Handicapping Question

[Danzig]

why would you bet two horses to win, knowing one of them is automatically a losing bet?

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by Danzig

why would you bet two horses to win, knowing one of them is automatically a losing bet?

Why would you ever play more than one exacta, knowing that only one can come in?

[eajinabi]

That question is easy to answer.

If you like two horses that are 8-1, 10-1 and if you going to play 20 bucks anyways then I suggest you play a daily double with those two horses in the first leg and 5 horses in the next. Typically it will pay more than playing 10 bucks each to win.

95% of my bets are pick3, pick4 and sometimes DD. I would say it requires some patience but your patience will be rewarded.

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

That question is easy to answer.

If you like two horses that are 8-1, 10-1 and if you going to play 20 bucks anyways then I suggest you play a daily double with those two horses in the first leg and 5 horses in the next. Typically it will pay more than playing 10 bucks each to win.

95% of my bets are pick3, pick4 and sometimes DD. I would say it requires some patience but your patience will be rewarded.

Apparently not that easy to answer. . .

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

Apparently not that easy to answer. . .

How would you play it?

[hockey2315]

I'd need PPs and prices to tell you that. Every situation is different. For you to suggest that OP should play daily doubles 2 X 5 w/o considering any relevant factors shows you don't really understand the fundamentals of betting.

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

I'd need PPs and prices to tell you that. Every situation is different. For you to suggest that OP should play daily doubles 2 X 5 w/o considering any relevant factors shows you don't really understand the fundamentals of betting.

Of course. Just like Ateam said: The DD approach should be balanced wager and not a straight 2 dollar wager. As far as the situation is presented by the poster is exactly the way i will approach it.

I will indeed compare my DD probables to my win bet ROI and see if its a worthy bet.

[chucklestheclown]

Go with your gut.

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

Of course. Just like Ateam said: The DD approach should be balanced wager and not a straight 2 dollar wager. As far as the situation is presented by the poster is exactly the way i will approach it.

I will indeed compare my DD probables to my win bet ROI and see if its a worthy bet.

I must've missed the part where he mentioned a second race in which he likes five horses. . .

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

I must've missed the part where he mentioned a second race in which he likes five horses. . .

I at least gave him my answer. Other than criticize other peoples responses, I really dont see you providing any insight to this topic.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

That question is easy to answer.

If you like two horses that are 8-1, 10-1 and if you going to play 20 bucks anyways then I suggest you play a daily double with those two horses in the first leg and 5 horses in the next. Typically it will pay more than playing 10 bucks each to win.

95% of my bets are pick3, pick4 and sometimes DD. I would say it requires some patience but your patience will be rewarded.

Doubles are a good approach (especially if there's a vulnerable favorite you're trying to beat), but playing a straight up $2 wheel in this fashion makes no sense. If I decide to play a 2x5 double, I'll split it up to maximize value in response to the probables, i.e. if there's a $40 probable and a $200 probable, I'll play the first one for $5 and the second one for $1.

After adding up all of the double costs, if the desired ROI of the double is less than that of a win bet on the two horses, I'll make the win bets or roll the dice and stretch it into a Pick 3.

Basically what I'm saying is I don't like to do 'flat' bets. Even in your $10 win on each scenario, it makes little sense if you think the horses have equal chances and are 8-1 and 10-1. $11 win on the 8-1 and $9 win on the 10-1 would guarantee you $99 regardless of the winner.

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Doubles are a good approach (especially if there's a vulnerable favorite you're trying to beat), but playing a straight up $2 wheel in this fashion makes no sense. If I decide to play a 2x5 double, I'll split it up to maximize value in response to the probables, i.e. if there's a $40 probable and a $200 probable, I'll play the first one for $5 and the second one for $1.

After adding up all of the double costs, if the desired ROI of the double is less than that of a win bet on the two horses, I'll make the win bets or roll the dice and stretch it into a Pick 3.

Basically what I'm saying is I don't like to do 'flat' bets. Even in your $10 win on each scenario, it makes little sense if you think the horses have equal chances and are 8-1 and 10-1. $11 win on the 8-1 and $9 win on the 10-1 would guarantee you $99 regardless of the winner.

I agree.

[johnny pinwheel]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

That question is easy to answer.

If you like two horses that are 8-1, 10-1 and if you going to play 20 bucks anyways then I suggest you play a daily double with those two horses in the first leg and 5 horses in the next. Typically it will pay more than playing 10 bucks each to win.

