Pick 6 Ticket Structure -- Crist

[chickenhead]

I was just about to say the same thing, Crist attributed his learning of the idea from Beyer back in the 80's.

I think it's one of those tough things, but I don't think Crist tries to claim in any way that it's his invention. I knew of it, and I can't even say from where, well before Crists book.

tlg -- anything to say on the thread? I know you don't generally jump into these things but I'm sure you could add something.

[the little guy]

I'm on my way out the door to Belmont.

I'll try to check in later.

[twindouble]

I can't see how you all can slide over something as important as having conditions were it warrants hedging your wager.

For example, lets say your live in the last leg of the pick 6 for $50 grand and up in a nine horse field with 3 horses and 4 others will bring consolations. Of the two left, just one has an outside shot to beat you with value. I'll bet that sucker good. That way, I have the consolations plus a nice win bet if I get beat for 6. Now to add that horse in the original play in the 6, it would have put to much pressure on my bankroll. To play an under ticket going deep in other races including the 3 in the last, I invest less money by not doing that. As stated in this thread some pick 6's require an investment most of us can't afford so you have to use whatever tools you have to make a profit.

Good luck,

T.D.

[chickenhead]

Originally Posted by jerry samovitz

The maker of the ticket should spend much time in considering the structure of the ticket for this reason.

This is what I keep coming back to, and what I think everyone agrees. It really is an extreme skill to structure good pick 6 tickets. But it's also just about impossible to talk about in generalities. The framework of miss whatever is a great framework to use, it puts someone on the right track -- but the actual shuffling and balancing of opinion vs. cost vs. value is where most people screw up. I think the framework just makes it slightly easier to NOT screw up.

I know when I structure tickets I can look at them and say "no, that set of tickets sucks" and then do some shuffling, moving B's up, A's down, adding or subtracting C's, and say "oh yes, that's much better"....but I can't really say how I know, or in general whether I'm right or not. It's an elusive thing.

[toetoe]

In fairness, I think Crist was credited by others as the inventor of the "avoid-one" as Crist has called it. He just never denied it, which is fine.

I'm pleasantly surprised that the new poster has not been piled upon by the naysayers. Amen to JS and thanks for sharing one of the all-too-few sensible approaches to pony-playing. He's no literary giant; just a razor-sharp, value-demanding winner at the races, judging from his published approaches, none of which includes touting four horses in EVERY STINKING RACE (Chris Russo voice simulated here).

[chickenhead]

Originally Posted by twindouble

As stated in this thread some pick 6's require an investment most of us can't afford so you have to use whatever tools you have to make a profit.

Twin, what you're saying is actually more nuanced than what I originally thought..at first I thought you just wanted to say that hedging is a good thing, which didn't have anything to do with ticket structure.

But I can see you are actually saying something much more than that, that you base your ticket structure in part on the ability to hedge against it in various pools later on. That is not something I do, but I can see how that makes some sense. Let me think about it.

[pic6vic]

Just to add some more history.

The author JS published his book in 1999. His experience comes from playing the pick 6 when it first came to Cal back in the 80's. In those days there was no carryover and the pools were larger.

[twindouble]

Originally Posted by chickenhead

Twin, what you're saying is actually more nuanced than what I originally thought..at first I thought you just wanted to say that hedging is a good thing, which didn't have anything to do with ticket structure.

But I can see you are actually saying something much more than that, that you base your ticket structure in part on the ability to hedge against it in various pools later on. That is not something I do, but I can see how that makes some sense. Let me think about it.

Well you and others here are much better at putting your thoughts in writing than I am, takes me a while to get there.

T.D.

[chickenhead]

Crist certainly talks about hedging quite a bit. Just as a for instance, he had a high opinion of Leroi in the mile, but the bar shoe announcement that am put him in a troubled mind over what was one of his major Pick 6 keys.

