Are contenders more important than selections?

[whodoyoulike]

Thanks Tom.

Again, I'm uncertain what is meant by this post. But, my contenders are get creative (4/1) and dave the usher (6/1).

My selection is that the will finish ahead of the .

My bet will depend on how one or the other looks in the paddock and/or post parade.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by no breathalyzer

Best way to play just bet you're best bets and stop betting races for action or to prove something

You beg the question. What constitutes a "best bet"?

[no breathalyzer]

Originally Posted by AndyC

You beg the question. What constitutes a "best bet"?

It can be a # of different things... i like trip handicapping but i don't put all my eggs in that basket. It can be anything from bad pace scenario last start to a positive one, running against a track bias. (which i will say is over used).. key trainer angels .. jockey clowning ect.. even will use the old stand by angle on a horse that i put in stable mail in the past. ONLY IF STILL GOT CONDITIONS LEFT!

I want to red board so hard rite now there was a horse at Bel. today that both them talking horses guys missed that won today that was a best bet for example

[EMD4ME]

If one is trying to make profit in this game or survive VIA exotics (PICK 4's, PICK 5's and PICK 6's) you must be finite in SOME of your selections so you can weight combos the right way.

If you are betting to win or place and looking to survive, then you can handicap a race down to 3 or 4 and bet the longer of the 3 or 4.

Just my 2 cents

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by no breathalyzer

It can be a # of different things... i like trip handicapping but i don't put all my eggs in that basket. It can be anything from bad pace scenario last start to a positive one, running against a track bias. (which i will say is over used).. key trainer angels .. jockey clowning ect.. even will use the old stand by angle on a horse that i put in stable mail in the past. ONLY IF STILL GOT CONDITIONS LEFT!

I want to red board so hard rite now there was a horse at Bel. today that both them talking horses guys missed that won today that was a best bet for example

So your best bet has nothing to do with price? In my view there is a distinction between most probable winner and best bet.

[no breathalyzer]

Originally Posted by EMD4ME

If one is trying to make profit in this game or survive VIA exotics (PICK 4's, PICK 5's and PICK 6's) you must be finite in SOME of your selections so you can weight combos the right way.

If you are betting to win or place and looking to survive, then you can handicap a race down to 3 or 4 and bet the longer of the 3 or 4.

Just my 2 cents

I hate pick 3's 4's and 5's because that means i have to risk $$$ with out seeing what i'm betting on before race.. too many times i bet then see a horse that looks off or even slightly off to how did this horse pass the vet. i will only play pick 3 or 4 if i really love a horse that is a bomb. I like the crush the race approach the wiser i get

[no breathalyzer]

Originally Posted by AndyC

So your best bet has nothing to do with price? In my view there is a distinction between most probable winner and best bet.

I never bet a horse under 9/5.. even then its gonna be horse falls down in my mind to lose... to correct my statement there are times i will play exactors to get better value when price is too short

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by EMD4ME

If one is trying to make profit in this game or survive VIA exotics (PICK 4's, PICK 5's and PICK 6's) you must be finite in SOME of your selections so you can weight combos the right way.....

If I was playing a P-6 and I had to make a choice on a single between a horse I thought should be 2-1 and was actually 6/5 versus a horse I thought should be 4-1 and was actually 12-1, it would be a no-brainer. The 2-1 would be the choice every time. Long horizontal bets are not the place to bet value over probability. On a vertical or short horizontal, I am all over the 12-1.

[no breathalyzer]

i will also add i truly believe too many cappers put to much in to the ''value'' thing.. just pick the most likely winner.. if the odds aint to you're liking just past the damn race. I seen it too many times im gonna take this 13-1 shoot cause of value ... ok maybe they horse should be 4-1 in you're mind , still don't mean its gonna win today .. its like flushing $$ down the drain

[no breathalyzer]

also if when you try to pick the most likely winner and you come up with the chalk all the time .. you are doing it wrong

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

This game is about profit...bottom line net profit. you can pick all of the winners that you can BUT in the long run did you make money?

