How deep is to deep in the pk4?

[jms62]

How would he catch 3 bombs in the sequence ?

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by jms62

How would he catch 3 bombs in the sequence ?

How do you? ALL-ALL-ALL-ALL? It comes down to handicapping - I'm sure he and anyone else who uses his methodology uses longshots as As or Bs - it depends on the horses you like and the expected value. . . and then if some fringe contender (C) comes in, he's still got coverage that you don't playing a "cave man" ticket.

[brianwspencer]

Depends on the level of drunkeness that you and your friends have reached and then inversely how much money you actually care about winning instead of just wanting to hit for fun.

[Scav]

My personal opinion is that I think you can use both approaches as part of your arsenal.

Lets say that for each approach you are willing to put in $500, which is probably between average and expensive. Note, I am speaking in terms of P6, not P4. I never use A/B/C/X for P4's

In regards to the caveman, if you have two horses that you really like and willing to single, then you have 4 legs to spend 250 combinations. That opens up the door to a major payday if you are really right on those two singles, and deep in those other legs.

Now within the A/B/C/X theory, I think this approach allows you for what ifs. What if this horse gets a lone lead, what if there is a speed duel. You can add certain horses as C's based on what ifs.

It is really how the sequence plays out and what risks you are willing to take.

Me personally, I have played it both ways before, with success on the caveman and a couple 5 of 6's on the A/B/C/X. I will say I have a personal preference to the caveman, in doing that, I usually have to be REALLY right on two legs, and have coverage in the others.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Scav

Me personally, I have played it both ways before, with success on the caveman and a couple 5 of 6's on the A/B/C/X. I will say I have a personal preference to the caveman, in doing that, I usually have to be REALLY right on two legs, and have coverage in the others.

In all seriousness, this is really the way I like to play it when I'm playing it alone, especially if I can find a leg or two where I am incredibly confident in 1-2 horses ONLY.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

How do you? ALL-ALL-ALL-ALL? It comes down to handicapping - I'm sure he and anyone else who uses his methodology uses longshots as As or Bs - it depends on the horses you like and the expected value. . . and then if some fringe contender (C) comes in, he's still got coverage that you don't playing a "cave man" ticket.

All-All-All-All is quite absurd no and quite disrespectful to me. Why even state it ? Is someone automatically Wrong when they do not share your opinion? It's quite logical if you go deeper you have more coverage to wild occurrences that you aren't going to get with smaller tickets. I 100% agree with you on the handicapping aspect it is by far the most important. On big days I usually have a caveman of about 144 and a few smaller tickets usually with a single or 2 and some longshots sprinkled in. And to your statement about the fringe coming in and not having coverage. I certainly would have coverage if I was anygood at handicapping.

PS... I only play Pick 3 and 4's...

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by jms62

All-All-All-All is quite absurd no and quite disrespectful to me. Why even state it ? Is someone automatically Wrong when they do not share your opinion? It's quite logical if you go deeper you have more coverage to wild occurrences that you aren't going to get with smaller tickets. I 100% agree with you on the handicapping aspect it is by far the most important. On big days I usually have a caveman of about 144 and a few smaller tickets usually with a single or 2 and some longshots sprinkled in. And to your statement about the fringe coming in and not having coverage. I certainly would have coverage if I was anygood at handicapping.

PS... I only play Pick 3 and 4's...

He didn't "state" anything. He asked you how you would be more likely than Crist to hit a large ticket, and instead of answering, you got defensive.

The A/B/C/X method works toward minimizing investment and emphasizing handicapping. In the long run, I think it's the best method.

If I had $144 to invest, I'd rather find an Exacta or Trifecta or Double or Win bet I could have multiple times than put it all on a $1 Pick 4 and potentially watch four $5-$7 horses come in.