3/26-28 (CD): Derby Future Wager ~ Pool 5

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by moses

The futures wagers are bad bets...but I still make them because they can be fun.

In the past, I've picked different horses for each pool. This year, I just kept betting Concert Tour so I've got some money to win on him and then a bunch of small ($1 or $2) exactas with different horses in each pool and a few doubles with him. I've got a $1 exacta of Concert Tour over Hot Rod Charlie that will pay $1030. And while that's still probably not going to happen, it's kind of fun to have that possibility.

I hear ya. If you’re looking at it as a fun bet, it is.

[moses]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I hear ya. If you’re looking at it as a fun bet, it is.

Yeah. I mean, winning money is generally more fun than losing money. But I don't wager a ton of money on these future bets and consider them a little more like lottery tickets than typical horse bets.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I don’t see how betting a race that is 6 weeks away where there are so many variables could possibly be considered a good bet.

Just like any other horse bet, there is information to analyze. The time until the race is another variable. Often, adding a new variable is a good thing in betting, especially if you think you have a better handle on it than the majority of bettors.

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I’m sure all those people who bet Life Is Good thought they made a good bet.

Doesn’t everyone who makes any horse bet think they've made a good bet? I think you'd agree that 99%+ of them are wrong.

Originally Posted by Dahoss

So much can change in this game, with 3 year olds, daily. Why make it more difficult on yourself and your bankroll?

Why make any horse racing bet? With its house edge/takeout of 15-25% it would appear way more difficult than, say, NFL betting, where the house edge is less than 5%. But sometimes the difficulty presents opportunities for the betting public to make big mistakes.

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I just think it’s very difficult if not impossible to determine value this far out. Too much can happen.

It’s another variable. It's not impossible to analyze.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Just like any other horse bet, there is information to analyze. The time until the race is another variable. Often, adding a new variable is a good thing in betting, especially if you think you have a better handle on it than the majority of bettors.



Doesn’t everyone who makes any horse bet think they've made a good bet? I think you'd agree that 99%+ of them are wrong.



Why make any horse racing bet? With its house edge/takeout of 15-25% it would appear way more difficult than, say, NFL betting, where the house edge is less than 5%. But sometimes the difficulty presents opportunities for the betting public to make big mistakes.



It’s another variable. It's not impossible to analyze.

Yawn. Why not tell us who you think is a good value bet at this point and we will come back to the thread and see if you were right.

If you can’t see why these are bad value bets, nothing anyone says will change your mind. Comparing future bets to non future bets is intellectually dishonest and you know that.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Yawn. Why not tell us who you think is a good value bet at this point and we will come back to the thread and see if you were right.

Please explain how you will evaluate whether I was "right". Does my bet have to win to be right? If so, we have a very different definition of 'good bet'.

How about if my horse goes off at lower odds in the Derby than my odds in the Future Wager, does that make me right? If so, how will you evaluate a bet on All Others? (I can help you with that one if you're stumped.)

Originally Posted by Dahoss

If you can’t see why these are bad value bets, nothing anyone says will change your mind.

It's true that someone saying 'it's hard' or 'there's no value' will not get me to change my mind.

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Comparing future bets to non future bets is intellectually dishonest and you know that.

Calling someone "intellectually dishonest" because they disagree with you is pretty silly.

Just because you cannot see an edge in a game or a certain kind of bet, it does not mean that someone else cannot.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Please explain how you will evaluate whether I was "right". Does my bet have to win to be right? If so, we have a very different definition of 'good bet'.

How about if my horse goes off at lower odds in the Derby than my odds in the Future Wager, does that make me right? If so, how will you evaluate a bet on All Others? (I can help you with that one if you're stumped.)




It's true that someone saying 'it's hard' or 'there's no value' will not get me to change my mind.



Calling someone "intellectually dishonest" because they disagree with you is pretty silly.

Just because you cannot see an edge in a game or a certain kind of bet, it does not mean that someone else cannot.

LOL

How much is your ticket worth if you bet a horse in the future pool at 30-1, he goes off 5-1 in the Derby and runs 16th?

Right means making money. That’s what this is all about. If you feel like you’ve found an edge and can spot underlays in future pools....more power to you. But at the end of the day, if you’re not actually making money who gives a sh.it?

Plus...saying you have an edge and actually having one are two different things. For all of your posts on the matter I can’t recall many (if any) actual opinions on horses. So how would anyone know if you have an edge? Where is the proof?

Finally, I didn’t call you intellectually dishonest...yet. I said your analogy was. If you’re still stumped on what the difference between the two is I can help you out.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

How much is your ticket worth if you bet a horse in the future pool at 30-1, he goes off 5-1 in the Derby and runs 16th?

Right means making money. That’s what this is all about.

Okay, so by your definition, a bet is “right” only if it makes money. The reality is that winning or losing the bet has very little to do with whether you had an edge at the time you made the bet. You can lose 28 out of 30 times with your 30-1 shots and have a humongous edge.

Originally Posted by Dahoss

If you feel like you’ve found an edge and can spot underlays in future pools....more power to you. But at the end of the day, if you’re not actually making money who gives a sh.it?

Finally, there’s something I can agree with you on, as long as you’re using “end of the day” to mean ‘in the long run’.

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Plus...saying you have an edge and actually having one are two different things.

Two things in a row that make sense.

Originally Posted by Dahoss

For all of your posts on the matter I can’t recall many (if any) actual opinions on horses. So how would anyone know if you have an edge? Where is the proof?

Your definition of ‘proof’, I presume, is a longterm winning record? I could show you a log of my bets in the Derby Future Wager ever since I started betting it in 2008. Those bets have shown a solid profit. Showing those bets here is a lose/lose proposition for me. Either (1) I’d fail to convince you, or (2) I WOULD convince you (and possibly others here), and my edge next year would be smaller, thanks to the parimutual aspect.

I’ve filed a Sch C as a professional gambler for at least the past 27 years, showing a profit every year. Am I going to show those to you? No. Would it convince you if I did? Probably not. You might point out that the profits didn’t all come from horseracing. You’d be right. In fact, just 5-10% comes from horseracing bets. What those 27 Sch C’s do show is that I understand how to recognize and capitalize on an edge.

Here’s one more bit of evidence that I know how to recognize an edge (and I’ll agree it’s hardly “proof”). You can check out these two links. The Forbe’s article is good for background; the 2nd link mentions me specifically.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatsp...h=32592578307f

https://www.blackjackreview.com/wp/2...ack-ball-2020/

Despite the 'Blackjack Ball' name, the 110 or so invitees come from multiple types of gambling. Bill Benter was there for at least the past two years. It’s an elite group, and I’m proud to have been invited the past 3 years.

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Finally, I didn’t call you intellectually dishonest...yet. I said your analogy was. If you’re still stumped on what the difference between the two is I can help you out.

So my using an intellectually dishonest analogy doesn’t make me intellectually dishonest? Good to know!

Something tells me you will want to get in the last word…