95% of my bets are pick3, pick4 and sometimes DD. I would say it requires some patience but your patience will be rewarded.

i agree with you, even though someone else gave you crap for your answer. play the double or pic's. with 8-1 or 10-1 in the first leg its a nice score. of course you have to handicap some more but you are getting value for your 20 bucks. personally, my biggest tickets come in pic 3's. but i love doubles too. why settle for 70 or 80 bucks when that 8 or 10 to 1 shot could bring way more?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

Why would you ever play more than one exacta, knowing that only one can come in?

i don't know, but i was asking a legitimate question. why would you place two bets, knowing one is a loser? when playing exotics, i've seen some put a 1/2,3,4 for example. now, that makes sense. you have your winner, but you recognize one of several can come in second.
or i've seen some do 1,2/over one or more picks.
but, if you have $20 to play, why would you go 1-$10, 2-$10? i guess like some said, it would depend on the odds and how it would pay off. i just didn't think it was the best way to play $20.

[TheSpyder]

If you like two horses in most cases you have not finished capping. I'd keep at it and narrow to one and bet W/P. Not keen on the double thing unless you have a strong opinion.

To me the worse thing is not cashing when you're right about a $20 horse. Albeit, I'm a small time better so I can't afford to take too many chances. Sometimes I'll bet an exacta box and W/P.

Spyder

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by TheSpyder

If you like two horses in most cases you have not finished capping. I'd keep at it and narrow to one and bet W/P. Not keen on the double thing unless you have a strong opinion.

To me the worse thing is not cashing when you're right about a $20 horse. Albeit, I'm a small time better so I can't afford to take too many chances. Sometimes I'll bet an exacta box and W/P.

Spyder

I disagree with this. It's not rare to end up with 2 horses that have value in a race with a vulnerable favorite.

--Dunbar

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i don't know, but i was asking a legitimate question. why would you place two bets, knowing one is a loser? when playing exotics, i've seen some put a 1/2,3,4 for example. now, that makes sense. you have your winner, but you recognize one of several can come in second.
or i've seen some do 1,2/over one or more picks.

but, if you have $20 to play, why would you go 1-$10, 2-$10? i guess like some said, it would depend on the odds and how it would pay off. i just didn't think it was the best way to play $20.

I don't see the difference between betting 1/2,3,4, which you say makes sense, and betting 2 horses to win. In either case you are guaranteed to have some losing tickets.

--Dunbar

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I don't see the difference between betting 1/2,3,4, which you say makes sense, and betting 2 horses to win. In either case you are guaranteed to have some losing tickets.

--Dunbar

some, yes. but i don't think the approach of betting HALF your money on known losers is the way to a productive day.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i don't know, but i was asking a legitimate question. why would you place two bets, knowing one is a loser? when playing exotics, i've seen some put a 1/2,3,4 for example. now, that makes sense. you have your winner, but you recognize one of several can come in second.
or i've seen some do 1,2/over one or more picks.
but, if you have $20 to play, why would you go 1-$10, 2-$10? i guess like some said, it would depend on the odds and how it would pay off. i just didn't think it was the best way to play $20.

Like Dunbar said, it's the same thing. Wheeling means that you're guaranteed to have losing tickets and are looking for one winner. In your 1/2,3,4 scenario, the three different exactas obviously can't all come in, so you're hoping for one of your three bets to be a winner. How is that any different from betting two or three horses to win?

Anything other than a straight wager is guaranteed to have losers in it. The idea is to maximize ROI when you don't have a super narrowed down opinion.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Like Dunbar said, it's the same thing. Wheeling means that you're guaranteed to have losing tickets and are looking for one winner. In your 1/2,3,4 scenario, the three different exactas obviously can't all come in, so you're hoping for one of your three bets to be a winner. How is that any different from betting two or three horses to win?

Anything other than a straight wager is guaranteed to have losers in it. The idea is to maximize ROI when you don't have a super narrowed down opinion.

i guess i just think that there must be a better way to spend $20 then on two $10 win bets, knowing only one of the two will cash, and you just blew half your available money for that race. now, if nothing else is appealing to you, and you KNOW one of the two will come in, fine. but wouldn't you be better off in general in building tickets around those two, rather than taking a ten and tossing it? you'd have to bet 10 $1 exactas (for example) before you spent that same ten dollars, but you've now got ten chances to win rather than just one.