Place Vs. Fave/Long Exacta Running Tab

[blackthroatedwind]

You're obviously welcome to do it this way, or any way you like, but looking at past results will be faster and provide the same statistical evidence.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

You're obviously welcome to do it this way, or any way you like, but looking at past results will be faster and provide the same statistical evidence.

True, but it will kind of fun to keep track this way. As you said if you sample any given month it could vary widely so I'd rather take my chances from here on in...A true entire year study would settle it but this kind of sample should do the trick.

[Scav]

a) You would probably box with the favorite thus it should count if the 10/1 horse wins and the favorite runs 2nd or vice versa

b) anything over 20/1 is a stretch IMO, should be between 10/1 and 20/1 the way Andy did it first.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

chalk players...lol at least 1/2 of it

[Grits]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

chalk players...lol at least 1/2 of it

What are you talking about Hooves?

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Scav

a) You would probably box with the favorite thus it should count if the 10/1 horse wins and the favorite runs 2nd or vice versa

b) anything over 20/1 is a stretch IMO, should be between 10/1 and 20/1 the way Andy did it first.

The way Grits described it is the way it will run. Boxing it has nothing to do with place betting....And over 20-1 will help prove the case that betting to place is the better option. Getting the 50-1 to finish second will not feel good when the fave is not on top in her situation....That's the way it goes.

[Grits]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

The way Grits described it is the way it will run. Boxing it has nothing to do with place betting....And over 20-1 will help prove the case that betting to place is the better option. Getting the 50-1 to finish second will not feel good when the fave is not on top in her situation....That's the way it goes.

Dream on darlin', and let's see how many of those I pine over.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Grits

Dream on darlin', and let's see how many of those I pine over.

You are the best....I pm'd you. Check it. Good luck my dear.

[ArlJim78]

If all this brainpower could somehow be harnessed to benefit mankind, Al Gore could rest at night.

[Grits]

Originally Posted by Scav

a) You would probably box with the favorite thus it should count if the 10/1 horse wins and the favorite runs 2nd or vice versa

b) anything over 20/1 is a stretch IMO, should be between 10/1 and 20/1 the way Andy did it first.

Nope, no go Scav. We're not talking about boxing the exacta. Flat, straight favorite, over the longshot only.

[blackthroatedwind]

The box is irrelevent to this particular discussion. We are ONLY looking at place vs. second to the favorite.

We could also compare a $10 wager in another study....$6 win $4 place vs. $4 win, $2 Box with favorite and $2 second to the favorite.

[Scav]

I came in on the ass end of the conversation and I look like a donkey...CARRY ON!!!

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

The box is irrelevent to this particular discussion. We are ONLY looking at place vs. second to the favorite.

We could also compare a $10 wager in another study....$6 win $4 place vs. $4 win, $2 Box with favorite and $2 second to the favorite.

Don't kill me Andy. LOL. Let's start with this the way it is. Haha.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Don't kill me Andy. LOL. Let's start with this the way it is. Haha.

The second one is much harder ( and will sometimes result in using both the first and second finisher ). The first is best because it's cut and dried.

[blackthroatedwind]

I will look at past data and make two groups....10-1 and up and only 10-1 to 20-1.

This should be fun and informative.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I will look at past data and make two groups....10-1 and up and only 10-1 to 20-1.

This should be fun and informative.

Let's do the data going forward. I want to have a fresh outlook on this and not expect the data to go in a certain direction.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Let's do the data going forward. I want to have a fresh outlook on this and not expect the data to go in a certain direction.

You just want to cheer for favorites to run up the track....

Either way, as long as the sample size is long enough (a whole meet), you should get a decent perspective on who is right....

Personally, if I understand this, Randall is saying that betting place is more worthwhile then playing an exacta, Grits is saying play the bomb with the chalk.

SPEAKING IN Natural odds, just plain Natural odds (10 horse race, each horse has a 10% change of winning) Randall wins this argument in a landside BUT I would have to break out some crazy algerbra to figure out the odds (using 30% as favorite winning as a national average)

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Let's do the data going forward. I want to have a fresh outlook on this and not expect the data to go in a certain direction.

Data is data.....and the past will be the same as the future.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Let's do the data going forward. I want to have a fresh outlook on this and not expect the data to go in a certain direction.

If the sample sizes are equal, it's better to go forward. Less chance to introduce a bias about starting point.

btw, randall, I really like the way you've spelled out exactly what you are doing, including the sample size!

I'm going to bet on the place bet being more profitable. I've missed where this whole discussion took place (so to speak), but I don't see a betting bias that would overcome the generally bigger takeout for exactas.

--Dunbar

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

someone has alot of time on there hands.......this about place betting vs doing an exacta with said horse on top of a lodigical fav 5/2 ..the exacta will come out on to 90 perc of the time..why the big study