Jackpot pick six's

[JohnGalt1]

[QUOTE=Poindexter;2137975]Just to illustrate the point some are trying to convey about the rainbow 6, just look at todays races at Gulfstream. Here were the winning odds.

6th) .90
7th) 2.70
8th) 1.90
9th) .70
10th) .90
11th) 4.80

QUOTE]

What did 5 of 6 pay?

That was a rhetorical question.

[SG4]

Originally Posted by mountainman

I have never bought completely into the prevalent assumption that horizontal gimmicks offer special value by taking just one bite from each wager. By that same logic wouldn't a trifecta wager offer the same value by theoretically including a place and show bet for the same price as a win wager?

Of course not. And that's because other things must happen in order to cash. Sure, a pick six is the same as a six horse parlay. But who in the WORLD bets six horse win-pool parlays?? And the obvious advantage of placing six separate win bets instead, is that NOTHING else must fall in place to reap dividends from a winner. The money is yours-regardless of subsequent results in the six race sequence. Not to mention the fact that in order for a real shot at hitting the thing, a pick-six bettor must play a GREAT MANY six horse parlays.

Thus in my opinion, any horizontal bet is just one single wager-not six separate wagers somehow bundled into a single slice of takeout.

I could be mistaken about this and do respect your opinion. sir. You're obviously an informed poster. But in my opinion, the rainbow six was contrived to defy logical handicapping and simply entails sharp bettors bequeathing their money to 10 cent opportunists possessing no skills whatsoever.

I actually do believe that exotic bets (vertical & horizontal) offer a special value by taking only one bite from each wager, as you put it. Otherwise to me the risk wouldn't be worth the reward. Yes a 6 horse win parlay is an unlikely play on a single card, but if you're a person who wants to play every race & often bets to win (especially if you bet more than 1 horse per race), you might as well throw a few dollars on whatever horizontal bets are offered to maximize earning potential, the more races in the sequence the better for payout. This all works out hypothetically & for people with big bankrolls, but the reality is many people can't afford or are unwilling to bet this way over time, and I think for them the unfortunate truth is their bankroll is most likely to get eaten away by repetitive takeout, albeit at a slower rate.

Also far as "sharp bettors bequeathing their money to 10 cent opportunists possessing no skills whatsoever," I think completely the opposite - I think the lottery type players throwing guesswork dollars & cents into this pool eventually seed it for someone with a deserving wager. No hate here for anyone who plays a birthday & takes down the whole pool, the more of those tickets being played the better eventually for the informed player.

[SG4]

Originally Posted by AndyC

To find "value" because a horizontal bet pays more than a parlay makes little sense. If every horse in the sequence was bet to their fair odds they would be underlaid by the amount of the track take. With a 16% takeout rate that would mean that a win bet would return 84% of fair value. So take .84 X .84 X .84 X.84 X .84 x .84 and you get about .3513. With fair value being 1.00, does beating that incredibly low bar of .3513 mean you are receiving value? Not unless you are getting about 3 times what a parlay pays.

To clarify, a jackpot pool is not great value, but I think it offers value to the degree where it is worth playing at times. On a strictly numerical basis, it is probably the worst exotic to play to find value, but it is still better than playing the 6 races in a row individually.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by SG4

To clarify, a jackpot pool is not great value, but I think it offers value to the degree where it is worth playing at times. On a strictly numerical basis, it is probably the worst exotic to play to find value, but it is still better than playing the 6 races in a row individually.

Does anybody really play 6 races in a row individually in a parlay? And if you bet the races individually in the same way that a Jackpot ticket is constructed you would be playing multiple horses individually in a dutch parlay format. My point is not to argue whether it is better to play the Jackpot or parlay, it is to oppose the idea that beating a parlay is somehow a measure of positive value for a bettor

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Does anybody really play 6 races in a row individually in a parlay? And if you bet the races individually in the same way that a Jackpot ticket is constructed you would be playing multiple horses individually in a dutch parlay format. My point is not to argue whether it is better to play the Jackpot or parlay, it is to oppose the idea that beating a parlay is somehow a measure of positive value for a bettor

Honestly, the way most horseplayers play these wagers is way off anyway.

For the wager to carry a positive expected value, you want to only play combinations that are likely to be overlays. Yet most players either build their tickets around obvious singles (likely to be overbet) or try to cover as many combinations as possible (which will contain plenty of overbet combos).

[Robert Fischer]

Are there other 'tools' than the 'parlay-comparison' model to appraise pick-6 value?

I would make a somewhat ignorant guess that a pick-6's value really depends on whether it's hittable for you as an individual(both in terms of bankroll required, and races that involve quality opinions within your circle of competency), and whether it would be a meaningful boost to your bankroll relative to the risk and outlay.

in the natural world, a pick-6 with actual good value, tends gets some of it's value from the contribution of under-funded players, forced to single chalk to get their way through the sequence.

The Rainbow-6 20cents/highlander model flows in the opposite direction of those natural forces. That is where my question w/ the Rainbow's value arises.

I suppose that on huge carryover days, where the public is aware that single winner (requiring a 'reach' long-shot or 2) is required, along w/ the .20cent min, could be enough to overpower that model. Other times I would expect tradeoffs.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

Are there other 'tools' than the 'parlay-comparison' model to appraise pick-6 value?

I would make a somewhat ignorant guess that a pick-6's value really depends on whether it's hittable for you as an individual(both in terms of bankroll required, and races that involve quality opinions within your circle of competency), and whether it would be a meaningful boost to your bankroll relative to the risk and outlay.

in the natural world, a pick-6 with actual good value, tends gets some of it's value from the contribution of under-funded players, forced to single chalk to get their way through the sequence.

The Rainbow-6 20cents/highlander model flows in the opposite direction of those natural forces. That is where my question w/ the Rainbow's value arises.

