Overlays?

[Johnny V]

Mathematically an overlay is an overlay at any odds range. The way I see it an overlay at 8/5 should not necessarily be bet no more than an overlay who is 20-1 on my line and is going off at 30-1 should be bet to win. I don't doubt that some players are making money betting low price overlays. I have torn up more tickets betting on those 8/5 overlays that I would care to admit so that is not for me. I cannot make a fine, tight odds line to reflect enough of a worthwhile line between say even money and 7/5. For me at this point I am looking for 4-1 and up for the win.
In exotic betting those low priced horses and the higher end odds horses with a "shot" are in there for me because I have to look at that favorite very closely as the horse mathematically that is going to factor along with my key overlay(s).

[Aerocraft67]

With true overlays, I suppose the math would be indifferent to high or low prices. But you have to bet twice as much on a 5/2 as a 6/1 to get the same payout. The hit rate is higher on the lower priced horse, but you have more at risk to reach the same goal. You have to bet a lot to win a little.

With uncertainty in your assessment of the overlay, it's intuitive that you have more margin for error in the bigger prices. Although the math may say otherwise.

[pandy]

Originally Posted by Aerocraft67

With true overlays, I suppose the math would be indifferent to high or low prices. But you have to bet twice as much on a 5/2 as a 6/1 to get the same payout. The hit rate is higher on the lower priced horse, but you have more at risk to reach the same goal. You have to bet a lot to win a little.

With uncertainty in your assessment of the overlay, it's intuitive that you have more margin for error in the bigger prices. Although the math may say otherwise.

Good points. I know when I see a 5-2 shot that I think should be 8-5, although it seems like a good bet, sometimes the horse is simply dead on the board and shows it on the racetrack.

With horses I bet that are in the higher odds range, let's say 10-1 to 20-1 range, since I feel that the horses are legitimate win contenders, I know that I'm getting good value.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

Originally Posted by PressThePace

I have no doubt that people can show a profit, even over the long haul, by betting 3/1 and lower overlays. But just because these plays are still overlays, it's not like there are an abundance of them, even when compared to "higher" overlays. I think people can easily make the mistake of thinking that there are spot plays everywhere within that range....not so. My play consists of making win bets at odds of 5/1 or higher. It's what works for me based on years and years of record-keeping. I can't show a profit on anything less.

This is true for me as well - I actually need closer to 7-1 to stay in the black. I think it's a fool's game for the recreational player to pursue low-priced overlays, as you're going up against players/whales/syndicates betting large amounts of sophisticated money late, and moving the odds around - and even when the 8/5 horse "jogs" and wins by 5, it doesn't seem as satisfying to see its odds cut to even money on the last flash. There's very little wiggle room left with the high strike rate necessary to produce profits.

The other sinister aspect is that the low-priced overlays are also prime candidates for getting "mysteriously" poor rides or tossing in sub-par performances - as taking them out of consideration in a race can provide a huge edge......for those betting the other contenders.

[pandy]

So far we've got three players at these odds 4-1, 5-1, 7-1. It's funny because I tend to aim for 6-1 or higher.

[green80]

Originally Posted by pandy

So far we've got three players at these odds 4-1, 5-1, 7-1. It's funny because I tend to aim for 6-1 or higher.

I use a black box type program to handicap. From my records I show a 25% win rate overall, with the majority being favorites or lower priced horses. My average win price is $ 6.09 (-24%roi), showing a loss overall. However when I set my minimum odds at 6-1 or better I show a profit overall. Fewer bets go in, the win rate drops, but the bottom line is profitable.

[pandy]

Originally Posted by green80

I use a black box type program to handicap. From my records I show a 25% win rate overall, with the majority being favorites or lower priced horses. My average win price is $ 6.09 (-24%roi), showing a loss overall. However when I set my minimum odds at 6-1 or better I show a profit overall. Fewer bets go in, the win rate drops, but the bottom line is profitable.

Thanks for your input. Doesn't surprise me.

[raybo]

I test tracks individually in my program. And, at the majority of tracks a higher minimum odds requirement produces a higher ROI, with a lower hit rate and less net profit (using flat bet wagering). But there are some tracks that will not support longshot plays without reducing the number of plays to the point of not being worth the time needed to continually test those tracks.

So, in my opinion, if you play many tracks, then by all means, require a higher minimum odds requirement. But if you play only a couple, or a few tracks, you need to analyze each of those tracks to see what your minimum odds need to be, some tracks perform excellently at any odds and start seeing diminishing returns as the minimum odds increase, but, some require 2/1, 5/2, 3/1, 7/2 etc.. This is assuming you want a mixture of decent hit rate, decent ROI, and decent profit. If you don't care about all 3 of those factors, then concentrate your play on tracks and odds minimums that offer the best return on the factor(s) that you deem most important, for you. It's really a matter of personal preference regarding what your ultimate goal and needs are. Some are perfectly fine with betting only a handful of races per week and showing a net profit, others want to churn their money by making a large number of wagers and making money from their rebate. Others are somewhere in between those two extremes.

[bettheoverlay]

I've never been able to show a long term profit betting horses to win at less than 6-1 both pre and post database. My own analysis of my ten year data base is that it is not, statistically speaking, even worth trying. I'm sure super handicappers can get it done but I'm not one of those. The other problem with low odds overlays is that they tend to fall in the final odds posting, lots of 5-2 overlays fall to 3-2 underlays.

[cnollfan]

Although 10-1 is 10-1, I am starting to believe that my longshot selections do much better in races where I dislike the favorite or second favorite than they do in races where I don't find flaws with the chalk.

[pandy]

Originally Posted by cnollfan

Although 10-1 is 10-1, I am starting to believe that my longshot selections do much better in races where I dislike the favorite or second favorite than they do in races where I don't find flaws with the chalk.

That's the great thing about exactas. When I bet a longshot, I always box at least one exacta. If the favorite looks legit, that's usually the play. Many times my longshot finishes 2nd and I hit a nice exacta, and of course when my longshot wins, if the favorite was legit it usually runs second and the exacta still pays even more. People always say that horseplayers are suckers and that there's a dumb money in the pools, but at most tracks, the exacta pools are the biggest pools, and exactas are the only exotic bet where you can be wrong and still win. With Doubles, you have to be right two times, you need two winners. With exactas, the favorite or second choice completes the exacta so often that you really only have to be concerned with finding a value play that runs first or second and you have a good chance of hitting the exacta keying your value play with one or two horses. Being able to win when your key horse loses is a great thing.

[pandy]

Thanks everyone who opined for your excellent feedback. For me it comes down to one thing, can you or can you not show a profit on the lower odds ranges.