on longshots will lead to bankroll ruin unless, of course, the longshots have an extremely high probability of winning. Not exactly an everyday or even every month type of bet.
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-18-2019, 09:03 PM   #32
Nitro
Registered User
 
Nitro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 18,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro View Post
Another secret to improving your ROI (assuming the selection is strong) is to bet MORE when the odds are HIGH and bet LESS when they’re LOW.
WOW! I didn’t realize a comment like this would create any controversy at all.
It seems that some seem to get it right off the bat. Yet others right away start blowing it out of proportion by comparing extremely long odds (long shots) with short odds.
Maybe I should have spelled out the "high and low" with more clarity?

I’ve been playing this game a long time and I’ve never looked at the odds of my final selections from the perspective of considering the % of their chances of winning. Maybe that’s because rather than trying to pick winners I choose to make winning plays by hedging my bets. I’ve always preferred to either make multi-entry Dutch Win plays or make Vertical bets with multiple permutations. The odds value of the preferred entries simply provide me with a barometer to first determine if it’s a play or pass. If it’s a play then it’s just a question of “how much”.

Again it comes down the odds value. I would rather focus on a profit margin than a probability. For instance, because I have a known hit frequency when it comes to Dutch plays (regardless of the anticipated profit margin), I will always invest more when that margin is higher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper View Post
I think the "bet more on your longshots" strategy has its roots in people looking at their historical results.

Theoretically, you should make an odds line and bet more on the biggest overlays with the highest probability of winning. But for most, theory and reality have little to do with each other.
I agree, but I have personally never found much value in creating an odds line. Because no matter which factors and variables from the realities of the past are used, they can only provide a subjective conclusion for a theoretical outcome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by green80 View Post
If you have any advantage over the game, the more bets you make the bigger your bankroll will grow.
So, what's the color of money? Green80’s got the right idea, because it all comes down to one thing:
Taking Advantage when the opportunity presents itself.
.
Nitro is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-18-2019, 09:51 PM   #33
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro View Post
......Again it comes down the odds value. I would rather focus on a profit margin than a probability. For instance, because I have a known hit frequency when it comes to Dutch plays (regardless of the anticipated profit margin), I will always invest more when that margin is higher.
I agree, but I have personally never found much value in creating an odds line. Because no matter which factors and variables from the realities of the past are used, they can only provide a subjective conclusion for a theoretical outcome.

So, what's the color of money? Green80’s got the right idea, because it all comes down to one thing:
Taking Advantage when the opportunity presents itself.
.
So basically you just said that you have a good idea of your probability of hitting a dutch bet which I assume doesn't change much. So it certainly makes sense to bet more when your margins are higher. There is a big difference, however, when analyzing how much to bet to win on a single horse.
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-18-2019, 09:59 PM   #34
ReplayRandall
Buckle Up
 
ReplayRandall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
So basically you just said that you have a good idea of your probability of hitting a dutch bet which I assume doesn't change much. So it certainly makes sense to bet more when your margins are higher. There is a big difference, however, when analyzing how much to bet to win on a single horse.
And this is the real truth of who, when, and how much to bet, instead of this thread's premise..."Reducing # of bets to improve ROI".

Variance is the killer to most bankrolls, and how you iron that out is finding as many situations as Nitro does, which requires "Increasing # of bets to improve ROI"....
ReplayRandall is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-19-2019, 08:14 AM   #35
Half Smoke
Registered User
 
Half Smoke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 1,266
The point of the thread might still hold true even if you are dutching.

if your play is to bet 3 or 4 horses against the fave, and you are not doing well, you are probably looking for a weak fave to bet against.

if you reduce the # of dutch attempts and try to find faves who are the very weakest going off at very low odds you still may increase your R.O.I. compared to trying to get as many dutch attempts as you can in

but I wouldn't suggest that anybody who is profitable change what they are doing

and it may make sense to consider a dutch attempt as being one bet

I've tried dutching and I didn't do well. when I won, the net profit was very low and sometimes because of odds changing too late for me to consider, much lower than I expected

but I'm not knocking in

Last edited by Half Smoke; 03-19-2019 at 08:16 AM.
Half Smoke is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-19-2019, 12:01 PM   #36
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
The key part of that equation is the highest probability of winning. Betting large amounts on longshots will lead to bankroll ruin unless, of course, the longshots have an extremely high probability of winning. Not exactly an everyday or even every month type of bet.
It's still a dilemma for me after 40 years.

