Winning Odds

[delfman]

Originally Posted by soflant

I was wondering if anyone has done a study if a handicapper would bet simply bet odds what would be the best range of odds to bet on? In other words what is the best odds to bet on that show a consistent profit? I hope my questions make sense. I am free to answer all responses. Thanks in advance.

I haven't done a study but here's my 2 cents.
bet 2-1 through 4-1 in 6,7, or 8 horse fields sprinting on the dirt. -to show a consistent profit, or stated another way. the 2nd or 3rd fav. sprinting on dirt in a 7 horse field. this is assuming you are not in any way handicapping the race.

[formula_2002]

COST OF BETTING CHART DUE TO TRACK TAKE OUT

[ranchwest]

Originally Posted by delfman

your data may be right, but that does not sway my opinion. Maybe just lessens it a tad. so I change MUCH to greater.
the type of race, be it a sprint or route, for whichever type of condition is also going to factor in to the odds of a horse.
IE - betting 2-1 shots in a 12 horse field going long on the turf for any condition other than high $ stakes horses is simply stupid.
betting 2-1 shots in a 6 horse field sprinting on the dirt is MUCH smarter IMO.


your data, absolutely in no way would help anyone win $ betting horses.
there are way too many variables involved to even be having this discussion in the first place.

Yeah, let's not accept facts. Let's use what we have in our heads.

[delfman]

Originally Posted by ranchwest

Yeah, let's not accept facts. Let's use what we have in our heads.

so what is it that jeff p said which you consider a fact?
that according to his data a 2-1 shot in a 6 horse field has the exact same chance to win as a 2-1 shot in a 12 horse field.


and BTW, who asked you anyways? are you jeff p's sex slave or something?

[ranchwest]

Originally Posted by delfman

so what is it that jeff p said which you consider a fact?
that according to his data a 2-1 shot in a 6 horse field has the exact same chance to win as a 2-1 shot in a 12 horse field.


and BTW, who asked you anyways? are you jeff p's sex slave or something?

Jeff pulled his facts from his database.

You pulled your "facts" out of your ass.

[headhawg]

Originally Posted by delfman

so what is it that jeff p said which you consider a fact?
that according to his data a 2-1 shot in a 6 horse field has the exact same chance to win as a 2-1 shot in a 12 horse field.


and BTW, who asked you anyways? are you jeff p's sex slave or something?

You really don't understand probabilities and odds, do you? Please keep putting your money into the pools. Much, much money. Get a third mortgage. Thank you.

And Jeff P has a sex slave? Damn...I have to finish coding my software.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by delfman

so what is it that jeff p said which you consider a fact?
that according to his data a 2-1 shot in a 6 horse field has the exact same chance to win as a 2-1 shot in a 12 horse field.


and BTW, who asked you anyways? are you jeff p's sex slave or something?

I really can't top Ranchwest's comment (actually laughed out loud at that one), but I will add that the winning percentages make more sense if you think about odds distribution in actual races.

A 2-1 shot in a 6-horse field is likely (not always, but likely) not even the race favorite, unless it's a field where everyone is single-digit odds. In a 6-horse field, if you've got some horses over 10-1, one of them is also probably lower than 2-1.

In the 12-horse field, the 2-1 is much more likely to be the favorite. Sure, sometimes you might get a 12-horse field with (for example) an 8-5 shot and a 2-1 shot, but that's not how the odds are usually distributed. So we're likely talking about a 2-1 second choice in the 6-horse field vs. a 2-1 favorite in the 12-horse field, and considering how much more often the favorite wins than the second choice, that's why the actual winning percentages are much closer than you think they would be.

[pandy]

The stats that Jeff showed here are in line with other similar charts I've seen. Yes, it's true, that lower odds horses have higher ROI's than higher odds horses...if you are betting all of them.

So, yeah, if you bet every horse that goes off between the odds of 1-9 and 5-2 and every horse that goes off between the odds of 3-1 to 20-1, you'll have both a higher win percentage and a higher return on the lower odds bets.