He resolved eventually to play the Pick 6 as planned, but change his late pick 4 to cover the possibility of Leroi getting beat. This moved Artie up and he ended up hitting the Pick 4 for $8K.

I think it makes sense to play a 4 that is somewhat different than a 6...but I'm not sure I would change a 6 just so I could play a different 4, or change it so I could backup another way, unless as you say TD that is the only way to get the coverage without the tickets getting out of control.

[Indulto]

As usual TD came right to the point:

Originally posted by twindouble
Someone explain to me how anyone can say they have a formula for picking the pick 6?

I first saw the term, “life-changing score,” in a Beyer book. Whether that phrase was coined by the author isn’t as significant as its association by almost all horseplayers with the Pick Six. Whether Mr. Samovitz or Mr. Crist was the first to publish a common approach to horizontal ticket structuring is not as interesting as the fact that cashing such wagers remains as challenging as it did prior to publication of both authors’ work.

With all due respect for these gentlemen, I wonder whether willingness to share wisdom with us was warranted while wily wager-structuring strategies as written were still winning? Did declining dividends decimate desire for daily deliberation or did diminishing deposits determine that documenting details should displace demonstrating them?

Books by Beyer and Crist are successful because both authors are extremely entertaining storytellers who enable their readers to vicariously experience the thrill of cashing tickets they are unlikely to duplicate on their own – even after reading them.

C-HD put it all in perspective:

Originally posted by chickenhead
... It really is an extreme skill to structure good pick 6 tickets. But it's also just about impossible to talk about in generalities.

[jerry samovitz]

If one works out the mathematics one can determine what hit rate they will have even in the Pick 6. Knowing the confidence level of your so called A picks and B picks etc. one can get a fairly accurate figure of confidence. The way I was playing pick 6's in the 80's I knew our group would hit a 6 around once every 5 days. We would hit 5 of 6, 3 of those 5 days and 4 or less 1 day. We were investing around $3,000 a day. Of course the results varied weekly but after a period of plays was fairly accurate. Arranging the tickets differently would of course produce different results but the percentage of confidence could be fairly well estimated before the event.

The problem, of course is the amount of the payoff. That of course can't be determined and determining the average payoff would take so many trials and it is subject to so much fluctuation that it is hard to estimate a risk reward ratio and therefore to determine a projected rate of profit or loss. WE wound up just over 20% return of capital.

What I'm trying to say is ticket structure doesn't have to be generalized and one can determine approximate confidence levels and of course thereby dictate sensible risk amounts.

When the payoff structure of the Pick 6 changed in California to 60% payout for 6 and 40% for 5 of the pool from 50/50 and then 70/30 I stopped playing except for occasionally.

It is still fun now and then but I don't think I can beat it in its current structure day in and day out. Of course that would not be true at the breeders cup where the payout has to be made and I think it can be a good bet sometimes.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by jerry samovitz

If one works out the mathematics one can determine what hit rate they will have even in the Pick 6. Knowing the confidence level of your so called A picks and B picks etc. one can get a fairly accurate figure of confidence. The way I was playing pick 6's in the 80's I knew our group would hit a 6 around once every 5 days. We would hit 5 of 6, 3 of those 5 days and 4 or less 1 day. We were investing around $3,000 a day. Of course the results varied weekly but after a period of plays was fairly accurate. Arranging the tickets differently would of course produce different results but the percentage of confidence could be fairly well estimated before the event.

The problem, of course is the amount of the payoff. That of course can't be determined and determining the average payoff would take so many trials and it is subject to so much fluctuation that it is hard to estimate a risk reward ratio and therefore to determine a projected rate of profit or loss. WE wound up just over 20% return of capital.

What I'm trying to say is ticket structure doesn't have to be generalized and one can determine approximate confidence levels and of course thereby dictate sensible risk amounts.

When the payoff structure of the Pick 6 changed in California to 60% payout for 6 and 40% for 5 of the pool from 50/50 and then 70/30 I stopped playing except for occasionally.