Some of the biggest "theoretcial" overlays I find are on horses I'm not giving a especially big chance of winning. That makes the potential losing streaks problematical (the psychological impact is even tougher for me). At the same time, I try to keep my bets as flat as possible for other reasons.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
classhandicapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-19-2019, 02:12 PM   #37
JohnGalt1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,228
I don't make action bets.

If a horse doesn't qualify for my normal bet amount, I don't make it.

Why lose on a low percentage action bet? They hurt my bottom line.
JohnGalt1 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-19-2019, 02:40 PM   #38
Robert Fischer
clean money
 
Robert Fischer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 23,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt1 View Post
I don't make action bets.

If a horse doesn't qualify for my normal bet amount, I don't make it.

Why lose on a low percentage action bet? They hurt my bottom line.
100% correct.


I catch myself making ACTION BETS in a couple scenarios
  1. I'm live, at the track, and just trying to make a 'day at the races' (rather than being focused on the simulcast opportunities)
  2. Or, There are some times when I tune into a card, and I throw $2 on a horse , 'seed money', to get warmed up

Probably knocks $100.00 off my yearly bottom line. Not correct theory, but that's how I live.
__________________
Preparation. Discipline. Patience. Decisiveness.

Last edited by Robert Fischer; 03-19-2019 at 02:44 PM.
Robert Fischer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-19-2019, 04:03 PM   #39
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Fischer View Post
100% correct.


I catch myself making ACTION BETS in a couple scenarios
  1. I'm live, at the track, and just trying to make a 'day at the races' (rather than being focused on the simulcast opportunities)
  2. Or, There are some times when I tune into a card, and I throw $2 on a horse , 'seed money', to get warmed up

Probably knocks $100.00 off my yearly bottom line. Not correct theory, but that's how I live.
If one is betting just for the sake of betting then no, that probably isn't a good habit to start. But there are so many scenarios that warrant a bet albeit not a large regular bet. I think it makes perfect sense to make action bets. Example: Heavy favorite comes on the track completely washed out and you know that the horse runs poorly when washed out. I think it is good play to make a bet of some sort against the favorite.

A newcomer at the track would lose their mind if they sat around for 4+ hours and made 1 or 2 bets all day.
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-19-2019, 08:36 PM   #40
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
If one is betting just for the sake of betting then no, that probably isn't a good habit to start. But there are so many scenarios that warrant a bet albeit not a large regular bet. I think it makes perfect sense to make action bets. Example: Heavy favorite comes on the track completely washed out and you know that the horse runs poorly when washed out. I think it is good play to make a bet of some sort against the favorite.

A newcomer at the track would lose their mind if they sat around for 4+ hours and made 1 or 2 bets all day.
The "action bet" concept was first introduced during the pre-simulcast days...when there were indeed hours in-between the serious player's solid wagers. In the current hyper-betting era, the races come in rapid succession...and the action bets have outlived their original usefulness...IMO. I, personally, cannot imagine a newcomer at the track being so selective as to make only a bet or two in 4+ hours. Today's newcomers don't lose their minds...they are satisfied in only losing their money.
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-23-2019, 03:37 AM   #41
Parkview_Pirate
Registered User
 
Parkview_Pirate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
The "action bet" concept was first introduced during the pre-simulcast days...when there were indeed hours in-between the serious player's solid wagers. In the current hyper-betting era, the races come in rapid succession...and the action bets have outlived their original usefulness...IMO. I, personally, cannot imagine a newcomer at the track being so selective as to make only a bet or two in 4+ hours. Today's newcomers don't lose their minds...they are satisfied in only losing their money.
I recall reading one of Beyer's books outlining the difference between "prime" and "action" bets, and as I tried to adjust my wagering from harness to thoroughbreds back in the mid 1980s, I thought it was a good strategy, since the performance of thoroughbreds was (and still is) so much more volatile. From "pounding" several races a card to maybe several a week was defensive to protect the bankroll.

