Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dunbar
The article said "Many horse bets are the equivalent of hitting 17 with the dealer showing a 5-spot, of letting it ride on green at the roulette wheel."
I take exception to the 2nd half of that claim! The vast majority of horse bets are way worse than "letting it ride on green at the roulette wheel". Even with a double zero wheel, those roulette bets only lose at 5.2% on average. How many horse players (with the exception of absolutely everyone at derbytrail!) have cut the house edge to less than 5%?
|
But when we bet with a semi-informed (at least perceived) opinion aren't we taking what we think is an overlay? No rational person bets 0/00 and thinks they have an edge. . . So, is it really worse to at least
try to extract some value from a bet than to take a documented underlay simply because, over time, we're more likely to lose less from the standard roulette house edge than our inept handicapping/betting?