A player must make a decision : do I want to have fun when I bet ( there is nothing wrong with that), or do I want to make money. When you play for profit you do all of the things that must be done to make profit. No personal likes and dislikes it is a business that has a plan of operation and evaluating the race contenders becomes of utmost importance AND when there is no edge you sit on your wallet and don't bet. Simple and not fun.

[pandy]

You have to be flexible. Let's say that my Best Bet is the 1 horse in the 1st at Belmont, my picks are 1-2-3, the 1 horse is 5-1 on the ml and I expect to get at least 5-2. I feel that the horse to beat is the 2. A minute before post, the 1 is 7-5, the 2 is 6-1 and the 3 is 5-2. At this point I can either pass the race, because the 1 is not a good bet, or I can bet the overlay, the 2 that is 6-1. I have to admit, many times I've passed the race without checking the odds on the other two horses and missed big overlay winners. If you feel that you have the right contenders, it pays to check the board on all contenders.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Originally Posted by pandy

You have to be flexible. Let's say that my Best Bet is the 1 horse in the 1st at Belmont, my picks are 1-2-3, the 1 horse is 5-1 on the ml and I expect to get at least 5-2. I feel that the horse to beat is the 2. A minute before post, the 1 is 7-5, the 2 is 6-1 and the 3 is 5-2. At this point I can either pass the race, because the 1 is not a good bet, or I can bet the overlay, the 2 that is 6-1. I have to admit, many times I've passed the race without checking the odds on the other two horses and missed big overlay winners. If you feel that you have the right contenders, it pays to check the board on all contenders.

Very well thought out approach Pandy. But that's to be expected with your experience and fine web site. I love how you use the win bet along with select exotic bets as an overall approach as the combination prevents lng losing runs.

[Capper Al]

Let me say that I do categorize my contenders in two ways, sort(selection) and to-bet or not-to-bet. Today at Woodbine my top selection hit 5 out of 10 races. My contenders hit 8 out of 10 races missing out twice. I had 7 out of 8 remaining winning contenders in my to-bet category. Today it would have been better to play the selections.

Race 7 at Woodbine my contenders were 4-1-11-9. 4 and 9 were my only two to-bet contenders. Their odds were 1.55 - 6.80 - 9.60 - 8.90, respectively. Did I need to know that the 4 was preferred to the 9? By playing the to-bet contenders with odds, I didn't.

I have just finished a period of playing without regard to my selection order with mixed results at best. I'm now back to finding a way to include my selection order.

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

Let me say that I do categorize my contenders in two ways, sort(selection) and to-bet or not-to-bet. Today at Woodbine my top selection hit 5 out of 10 races. My contenders hit 8 out of 10 races missing out twice. I had 7 out of 8 remaining winning contenders in my to-bet category. Today it would have been better to play the selections.

Race 7 at Woodbine my contenders were 4-1-11-9. 4 and 9 were my only two to-bet contenders. Their odds were 1.55 - 6.80 - 9.60 - 8.90, respectively. Did I need to know that the 4 was preferred to the 9? By playing the to-bet contenders with odds, I didn't.

I have just finished a period of playing without regard to my selection order with mixed results at best. I'm now back to finding a way to include my selection order.

I'm not following.

Race 7 at Woodbine my contenders were 4-1-11-9. 4 and 9 were my only two to-bet contenders. Their odds were 1.55 - 6.80 - 9.60 - 8.90, respectively. Did I need to know that the 4 was preferred to the 9? By playing the to-bet contenders with odds, I didn't.

Your contenders 4-1-etc., are in your selection ranking order but, you are preferring the 4 over the 9 because of the lower odds or because the 4 is your first selection? I'm just not understanding.

Why did you dismiss the 1 & 11?

Without seeing the PP's, I would be ranking my contenders in who I think can beat whom in some order and eliminating them based on something else i.e., how they look in paddock, odds, weather etc.