However, that doesn't mean that the lower odds range bets are better bets because no one bets on every horse in a particular odds range.

I've run hundreds of tests on various different handicapping methods and I've found that it's profoundly easier (and more likely) to show a flat bet profit on win bets if you're not betting any favorites at all. In fact, I think you could make a good case that you should never bet any horse that's under 6-1 odds.

Of course, the ROI also goes up if you don't bet to win but use the key horses in a few exactas or other kinds of exotic wagers.

So when it comes to longshots, try this...

Pick two odds ranges, one with favorites one with longshots... for favorites, say 4-5 to 5-1....for longshots from 6-1 to 30-1. Let's say that you only bet horses in these two odds ranges, but, you use sound handicapping logic to pick those horses. That's a good way to see how you are at picking winners in lower or higher odds ranges. I think that most handicappers will find that they will have a higher ROI in the 6-1 to 30-1 range, simply because there are more overlays in that range, and, you have more leverage. There's no room for error when betting favorites. Many horses that appear to be legitimate favorites lose because they simply didn't run well that day, or they got a rough trip, or the pace went against them. There's simply not enough room for error.

[green80]

there are too many factors involved but just to answer you question, I have trouble making any money at anything much less than 6/1

[delfman]

Originally Posted by ranchwest

Jeff pulled his facts from his database.

You pulled your "facts" out of your ass.

yeah well I trust "facts" out of my ass WAY more than jeff p's facts pulled from his database.


any of you sheets/database/figures guys want to go head to head for a grand at derbywars someday. I'd love to take your $


I'm only trying to help the clueless guy who started this thread. Clearly he has no skill whatsoever handicapping or he wouldn't have asked such a dumb question.

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by delfman

I haven't done a study but here's my 2 cents.
bet 2-1 through 4-1 in 6,7, or 8 horse fields sprinting on the dirt. -to show a consistent profit, or stated another way. the 2nd or 3rd fav. sprinting on dirt in a 7 horse field. this is assuming you are not in any way handicapping the race.

I'm your huckleberry.

Is 10,000 races enough?

[delfman]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

I'm your huckleberry.

Is 10,000 races enough?

so what are you saying dave?
that you fancy a heads up match at derbywars for a grand?


my point to this thread is that your facts are useless!
it is bullshit data! it means nothing!
according to all of you people spouting off in this thread, every horse that goes off at the same odds in every race run around the country is somehow similar to each other. if you find value in knowing what the winning %'s of post time odds are, than you need to find a new way to spend your $. Or better yet, please proceed!

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by delfman

so what are you saying dave?
that you fancy a heads up match at derbywars for a grand?


my point to this thread is that your facts are useless!
it is bullshit data! it means nothing!
according to all of you people spouting off in this thread, every horse that goes off at the same odds in every race run around the country is somehow similar to each other. if you find value in knowing what the winning %'s of post time odds are, than you need to find a new way to spend your $. Or better yet, please proceed!

Sorry I wasted your time with facts.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by delfman

so what are you saying dave?
that you fancy a heads up match at derbywars for a grand?


my point to this thread is that your facts are useless!
it is bullshit data! it means nothing!
according to all of you people spouting off in this thread, every horse that goes off at the same odds in every race run around the country is somehow similar to each other. if you find value in knowing what the winning %'s of post time odds are, than you need to find a new way to spend your $. Or better yet, please proceed!

What you wrote here is true, but it's also not the point you made earlier about 2-1 horses that people were disproving using facts. Moving the goalposts doesn't make your earlier statements correct.

[mhaney0423]

Originally Posted by delfman

so what are you saying dave?
that you fancy a heads up match at derbywars for a grand?


my point to this thread is that your facts are useless!
it is bullshit data! it means nothing!
according to all of you people spouting off in this thread, every horse that goes off at the same odds in every race run around the country is somehow similar to each other. if you find value in knowing what the winning %'s of post time odds are, than you need to find a new way to spend your $. Or better yet, please proceed!

My money's on DAVE........sidebets anyone???