Quote:
We're on the same page (raybo too) - this isn't like poker where we can avoid the whales;
|
Actually, we can. Some tracks have higher rebates. Those tracks will (logically) have a greater percentage of the pool from whales.
I actually find that as my rebates go up, my profitability goes down.
It is precisely your example: Avoiding Phil Ivey is a good idea. LOL
I am not saying that the game is not beatable at a high-rebate track. I am saying that the level of competition is lower, and therefore easier to beat at a track with lower rebates.
Specifically, I find that when my rebate hits 4% in the win pool, my $Net falls significantly unless my contenders are in opposition to the tote board.
To use the poker example again (which is a good one, I think), one could theoretically avoid bumping heads with Phil Ivey by not playing when he is in the hand. Maybe another way to say this would be, "If you are going to stay in the game against Ivey, you better make sure you've really got it."
In horse racing, we could avoid the whales by playing where they typically do not. Where is that? Longshots. By their nature, they do not wager on longshots so much, otherwise, they wouldn't be longshots, would they?