odds line

[cj]

Originally Posted by imofe

Maybe it's me and I am reading this wrong. But if long term I considered 2 contenders in 5 horse fields and my 3 throwouts won 28% of the time I would not be happy.

I think you'd be surprised.

[imofe]

Originally Posted by cj

I think you'd be surprised.

If I am forced to pick only two horses in every five horse field, I could see 28%. But in races where I think only two can possibly win out of five, 28% is too high in my opinion.

[TrifectaMike]

Originally Posted by imofe

Maybe it's me and I am reading this wrong. But if long term I considered 2 contenders in 5 horse fields and my 3 throwouts won 28% of the time I would not be happy.

Reality does get in the way of expected happiness... sorry about that. Use a a set of values that makes you happy.

Mike

[Capper Al]

Btw, I don't do a top two or three out of the field. My amount of contenders varies from race to race depending on the elimination rules. I could have four contenders in a five horse field or two contenders in an eight horse field. The non-contenders are considered not to play as a key horse.

[HUSKER55]

Capper Al, I agree!

The way I make my line is not flashy. I shove points around. In an 8 horse field all horses start at 12%. Then I adjust for speed, form, class, angles and etc.

In the end I have a ranking and I look for value based on my strike.

It is what works for me. My advise to all of you is, if it works for you then phoey on everything else. If you need to make changes make sure YOU are comfortable with the changes cause YOU will be living with them.

There are plenty of math guys here who will help you with whatever you want to know.

JMHO

[Speed Figure]

For me all horses that are 9/1 or less on my odds line are contenders. So looking at the 7th race at DMR, I have 6 contenders in this race. The #2, #3, #6 look like the best overlay's right now.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Speed Figure

For me all horses that are 9/1 or less on my odds line are contenders. So looking at the 7th race at DMR, I have 6 contenders in this race. The #2, #3, #6 look like the best overlay's right now.

Along this line, I generally abstain from betting any horse on my line as a potential bet if I give them less than natural odds to win. So in a 6 horse field, they have to be 5 to 1 or less, a 10 horses field 9 to 1 or less, and so on.

[Speed Figure]

The real guide for me is my PPO line, Possible Public Odds. You can see it does a pretty good job of letting me know where a good overlay can come from. The #2 would not have qualify because his odds were lower than the PPO of 12/1 at post time, the #3 was tabbed at 12/1 and went off at 14/1 and the #6 was tabbed at 8/1 and went off at 12/1. I look for horses that go off at or above the PPO that are 9/1 or lower on my odds line.

[overthehill]

experientially , i would think that if 25% i can collect on by bettnig the three non contenders in a six horse field that should be profitable. i think it makes a big difference if the the logical favorite and or second choice take up a lot of the pool. for example, if in a six horse field the top two choices are both well under 2-1 the likelihood of another horse winning is way less than 25%. the same would be true if the favorite in the race is clearly odds on. I would also distinguish in situations where there are many horses making a surface switch for the first time. there are also situations that make it more likely for the the favorite not to run well. for example if its drawn outside in a route or involved in a speed duel. for example if i had know that velasquez would have engaged console the way he did I could have easily landed on shark, off the reclaim despite the generous odds. so my contention if that every race is different. the other side of the equation is that when the chalk is a big closer and there there is either no speed or a single speed in the race.

[overthehill]

that makes no sense to me. if the field is 12 and i think a horse has an 8-5 money chance of winning and he goes off at 4-1 one should be making a good size wager on it. in some fashion. in fact if you are concerned with the size of the field you can save with all the non-contenders and still make money. i suspect that many experienced cappers can figure out horses that are likely to win 25% of the time irrespective of the size of the field. My own experience has been that I lose many more races to the chalk and second choice than the rest of the field, whether that number is 75% or 80% is worth examining.

[classhandicapper]

One insight into line making I've learned from experience is that the horse's rank within the field can be significant. It's very easy for 1 or 2 horses to not fire their "A" race or get a really tough trip and allow a much inferior 3rd best horse to win. It's a lot tougher for that happen to 5-6 horses even if you not as far from the top as the 7th ranked horse.

[classhandicapper]

I want to add one thing about the "line" approach. This comes from the brain of Warren Buffett when it comes to valuing stocks. But I think it's applicable.

In the stock market, people often try to compensate for some level of ignorance by insisting on a higher risk premium. Applied to racing that would mean if there are certain things going on in a race that you aren't really sure about (perhaps a distance or surface change, a layoff, will a typically consistent horse bounce back off a single bad effort etc..), you would compensate by insisting on a higher odds gap between your line and the actual price before betting than if you thought you understood the race thoroughly.

It's a sensible idea, but Warren tends to dismiss stocks (races) where these questions exist because there are people out there that may understand them better than he does and he could easily be WAY off.

I know I can't make an odds line for a maiden turf race with a lot of first time starters and horses switching to the grass for the first time. So I don't even try to think in those terms.

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

One insight into line making I've learned from experience is that the horse's rank within the field can be significant. It's very easy for 1 or 2 horses to not fire their "A" race or get a really tough trip and allow a much inferior 3rd best horse to win. It's a lot tougher for that happen to 5-6 horses even if you not as far from the top as the 7th ranked horse.

Of course.
The average ranking of winners is in the area of 2.5 to 3. I gather that this corresponds roughly to the mean opinion of the betting public, i.e., the cumulative percentage of winning beginning with the fave.

[Capper Al]

No, one can't go by odds line. A false favorite is usually one of the top three figured horses if your method is any good. This false favorite won't get eliminated going by odds valuation. And worse yet, the capper loses an opportunity to bet against him.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

No, one can't go by odds line. A false favorite is usually one of the top three figured horses if your method is any good. This false favorite won't get eliminated going by odds valuation. And worse yet, the capper loses an opportunity to bet against him.

You lost me. Isn't a false favorite just a horse that is overbet, like any other overlay, and just also happens to be the most heavily bet? You can still consider him a non-contender, or consider him a contender with a higher line than the others. How does that eliminate betting against him?