Pick 3 , 4 ,5 bet sizing

[teddy]

Just pulled my 10 year stats and I got killed on the Pick 3 4 5 bets. I made money on exactas and tri. After rebate.

I can remember hitting some nice bets when i took tickets where I took more singles and didnt spread out. Usually Id take 1 with 2 with 2 and take it for a $20 ticket. My pick 5 might have many entries per leg with the Crist style of having A,s and b's.. MY assumption is this is a still a big loser because of spreading too much.

I suggest using at least 2 singles on a pick 5 and then smaller B's . What do you guys see in your wagering.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by teddy

Just pulled my 10 year stats and I got killed on the Pick 3 4 5 bets. I made money on exactas and tri. After rebate.

I can remember hitting some nice bets when i took tickets where I took more singles and didnt spread out. Usually Id take 1 with 2 with 2 and take it for a $20 ticket. My pick 5 might have many entries per leg with the Crist style of having A,s and b's.. MY assumption is this is a still a big loser because of spreading too much.

I suggest using at least 2 singles on a pick 5 and then smaller B's . What do you guys see in your wagering.

Some generalization here. I think there is a tendency for the most to chase a pick 4 and pick 5 with little regard to value(been very guilty of this myself). If you come with a pick 5 play and single a horse to make it affordable, you are basically just making a straight play on that horse (just parlaying it to the other legs). Now if that horse should be 8/5 in your mind and he is 3/5 on the board, you just made an awful bet. When you look at 10 years worth of results it is basically the sum of all your bets. Thus if you are in the habit of singling horses that should be about 8/5 that go off at 3/5, you aren't going to make money, because you are giving a way to much juice on your singles.

This is just one example, but if you want to turn the corner on these bets my advice is to really look at what you are doing. If singles are a big part of your strategy, who are you singling? Do you consider them good straight plays? If you are using a 2x2x3x3x3 type plays, what horses are you including? The obvious overbet horses, or are taking stands, tossing horses that you believe will be overbet and throwing in some good value horses into the mix.

The one takeout aspect of the pick 4's and pick 5's are very enticing, especially when you factor in those rare carryover situations, but ultimately they do not replace the need to think value on those plays. So if you are not happy with your long term results, figure out what you are doing wrong and modify your approach, othewise, in 2029 you will be singing the same song.

[teddy]

I agree I will be singing the same song unless small tickets make a diff... I am going to play smaller ones for 30 days and see what changes in the results. Or if i can win some at exactas, then why not focus on doing it better. I know the whales play exactas and tri. The ones I know at least 3 of them do. Must be a reason why huh. Exactas and Tri are race to race and you can really hone in better than rush betting a pick 5. Yes we all do it.


Exactas I am going to try to pick one horse to be first and second and key that. I think before I bet more of a 2 with 3 strategy or 1 with 5 and then go back and bet a few combinations much harder like 1 with 2. Still its just a 1% winner over $200k bet in 10 years. but beats losing right.

Maybe i can post my 30 day results . I think betting better is really the key to profits.

[teddy]

Just hit a $10 pick 3 that paid $25 for .50. So far so good . Normally Id have a $1 version.

[AndyC]

I think a lot of bettors play the P-3, P-4, P5, & P-6 without having an opinion on enough races. If you find yourself spreading too much on too many races you clearly do not have an opinion. It's OK to skip a horizontal bet.

The majority of my bets were horizontal bets. There have been countless times when I spent many hours handicapping for a big P-6 carryover only to skip the bet for lack of a clear opinion. When your handicapping produces clarity then the bet size will take care of itself. Of course clarity might mean that you love the chalk in each leg and that you would be a fool to place a bet with that opinion.

[BCOURTNEY]

Originally Posted by teddy

Just pulled my 10 year stats and I got killed on the Pick 3 4 5 bets. I made money on exactas and tri. After rebate.

I can remember hitting some nice bets when i took tickets where I took more singles and didnt spread out. Usually Id take 1 with 2 with 2 and take it for a $20 ticket. My pick 5 might have many entries per leg with the Crist style of having A,s and b's.. MY assumption is this is a still a big loser because of spreading too much.

I suggest using at least 2 singles on a pick 5 and then smaller B's . What do you guys see in your wagering.

What does the A, B, C .. mean or represent, needs definition before discussion.

[Buckeye]

Speaking for myself, the ABC means A is your A and B is your B and so on.

It is absolutely critical to have an opinion and bet accordingly.

