Handicapping vs Money Management

Ok, guys, he's not asking HOW to pick a winner(s). He's asking what to do after he's done that. Stop telling him to bet an overlay.

I've been around here a short amount of time, but it seems like most guys around here play multi-race wagers and reduce their level of risk by covering. There's a good thread on multi-race wagering that BTW weighed in on called SA Pick 6 carryover, or something to that effect. There are some good lessons in that.

As far as money management goes, from a basic level what I would suggest is figuring out exactly what your bankroll is and exactly how much you can afford to wager when you do play. So, if you have $10,000 per year bankroll and you play 100 times a year, you can plan on having, on average $100 every day you play. This is helpful because it tells you what types of wagers you can play consistently and, realistically, have a chance of success. If one has $100 to play when he/she wagers, they are not pick 6 players most likely...more like rolling Pk 3 and Pk 4. Maybe not even that depending on the aversion to risk a player has personally.

Also, what I think you might be hinting at with money management is the notion of changing the amount bet depending on your position as you go along. For instance, some folks say if you're losing you should bet more to make up for what you lost when you eventually do win. This is suspect, but some folks subscribe to the theory that, at some point, they're "due." I say baloney, every race is a new set of circumstances, you could go on forever and keep picking a number based on handicapping and still have relatively little success. In other words, I don't think it's as analogous to flipping a coin and, over time, having heads and tails come up an equal number of times.

My latest money management strategy?? Quit when I'm ahead!! And play within my bankroll. Or at least, when I'm ahead, don't bet it all back. If anything, I've learned that betting back most or all of the amount that I'm ahead using aggressive bets usually ends up being unprofitable. For what it's worth...

I've heard BTW say before that it's one thing to be a good handicapper and another thing to be a good horseplayer. So, I know he's got "opinions" on the topic. Should be a good thread.

[hockey2315]

In reference to the bankroll comment. . . I've read that you should play 2% of your bankroll on a given race. . . That might not work for everyone though

[SentToStud]

I'll make one comment and ask one wuestion.

If you look to bet horses whose actual odds exceed your "fair" odds, that's the right thing to do. That's not enough. you must wager more as the actual exceed fair by a greater margin. For example, if you think a horse's fair odds are 5-1 and it's going off at 7-1, you may make your standard wager, say $10. But if that same horse is going off at 8-1 or 10-1, you really need to wager more, perhaps $12 or $15. What's important is that when you have a perceived advantage, you really need to wager more as that advantage grows.

Why does anyone ever bet to place?

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

I'll make one comment and ask one wuestion.

If you look to bet horses whose actual odds exceed your "fair" odds, that's the right thing to do. That's not enough. you must wager more as the actual exceed fair by a greater margin. For example, if you think a horse's fair odds are 5-1 and it's going off at 7-1, you may make your standard wager, say $10. But if that same horse is going off at 8-1 or 10-1, you really need to wager more, perhaps $12 or $15. What's important is that when you have a perceived advantage, you really need to wager more as that advantage grows.

Why does anyone ever bet to place?

I pretty much agree with STS's advice, but I'd qualify it somewhat:

1. Even if you perceive an overlay, you'd better have a good reason why the other bettors are "wrong". That is, what is it they are over- or under-estimating?

2. You should be betting less on longshots than on favs. Yeah, that's a "duh" to some, but others think in terms of flat-betting every race, which is a big mistake from a risk standpoint.

--Dunbar

[westcoastinvader]

Why does anyone ever bet to place?


I know of lots of folks who got started betting $2 to win, and $5 to place each race.

And, not necessarily on the same horse.

It's a fun way to have action, a good chance of collecting some tickets each day, and not lose more that $63 on a 9 race card in a worst case scenario. Yes, the opportunity to make "big bucks" is remote unless one runs the table, but it still can make for a fun......and profitable....afternoon.

If one wants to "stretch it out" from the $7 per race, going with a 3 horse quinella box can be OK for the $6 wager.....where offered.

If I've got a horse I really like that is NOT the favorite, it's very common for me to bet it solidly with a backup place wager.......if I'm convinced it's gonna be on the board. I do it most often when I totally discount the favorite. (edit: but I DO a double check glance at the place pool before making the wager, just to make certain it seems worthwhile.........and I define "worthwhile" for a backup place bet as recovering 50% or more of my win wager should the horse finish 2nd).

Last month, or possibly in December, a horse claimed from up here went down and ran in SoCal. She was made the favorite, and based upon my following up here, I completely tossed from the race. She ran out of the $$ and I cashed a nice Win and Place on my selection.

[Thunder Gulch]

I've read a lot of interesting material on the subject, but I can't claim to have a definitive system. I like the theories that say the size of the wager should correlate to your perceived edge and your chance of winning. If you have a large edge, but only a 5% chance of cashing, it's impossible to stick with the program.