I suppose that on huge carryover days, where the public is aware that single winner (requiring a 'reach' long-shot or 2) is required, along w/ the .20cent min, could be enough to overpower that model. Other times I would expect tradeoffs.

There isn't going to be a good measure of the bet's profitability, precisely because there's such a small sample size and the variance in a 6 race series is huge.

However, I can with a fair amount of confidence say this-- a player who can make a profit betting to win by consistently identifying overlays is highly likely, if he or she plays a pick 6 strategy that centers on probable overlays, to be making positive expectation wagers in the pick 6 as well. In contrast, a player who is unable to turn a profit on win bets is almost certainly going to lose in the pick 6 as well.

[SG4]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Does anybody really play 6 races in a row individually in a parlay? And if you bet the races individually in the same way that a Jackpot ticket is constructed you would be playing multiple horses individually in a dutch parlay format. My point is not to argue whether it is better to play the Jackpot or parlay, it is to oppose the idea that beating a parlay is somehow a measure of positive value for a bettor

To me, beating a parlay is precisely how I measure value when it comes to figuring out my wagering strategies on multi-race wagers. Different strokes I guess.

[Mr. Pick 5]

There are some advantages to the jackpot pick 6 despite the disadvantages with the extra takeout...for starters there is always the small chance, albeit rare, that you do take the entire jackpot pool, which at times can be massive...in addition there are advantages depending on the day. For example maybe the pick 5 looks chalky but the first leg of the pick 6 looks wide open. Suddenly a low value pick 5 could potentially have some value as a pick 6. In addition, perhaps you cant find a single in the pick 5 but you love a horse or two in the first leg of the pick 6. To me it is very situational dependent but there are definitely instances where playing this bet makes sense.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

Are there other 'tools' than the 'parlay-comparison' model to appraise pick-6 value?

I would make a somewhat ignorant guess that a pick-6's value really depends on whether it's hittable for you as an individual(both in terms of bankroll required, and races that involve quality opinions within your circle of competency), and whether it would be a meaningful boost to your bankroll relative to the risk and outlay.

in the natural world, a pick-6 with actual good value, tends gets some of it's value from the contribution of under-funded players, forced to single chalk to get their way through the sequence.

The Rainbow-6 20cents/highlander model flows in the opposite direction of those natural forces. That is where my question w/ the Rainbow's value arises.

I suppose that on huge carryover days, where the public is aware that single winner (requiring a 'reach' long-shot or 2) is required, along w/ the .20cent min, could be enough to overpower that model. Other times I would expect tradeoffs.

A parlay comparison is fine provided you use about 2.9 X the parlay amount.

You make a good point about being "hittable". Many players will make a bet simply because there is a large carryover. I take hittable one step further, I look at my ticket and see if there are enough races that offer value where I feel confident that I will prevail. Confidence with 3 odds-on favorites might make a bet hittable but certainly not worth playing.

[Robert Fischer]

The parlay of a chalky sequence is especially interesting in these analysis.


normal day, extreme jackpot day

$2SA , .20cRainbow


four different groupings that could show different models

[MonmouthParkJoe]

I have a love hate relationship with this bet for many of the reasons mentioned already. Yes with so much dead money in the GP pool and the amount of people putting in big tickets hoping to be the only winner does boost the payout if the sequence is chalky. I will only play it on mandatory payout days for the most part.

The SA thing kind of drives me nuts with the base still at $2 and cutting the consos in half to carry. In my opinion, it really just moves the money to the bigger players/syndicates.

Disturbing thing to me is looking at the carryovers on my equibase app and seeing just about everyone of them being a jackpot wager, including the pick 5 at FG.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by SG4

To me, beating a parlay is precisely how I measure value when it comes to figuring out my wagering strategies on multi-race wagers. Different strokes I guess.

If Las Vegas was offering 4/5 on a flip of a coin and 6/1 on calling 3 consecutive flips correctly would you say that the 6/1 bet was a "value" bet because a parlay of three coin flips would only pay 4.832/1? I can see that the 6/1 bet is clearly less damaging to a player's bankroll in the long run but still offers no hope of a long term chance of winning. To many players losing at a slower pace has great value.

[SG4]

Originally Posted by AndyC

If Las Vegas was offering 4/5 on a flip of a coin and 6/1 on calling 3 consecutive flips correctly would you say that the 6/1 bet was a "value" bet because a parlay of three coin flips would only pay 4.832/1? I can see that the 6/1 bet is clearly less damaging to a player's bankroll in the long run but still offers no hope of a long term chance of winning. To many players losing at a slower pace has great value.

Getting into different territory I think here though, cause choosing a wager's value (what was in discussion here) vs. the value on the horse you're backing are 2 different things. Betting a coin flip at 4/5 odds is clearly a non-starter for any wager, if you're looking for value. I guess succinctly my thoughts are a bet has value if you expect the ROI to be positive if you made this same wager over & over, and using a wager's value is to maximize the return on these selections.

If I had confidence in my coin toss calling, I'd definitely bet the parlay

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by SG4

Getting into different territory I think here though, cause choosing a wager's value (what was in discussion here) vs. the value on the horse you're backing are 2 different things. Betting a coin flip at 4/5 odds is clearly a non-starter for any wager, if you're looking for value. I guess succinctly my thoughts are a bet has value if you expect the ROI to be positive if you made this same wager over & over, and using a wager's value is to maximize the return on these selections.

If I had confidence in my coin toss calling, I'd definitely bet the parlay

The problem with this is that you will rarely have a six race sequence where all 6 races present positive expectation situations (in contrast you can choose what races you want to parlay).

So the overall bet can be negative expected value simply because you are forced to play a bunch of overbet combinations due to some races in the sequence offering no value.