The nice part is few 'handicappers' do this for whatever reason.

The more complicated the bet is, the better the chance you have if you know what you're doing.

[teddy]

The A is your most likely winner selection B are horses you think have an ok shot.. C is long shots.

[Buckeye]

Originally Posted by teddy

The A is your most likely winner selection B are horses you think have an ok shot.. C is long shots.

That's right teddy.

On the other hand, your A could be a value horse.

Same thing applies to singles.

[davew]

I do better on my vertical bets as well. I think it is because I use other things besides past performance to make my selections.

Besides past performances, track condition, betting action, probables, horse physical appearance and attitude help me adjust my plays.

The multiple race horizontals leave many things blind in my approach.

[castaway01]

To me, there's a big difference between a Pick 3 and a Pick 5.

With a Pick 3, you can have one strong opinion and make something out of it. You can love one horse and hate the favorites in two connecting races and you're (in broad terms) off to a good start. Of course a dozen other factors determine whether this would be a better win or exacta bet than a Pick 3, but at least you have the basis to build something.

The problem is too many people take that same situation and try to expand it out to a Pick 5. You can occasionally do this with one strong opinion, but if you have only one strong opinion and then are hoping for longshots, these are the situations where you're going to burn a lot of money and have a lot of 3 out of 5 tickets. I think you need to really like at least two horses that are not the favorite to key on and then build around that.

A Pick 4 is somewhere in the middle. With a 50-cent Pick 4, you can have one strong opinion and spread in the other races, but where you get hurt here is when you realize favorites look strong in the other legs but you talk yourself out of them because you're looking for a price. Or, even if you include them, you hit the bet and get back half of what you wagered. It happens, but if it happens too often, you're going to be in the red at the end of the year.

[Robert Fischer]

# of Bets. Win % $1 ROI Wagered... Payoff.. Profit/Loss
131.........17.56%..+1.29.$2071.00.$4736.40.. $ +2665.40

didn't bet a lot this year, starting to get more serious...

copy/paste, not necessarily how i measure ROI...


I do best with a significant opinion in race that is next to a spread/chaos race, with the third race preferably not a heavy(prohibitive) favorite.

A properly funded Pick-3 actually takes a larger bankroll than it may seem at first-glance. I sometimes leverage this by ending the sequence with a single low-priced strong favorite,
for example:
(significant opinion vs the #1) x (spread/chaos race) x (strong contender) ...
If I am alive to the single in the last leg for a decent payout, I then have the choice to let it ride, or to hedge(perhaps keying the strong fav 2nd under a few scary contenders).

It really requires a series of tickets. You should 'emphasize' low-priced horses.
so maybe something sort of like;
#1 50c x x
#2 $1 x x
#3 50c x x

usually use of the ABC method to where you have 'C' horses is reserved for longer sequences(deep p4 and up), but if you are comfortable with 'ABC', I'm kind of advocating using the low-priced horses as 'A's' with a higher bet amount for the 'A' ticket and just the minimum unit for the caveman and 'C' tickets. While you wouldn't use a 'caveman' ticket at all (aside from maybe a mandatory jackpot) in standard ABC, I like to bet 1 caveman ticket in a p3 that is intentionally constructed with the above mentioned spread/chaos race.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Anything more than a P3 becomes complicated. Say you have three horses in each event of a P4. That's a $40.50 investment. If you have 3/5 horses, you may not even get 3-1 on your money. Not really a great bet. An alternative is

1/1,2,3/1,2,3/1,2,3

1,2,3/1/1,2,3/1,2,3

1,2,3/1,2,3/1/1,2,3

Same amount of money, but chances to hit multiples.

[BCOURTNEY]

Originally Posted by teddy

Just pulled my 10 year stats and I got killed on the Pick 3 4 5 bets. I made money on exactas and tri. After rebate.

I can remember hitting some nice bets when i took tickets where I took more singles and didnt spread out. Usually Id take 1 with 2 with 2 and take it for a $20 ticket. My pick 5 might have many entries per leg with the Crist style of having A,s and b's.. MY assumption is this is a still a big loser because of spreading too much.

I suggest using at least 2 singles on a pick 5 and then smaller B's . What do you guys see in your wagering.

Have you tried back testing using cumulative probabilities in conjunction with maximizing EV rather than ABCDX selection methods?

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by BCOURTNEY

Have you tried back testing using cumulative probabilities in conjunction with maximizing EV rather than ABCDX selection methods?

Could you give a quick example?