Twinspires Players Pool

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by pweizer

I know the players pool guys are excellent handicappers who play for real money every day. I am not criticizing them at all. It is the concept that forces them to play for $100,000 when that number is really overkill. That number forces bad ticket structure and limits the possible return.

Paul

I don't agree. It gives you more room to play...that's all.

If anything, what it really exposes is just how hard these Pick-6s can be to hit. Take for instance the post earlier in this thread, where somebody says the basically ridiculous " I always throw in Jose Espinoza, " as if that would have made the ticket a winner. This silly notion disregards that doing so may well have added one horse to each of maybe four races....thus further ignoring how exponentially this grows a ticket. This is furthered by the idea that there was one horse missed that easily could have been your next use in a given race. However, this idea ignores how many races included a " next horse " and further ignores which " next horse " was being used before the other one. No race, or horse, lives in isolation in Pick-6 ticket construction.

Bottom line....more money gives you more coverage....period. Yes, it can be argued that one's construction didn't give you optimum coverage...but perhaps the person on the other side has a reasonable argument that disagrees. The smartest, and most successful, player I know does not subscribe to Crists A/B/C/x method. This doesn't make either wrong...it's up to each player to decide.

Yet another great thing about this game....many roads can lead to the right destination.

[randallscott35]

More like most roads lead to failure in this game when it comes to something like a Pick 6....The average player would be much better off focusing on doubles and an occasional Pick 4.

[pweizer]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I don't agree. It gives you more room to play...that's all.

If anything, what it really exposes is just how hard these Pick-6s can be to hit. Take for instance the post earlier in this thread, where somebody says the basically ridiculous " I always throw in Jose Espinoza, " as if that would have made the ticket a winner. This silly notion disregards that doing so may well have added one horse to each of maybe four races....thus further ignoring how exponentially this grows a ticket. This is furthered by the idea that there was one horse missed that easily could have been your next use in a given race. However, this idea ignores how many races included a " next horse " and further ignores which " next horse " was being used before the other one. No race, or horse, lives in isolation in Pick-6 ticket construction.

Bottom line....more money gives you more coverage....period. Yes, it can be argued that one's construction didn't give you optimum coverage...but perhaps the person on the other side has a reasonable argument that disagrees. The smartest, and most successful, player I know does not subscribe to Crists A/B/C/x method. This doesn't make either wrong...it's up to each player to decide.

Yet another great thing about this game....many roads can lead to the right destination.

You are certainly right that a pick 6 is very hard to hit. Which is why it is supposed to be a high risk/high reward proposition.

My main point is that by putting so much money into the pool, even if they hit it, what can their ROI be as a result. If they hit yesterday, they would have managed to get 3-1 on their investment (and that is pre-tax). Aren't there better bets to be made every day that making such a high risk proposition?

I clearly get why Twinspires organizes it as it gets them serious additional handle. But the average person throwing $20 dollars into the pool with dreams of a life changing score will always come away dissapointed. If they hit it yesterday, that same person would have gotten about $60 and a W2-G.

Paul

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by pweizer

You are certainly right that a pick 6 is very hard to hit. Which is why it is supposed to be a high risk/high reward proposition.

My main point is that by putting so much money into the pool, even if they hit it, what can their ROI be as a result. If they hit yesterday, they would have managed to get 3-1 on their investment (and that is pre-tax). Aren't there better bets to be made every day that making such a high risk proposition?

Why can't their ROI be good? I'm no expert in betting Pick 6's, but it's not obvious to me that getting 3-1 disqualifies them from having a good ROI.

Originally Posted by Scav

They had four days of handicapping yet they spent 90k on one ticket. Its lazy and irresponsible.

This isn't obvious to me, either. Why can't a single ticket cover most of what you want to bet?

--Dunbar

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Why can't their ROI be good? I'm no expert in betting Pick 6's, but it's not obvious to me that getting 3-1 disqualifies them from having a good ROI.



This isn't obvious to me, either. Why can't a single ticket cover most of what you want to bet?

--Dunbar

I'm not against it the caveman theory at all. But 90k?

Just yesterday they owned 2.4% of the ENTIRE pool and I personally think they could have done ALOT better with (3) 35k tickets.

With 100k to spend, you can get REAL creative with how you structure, it is basically unlimited because at some point you have to trust your opinions. For example, if I had 100k to spend I probably would have had three tickets that had 1 singles on it each.

I just feel one ticket for 90k considering the sequence was the wrong way to do it, was lazy, and was not thought out throughly.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Scav

I just feel one ticket for 90k considering the sequence was the wrong way to do it, was lazy, and was not thought out throughly.

You really think people gambling with this much at stake are lazy?