Quinella at Belmont?

[Dunbar]

joeydb, If you're interested in betting quinellas, you might take a look at an article I wrote in 2002, "Getting More Bang for your Quinella Buck"

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/...t/Quinella.htm

The idea is that when quinellas and exactas are offered in the same race, you're presented with 2 different ways to bet a quinella: You can either make a quinella bet, or you can make 2 exacta bets in a proportion so that it acts just like a quinella bet.

The article explains how to determine which way will give the bigger payoff.

[Linny]

If the quinella probable is more than half of the exacta, play the quinella by doubling the base value of the bet.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Linny

If the quinella probable is more than half of the exacta, play the quinella by doubling the base value of the bet.

You're suggesting betting twice as much, right? You would have twice the money at risk and may or may not be making the better bet. You can't use a quinella in place of a single exacta bet.

What you can do is use two exacta bets in place of a quinella bet. Betting the same total amount on the two exactas as you would have bet on the single quinella, you can sometimes get a better return.

[jwkniska]

any race that has both exactas and quinellas, evaluate what a $2 quinella pays vs a $1 exacta box.

Play whichever one pays more as it's basically the same $2 bet, so play the combination that pays higher. In some cases the quin will pay more, in some, the exacta pays more. Get the most bang for your buck.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by jwkniska

any race that has both exactas and quinellas, evaluate what a $2 quinella pays vs a $1 exacta box.

Play whichever one pays more as it's basically the same $2 bet, so play the combination that pays higher. In some cases the quin will pay more, in some, the exacta pays more. Get the most bang for your buck.

It isn't that simple. The $1 exacta box will have two different payouts. What do you do when one is larger than the $2 quinella and one is smaller?

The answer is not that complicated, and it's in the article I linked to above.

[JolyB]

I have often followed the quinella will-pays in races 2 and 4 on NYRA races, comparing them to the exacta will-pays on the same combinations.

I've found that the quinella will generally pay more than the same amount invested in an exacta box on the same horses when the shorter priced horse of the two wins, and will pay less than the exacta box when the longer priced horse of the two wins. My decision of whether to use the quinella or exacta box often comes down to which of the two horses I think is the best one to have on top. If the shorter priced one, I go quinella; if the longer priced one, I go exacta box.

I know that this oversimplifies a much more complicated equation. This method has worked for me as a way of sometimes using the quinella to obtain a slightly better payoff on combinations I want to use.

The article you referred to was very helpful. One sentence from that article makes this process very difficult:

" There will always be some uncertainty in the final payoffs due to last minute bets and off-track bets that are added to the pari-mutuel pools after the close of betting."

Unfortunately, this statement is even more true today than when the article was written, and sometimes has the effect of defeating the very search for extra value that this process attempts to accomplish.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by JolyB

I have often followed the quinella will-pays in races 2 and 4 on NYRA races, comparing them to the exacta will-pays on the same combinations.

I've found that the quinella will generally pay more than the same amount invested in an exacta box on the same horses when the shorter priced horse of the two wins, and will pay less than the exacta box when the longer priced horse of the two wins. My decision of whether to use the quinella or exacta box often comes down to which of the two horses I think is the best one to have on top. If the shorter priced one, I go quinella; if the longer priced one, I go exacta box.

I know that this oversimplifies a much more complicated equation. This method has worked for me as a way of sometimes using the quinella to obtain a slightly better payoff on combinations I want to use.

The article I linked to assumes you have no reason to think that the exacta has more overlay value than the exacta reverse. We are merely considering using them in place of a quinella. When you bet a quinella, you don't care which of the 2 horses comes in first because you get paid the same either way. If you're going to bet exactas instead, you bet them in amounts that will give you the same net win, regardless of order. (there are examples in the article.)

If, on the other hand, you have an opinion that one of the exacta orders has a bigger edge, then my article doesn't apply.

Originally Posted by JolyB

The article you referred to was very helpful. One sentence from that article makes this process very difficult:

" There will always be some uncertainty in the final payoffs due to last minute bets and off-track bets that are added to the pari-mutuel pools after the close of betting."

Unfortunately, this statement is even more true today than when the article was written, and sometimes has the effect of defeating the very search for extra value that this process attempts to accomplish.

I'm glad you found it helpful.

Yes, I agree that there's even more late betting today, and the quinella pools are generally pretty small and not that common. (at the time of the article, Santa Anita was offering quinellas on every race.)

Still, if I liked two horses approximately equally in a race where quinellas were offered, I'd do the "Q-test" check to see if the exactas offered a better payout. The additional edge may or may not be there after the final betting, but I'd rather be on the +15% side going into the last minute than the -15% side.

[Kitan]

Originally Posted by JolyB

I have often followed the quinella will-pays in races 2 and 4 on NYRA races, comparing them to the exacta will-pays on the same combinations.

I've found that the quinella will generally pay more than the same amount invested in an exacta box on the same horses when the shorter priced horse of the two wins, and will pay less than the exacta box when the longer priced horse of the two wins. My decision of whether to use the quinella or exacta box often comes down to which of the two horses I think is the best one to have on top. If the shorter priced one, I go quinella; if the longer priced one, I go exacta box.

I know that this oversimplifies a much more complicated equation. This method has worked for me as a way of sometimes using the quinella to obtain a slightly better payoff on combinations I want to use.

The article you referred to was very helpful. One sentence from that article makes this process very difficult:

" There will always be some uncertainty in the final payoffs due to last minute bets and off-track bets that are added to the pari-mutuel pools after the close of betting."

Unfortunately, this statement is even more true today than when the article was written, and sometimes has the effect of defeating the very search for extra value that this process attempts to accomplish.

I think, from what I've seen, that generally the $2 Q will pay better than a $1 Ex. The cases I've seen where it hasn't is where there's been a double digit winner with the 1st or 2nd fav second, which makes sense. If you think the two faves will run 1-2 then it seems the Q is the way to go.