It is still fun now and then but I don't think I can beat it in its current structure day in and day out. Of course that would not be true at the breeders cup where the payout has to be made and I think it can be a good bet sometimes.

It seems to me there is a major contradiction between your first and second paragraphs. On the one hand you suggest that your " hit rate ", which I guess means theoretical chances of winning, can be determined in the Pick-6. Of course this is theoretically true, as one can theoretically determine the chances of each horse used in each race winning and thus derive the chances of " escaping " each race. No problem....FAR easier said than done but certainly possible. However, if one can do this I would say by the same token they should also at least roughly be able to figure out their expected payoff, both in general and specifically ( regardless of the number of trials which you claim are necessary ). I just don't believe both statements can be true.

Now, I can accept that you have MUCH more real life experience with playing the Pick-6 as the payoff percentages changed, as you suggested, however I fail to see how this should have changed your results given the success rate you claimed. So, you get less the supposed 3 out of 5 days you " merely " hit the conso, I would have to think this is more than made up with the substantially greater profits on the supposed one in 5 days you hit the Pick-6. Maybe I'm wrong but I am having trouble making real life sense out of this.

More than likely, assuming your assertions are true, what really happened is the Pick-6 players got more sophisticated over time and eliminated the edge you claim you had. But, then again, this would assume others apparently figured out " your " methods.

[toetoe]

little guy,

One last bit, and I'll hold my peace thereafter.

The payoff can't be predicted. The only upside is the "latent value," as when a poker player fills a hand, AND someone else fills HIS hand, and the pot swells exponentially. Consider: the 5-of-6 days keep the wealth in the black, but don't forget --- all decent 5's are signups, and the cash reserves become a problem. Now reduce the pool by 40%, and the bread-and-butter payoffs come closer to stale, naked bread. If you bet horses to win without knowing the odds, and favorites had a more usurious takeout than longshots, wouldn't you still want those few extra dimes when the favorites won? We can say we'd come out the same in the long run, but in the medium run, we might die of Gambler's Ruin.

Despite my failure to make much sense, I will now keep my promise. No, no, fellas, please. No vote to convince me to stay.

[the little guy]

I'm chalking it up to my hangover that I am havong trouble putting everything in your post together.....but......

I understand but what I was at least trying to say is that theoretically if you can figure out one's chances of hitting a certain Pick-6, which the original poster claimed, then by the same token one can figure out their expected returns. You may well be right that a finite pool like the Pick-6 has a much different distribution than other exotics but I still think that reasonable estimates can be made and there is certainly enough of a sample size now to check this out.

I also hear what you're saying about " gambler's ruin ", though withholding and " signers " are often two significantly different things, and I would think that the syndicate the original poster was discussing, which according to him was in a position to put in $15K a week, would be in a financial position to deal with the strain withholding tax can put on one's bankroll. It is, however, a very legitimate point you bring up. However, considering the original poster's claim of 20% returns, which is almost equal to the withholding, and his claims of actually hitting one in five Pick-6s, I cannot say his group would be subjected to the problem of " gambler's ruin ". With those numbers they would have no problem staying afloat.

[classhandicapper]

I have one thing to say about this.

There is no doubt in my mind that many people using what they believe to be original betting strategies and handicapping insights have plenty of company out there even if they don't know it.

A couple of months after I first read Andy Beyer's Picking Winners (it had just come out), I started compiling Fractional Par Time tables to go along with his Final Time tables. Since then, many books have been written on pace handicapping, making pace figures, and services have formed that make Beyer style pace figures. I don't think any of us stole the idea or had it first. I'd bet my life against a dollar that some people out there were making high quality pace figures before we were all born.

We all read the same stuff and then try to expand on it to get an edge. Many of us take the same exact road independently. The guy that publishes or sells the info first may get some extra credit, but he is rarely alone.

We are lucky when we find each other in a place like this and fill in some gaps for each other and shorten the path for those newer to the game.