Picking winners or finding value?

[adwplayingfool]

With the current state and high takeout percentages what is the way to go? finding a 10-1 who CAN win or a 2-1 that SHOULD win? in the end it comes down to cashin your ticket or throwing it out but what is the generzl consensus on the best way to make your play.

[CBedo]

I'd rather have a 10/1 that should win!

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by CBedo

I'd rather have a 10/1 that should win!

These days I can't even find a horse that I think should win going off at 2-1. I am lucky to see even money.

[adwplayingfool]

I have found that on what I call " pool picking" I have to spend a significant amount of time but can be rather succesful.
1. Find a weak favorite
2. find a strong underdog
3. closely analyze pools until post time
4. lay into a strong underdog as they load on a P/S bet where faves have 60-75% of the $ on them and your horse has under 15% but you feel the favorite could or should do 3rd or worse
I am very amateur and always looking to gain knowledge and unfortunately can not regulate myself to only these plays yet when I have it has been profitable

[ranchwest]

10/1 buys 10 more tickets.
2/1 buys 2 more tickets.

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by adwplayingfool

With the current state and high takeout percentages what is the way to go? finding a 10-1 who CAN win or a 2-1 that SHOULD win? in the end it comes down to cashin your ticket or throwing it out but what is the generzl consensus on the best way to make your play.

To me, finding value does not mean betting horses indiscriminately merely because their odds are high, nor arbitrarily excluding horses because their odds are low. A successful value approach has to recognize the valid percentages associated with prominent handicapping factors, and the reality that the bulk of winners comes from the lower-to-middle odds ranges. But (as far as your basic question), as long as an appropriate blend of factors is being used for the evaluation, I'll take an overlay (whether at lower or higher odds) over an underlay every time. (Expressed in the terms you used, it's not the mere fact that you tear up tickets, but the rate at which you tear them up versus the return that you receive when you cash them.)

(It's also been shown that you can include a low-odds horse that is slightly underlaid in a group wager with overlaid horses, and receive a higher return than if the underlay were excluded. So, it's also possible to have the best of both worlds.)

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

These days I can't even find a horse that I think should win going off at 2-1. I am lucky to see even money.

I take it from your comment that those horses that "should win" are not doing so frequently enough to produce a profit. All the more reason to give consideration to the chances of every horse in the field in light of its odds, rather than focusing solely on finding that one most likely winner.

[macdiarmida]

adwplayingfool wrote:
what is the way to go? finding a 10-1 who CAN win or a 2-1 that SHOULD win?

You need to be able to determine which way to go in any given situation. Why limit yourself to either longshots or faves?

IMO it's more like taking the things you like about a horse vs. its negatives, THEN looking at the odds and seeing if there's an overlay there for you. 2-1 does not mean the horse should win. There are enough 2-1s that don't deserve being that and the good 10-1 might still get beaten by a 20-1 that looks like nothing in the DRF. OTOH 2-1 might be a gift in some situations (e.g., lone speed horse vs. otherwise equivalent deep closers) and the 10-1 may be so just because others were bet down because they had the big/popular trainers and jocks. [EDIT] Essentially, yeah, what overlay wrote while I was busy writing my post.

[cmoore]

This game is not about picking winners. It's about finding value. Value can be a 3-1 who should be even money..Value can also be a 30-1 shot who should be 10-1. When searching for value. Losing streaks will occur much more frequently compared to picking the most likely winner..This is where it gets tough mentally. Finding races with weak favorites is a good starting point like
adwplayingfool mentioned..

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Originally Posted by adwplayingfool

4. lay into a strong underdog as they load on a P/S bet where faves have 60-75% of the $ on them and your horse has under 15% but you feel the favorite could or should do 3rd or worse

Why would you possibly bet one horse to place/show if you feel that the favorite should do 3rd or worse?

[Jeff P]

Skills Outline:

Reliable repeatable methodology/methodologies for:

1. Determining probability.

2. Determining value.

3. Play or pass decision making.

4. Backing an opinion to maximize returns.

5. Bet sizing/growing a bankroll.

6. Record keeping.

7. R&D/constantly working to improve each area of your game.

In addition, the ability to find better pricing helps.


-jp

.

[CapperLou]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Skills Outline:

Reliable repeatable methodology/methodologies for:

1. Determining probability.

2. Determining value.

3. Play or pass decision making.

4. Backing an opinion to maximize returns.

5. Bet sizing/growing a bankroll.

6. Record keeping.

7. R&D/constantly working to improve each area of your game.

In addition, the ability to find better pricing helps.


-jp

.

Excellent advice Jeff.

The above will give you an "edge" and you always need an edge to make a wager and going further--you always need an "edge" to be profitable over the long run. This is a cardinal rule for me....

[Vinnie]

Jeff P:

I hope that you are well? Sometimes reading posts like the one that you presented in this thread are just the kind of posts that I need to keep myself focused when handicapping the races.

Have a Great Day and weekend Jeff.

All the BEST!

[lamboguy]

my best advice would be to keep it simple, instead of trying to figure how much you are going to win, try to figure out how not to lose, or lose less. you will get your winners that way.


by the way, most of you guys out there work with good sets of numbers and programs, andi realise that some guys are winning or were winning in the past. i promise you that going forward that will not alway's be the case. this is still a parimutual game and only the strong survive, eventually there will be only strong ones left.

[46zilzal]

Too many people look for a singular result from a chaotic adventure: there are MULTIPLE scenario outcomes to each and every race. Exploit the varieties of results and far less frustration awaits you at the windows.