Betting Strategy
 

I'm not as seasoned a handicapper as a lot of you guys, so try and pass a little of that knowledge my way, please.

My question is this: Is there a rule, or a textbook betting strategy for betting an 8-10 horse field with a 2/5-type favorite, 2 or 3 "contenders" at 7 or 8/1, and then the rest at 20 and 30/1?

Assuming I also agree with the public that the 2/5 favorite is the probable easy winner, it would seem to a rookie handicapper like me that betting the favorite to win is out of the question (too much risk for little reward), therefore my only options are to bet exotics with the fav on top and attempt to score with the $12 exacta and $20 trifecta payoffs, or I can try and find some reason one or a few bigger-odds horses can shock the world and try and beat the favorite and score with the $30 win payoff.

What's the right answer here -- or at least the right play in this situation?

The four corners strategy that you developed is a good technique, especially when you bet the under.

Why not just skip the race?

I usually put the favorite on top with perhaps the second favorite as the top two in a trifecta then use them in second as well with one more horse to make three. In the third spot I will take the last one I used in the second spot and add two more..
Did any of that make any sence? :zz:

with 2/5 on top?

pick 3, single the fav. if you like the fav. and go deep around him, or play the pick 3 for more money.

In a tri yes..The whole point is not only trying to stay in the black, but to have all runners in the right order correct???

I mean you can have a 2/5 win and still put a couple longshots underneath and make more than $12.00. I mean the odds are that the 2/5 will more than likely win the race, so of course you can "hope" that he comes in second by placing another on with him/her as well in the top spot.

In the example you used here the horse in 2/5, so I agree that a win bet is probably not a smart bet. However, I will say that I think some people are overly eager to rule out ever betting on an odds-on horse. Sometimes, you can actually find value in these horses.
If you see a horse that looks like a 1/5 shot to you, and the horse is 4/5 on the board, why not bet it to win?

I have no problem with this rationale.

Heck, in a short field in the right circumstances, i think bridgejumping is a good bet.

In this example he gave a 2/5 likely winner in an 8-10 horse field. Unless you can find something underneath at a price, I would just skip the race.

When I am faced with this type of race, I hope it is part of the pick 4 or pick 3. That way I am faced with a pick 3 or a pick 2. You can always increase your wager to like a $10 pick 3 or a $4 pick 4. Or I like to see if an exacta will pay more than $10. If that is the case then I will put a $10 or $20 exacta down with the 2/5 horse on top of 2 horses and hope for the best. However, most of the time I skip this type of race.

I agree with the masses here. Either pass the race or single in a horizontal bet.

:D

The under was also always the way to go before the shot clock was implemented.

Unless you think you can beat the big fav., this is the way to go.

with 5 mins to post go get a beer and then sip it till they're in the gate. Go attempt to make the bet get shut out and then either count the $$$$ you saved or laugh at how little the exacta and tri paid.......

There is no absolute right or mechanical answer on how to play any situation. It's not any fun, but statistically some studies showed even money horses kicked out small profits when bet to show.

If you are trying to make an exacta, everyone else will key the 2/5 horse on top as well, so you really better have some compelling reason to play it with a real longshot- not the second or 3rd choice who you think is long at 8-1 simply because the favorite has 75% of the win pool. If I think I can beat that favorite, I may backwheel with a couple of reasonable choices.

Same for trifectas. You are betting an underlay with the favorite on top and the second favorite on the board. You need to go to the 4th or 5th favorites to make it a fair proposition.

I'm confused.

As there are any number of ways for the BEST HORSE to LOSE a race, and given all the other interesting aspects of the game, why is strategy for a < even money proposition something to discuss?

A long time ago, a, then young, racetrack friend of mine coined the phrase "bet the CHALK and you get BUSTED". How true it is.

My suggestion: instead of worrying about this crap, head over to the Trips and Traps Archive and learn something worth while.

There's no reason to bet a race unless you have a perceived edge over your competition. You could, for example, agree with the public that the 2/5 favorite has a 40% chance of winning, but not like the next few choices and prefer a longer shot to second. From your perspective, an exacta with the chalk over your longshot(s) would be a good play. If you don't have any insightful or contrarian opinion in a given race - skip it. Unless you're just playing for action. . .

Mark Cramer/Dick Mitchell
 

suggested win bets on the long(er)shots you like, then an exacta with the favorite on top and the long(er) shots underneath... longshots are much more likely to run second than win, but if they run in you are sure to cover your exacta saver. I however, am much more likely to use a cold favorite as a single to try and leverage prices with a multi-race bet.

I/L

oh yes.... Dick Mitchell, a notorious and brilliant California handicapper shows pretty convincing using data from a large series of races that betting trifecta with a fav on top is a losing proposition.... just consistent underlays compared to the price of the ticket.

If so many are recluctant to bet short favs, then how can any horse get to 1/5? For instance, if the ML is 2/1, then the odds start to fall to 1/1, then 4/5, and 3/5, etc., it stands to reason that a lot of people are betting on 4/5s -- thinking, "yep, this is the best way to wager my ten bucks." Are there that many cowboys out there just trying to cash win tickets?