Then simulcasting came along, and that proved for me to be an even bigger challenge to adjust to - hyper-betting indeed. I would agree the action bets of today are not the same as yesteryear, and are more along the lines of what I would call a "base" wager.

And I would add the "prime" bet has morphed into an increase in the wager based on odds, and not on the myth (for me anyway) of probability. After all, the horse that's 25-1 doesn't have a 10% chance to win, so deserves a larger bet. The horse in 1:11 2/5 will have a 100% chance or a 0% chance to win, period. So if the odds are longer, I try to take advantage of it.

30 years ago I would bet 8 of 10 races, and bet prime levels in 1 or 2. Today I might look over 50-80 races on Saturdays, bet on 15, with 12 at my base level, 2 at 1.5 to 2.0 x base level, and one at 2.5 or 3 x base level.

About four times a year I get the old "prime" bet feeling, and pound a horse. That's one of the big differences between playing online and at the track.
Parkview_Pirate is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-23-2019, 03:45 AM   #42
Parkview_Pirate
Registered User
 
Parkview_Pirate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReplayRandall View Post
And this is the real truth of who, when, and how much to bet, instead of this thread's premise..."Reducing # of bets to improve ROI".

Variance is the killer to most bankrolls, and how you iron that out is finding as many situations as Nitro does, which requires "Increasing # of bets to improve ROI"....
Variance is the killer? Not sure I follow what you mean - are you saying that players need to be better handicappers and come up with better odds lines, or they need to more rigorously adhere to stricter betting amounts and bankroll management?

Increasing the number of bets implies that a player is capable of finding, in spades over longer periods of time, races where you have "an edge". I would suggest for most players that's beyond their reach. I would advise to carefully review your records, be open to adjustments and streaks, but narrow your focus to where you can expect some success - which translates for me anyway, betting fewer races.
Parkview_Pirate is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-23-2019, 10:35 AM   #43
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate View Post
........And I would add the "prime" bet has morphed into an increase in the wager based on odds, and not on the myth (for me anyway) of probability. After all, the horse that's 25-1 doesn't have a 10% chance to win, so deserves a larger bet. The horse in 1:11 2/5 will have a 100% chance or a 0% chance to win, period. So if the odds are longer, I try to take advantage of it.........
So if probability is a myth all of your bets on 25-1 horses should be winning at the same rate as your bets on 3-1 horses.
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-23-2019, 12:10 PM   #44
MONEY
Registered User
 
MONEY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Houston Tx.
Posts: 3,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt1 View Post
I don't make action bets.

If a horse doesn't qualify for my normal bet amount, I don't make it.

Why lose on a low percentage action bet? They hurt my bottom line.
All of my bets are action bets.
I handicap and go to the track for entertainment.

Yesterday I bet the early pick5 at Gulfstream, 142 $1.00 exactas (2 exactas per race in 71 races)
and 29 $1.00 cold DDs.

Since I began betting this way about two months ago, I am way ahead.
I know that this winning streak will end some day, but that's horse racing.

Since I depend on Jockey and Trainer stats, Saturdays are not good for me.
Jockeys and Trainers shipping in and out thoroughly mess up my handicapping.
If I go to the track on a Saturday, I will bet only on the races that don't have outsiders.
So obviously I avoid graded races.

Making money gambling on horses is fun.
Losing a little money is a learning experience.
Handicapping keeps you sharp.
As long as you bet only what you can afford to lose, it's all good.
__________________
Laboratory rats are susceptible to drug addiction, obesity, diabetes, heart disease and cancer.
MONEY is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.