Making the mathematical odds work for you

BGboothA · 02-13-13, 12:22 AM

LOL, you know when you walk through the casinos and you see that tote board over the Roulette wheel....and it has a bunch of red numbers on it.......

A black number has to hit next right?

Easy-Rider 66 · 02-13-13, 07:56 AM

I see your point as it seems a couple of longshots usually hit on a day's racing. But You would still need to handicap to cherry pick what Longshots you are playing. GL if you try it.

JakeLc · 02-13-13, 11:21 AM

duplicate

JakeLc · 02-13-13, 11:23 AM

just some basic numbers from the last 8 months

final odds
0.1-1.4 18597 08148 44% 66% 79%

1.5-3.4 45352 11247 25% 46% 63%

3.5-5.9 41126 05920 14% 31% 48%

6.0-7.9 23470 02402 10% 24% 40%

8.0-9.9 18143 01415 08% 20% 34%

10.0-14.9 30431 01792 06% 15% 28%

15.0-19.9 18471 00787 04% 11% 22%

20.0 UP 64199 01103 02% 05% 11%

RawBillyIce · 02-13-13, 11:39 AM

wow .. odds from 0.1 - 6.1 WIN 83% of the time. Talk about a dream spoiler

maybe I should do the same strategy but vice versa

penetrate a cross eyed duck! It's hopeless

RawBillyIce · 02-13-13, 11:51 AM

Actually though I just thought of something... right when I was about to throw in the towel,

I remembered my strategy. If the long shots win 1 out of every 50 according to Jake's chart... I am very closely monitoring a few tracks and keep in mind that I am not betting shhit until 25 races go by without a long shot winner on that track. If I get in 19 races and a 60/1 longshot wins on race #20 then the clock resets.

FYI Most ideas are simple and folks get off track with their strategy. start betting over here and over there,
and exactas and show bets. You get the picture.

according to the numbers.... the 20/1's + WIN 2% of the time. Not hard to comprehend that this is a bad bet.

but... if u wait 25 races or 30 or 35 whatever your strategy as long as u stick to it. 25 races go by without a long shot winner on that particular track and now its time to start betting the 20/1 + to win. same bet size same strategy. problem I think with the cherry picking is that it ruins the whole simple strategy. The you start analysing,etc etc.

Handicapp other races of course. don't let this experiment get in the way of your handicapping.

This is the think tank and I am just throwing out an idea. prob junk I know.

JakeLc · 02-13-13, 12:03 PM

using a track that produces a good amount of longshots as an example DelMar

horses that went off at 20/1 or higher

00669 00016 02% 07% 11% 0.74

filtering it to just artificial surface route races

00130 00005 04% 07% 10% 1.31

RawBillyIce · 02-13-13, 11:51 PM

Nice

Sator · 02-14-13, 12:42 PM

RawBillyIce ,You assumption is that the longshot are not randomly distributed . Do you have any reason to think that ?

I think that the result of a race is memoryless and so the fact that you had 20 races without longshot winner those not change the probabilty that the next race is won by a longshot.(As in the example of BGboothA with the roulette).

But It can be a good filter if for example after 20 races with no longshot winner the people that usally bet those horses have less money to bet and so the odds get higher.

JakeLc · 02-14-13, 01:30 PM

using the same data here is a breakdown by track for horses that went off at 20/1 and up

Unlisted 00404 00012 03% 10% 19% 0.84
ALB 00327 00007 02% 05% 09% 0.59
AP 01090 00024 02% 06% 11% 0.77
AQU 01024 00017 02% 06% 12% 0.59
ARP 00362 00008 02% 05% 10% 0.67
ASD 00309 00002 01% 06% 14% 0.15
BEL 01225 00024 02% 06% 12% 0.63
BEU 00763 00015 02% 08% 16% 0.60
CBY 00810 00009 01% 04% 09% 0.38
CD 00871 00014 02% 06% 11% 0.52
CLS 00148 00003 02% 05% 14% 0.49
CNL 00546 00012 02% 05% 09% 0.72
CRC 01609 00037 02% 06% 13% 0.74
CT 03233 00056 02% 05% 11% 0.54
DED 01720 00036 02% 07% 12% 0.77
DEL 00851 00018 02% 06% 13% 0.87
DMR 00669 00016 02% 07% 11% 0.74
ELP 00508 00008 02% 05% 10% 0.48
EMD 00365 00005 01% 04% 12% 0.43
EVD 01393 00018 01% 05% 10% 0.46
FE 00767 00009 01% 06% 11% 0.38
FER 00025 00000 00% 04% 08% 0.00
FG 01069 00020 02% 05% 12% 0.70
FL 01880 00031 02% 06% 14% 0.62
FMT 00295 00007 02% 06% 10% 0.72
FNO 00098 00001 01% 08% 19% 0.22
FP 00442 00006 01% 05% 11% 0.37
FPX 00230 00007 03% 09% 17% 0.81
GG 01204 00009 01% 05% 12% 0.22
GP 01351 00016 01% 05% 11% 0.47
HAW 01033 00017 02% 07% 13% 0.54
HOL 00752 00015 02% 06% 13% 0.78
HOO 01113 00018 02% 05% 12% 0.48
HOU 00350 00008 02% 06% 14% 0.64
HST 00613 00005 01% 04% 11% 0.26
IND 00403 00004 01% 05% 11% 0.39
KD 00103 00001 01% 03% 09% 0.23
KEE 00498 00011 02% 07% 12% 0.76
LA 00347 00009 03% 08% 18% 0.98
LAD 01288 00022 02% 04% 09% 0.62
LNN 00072 00000 00% 04% 10% 0.00
LRL 01667 00030 02% 05% 12% 0.61
LS 00418 00004 01% 05% 09% 0.27
MED 00101 00004 04% 11% 16% 1.72
MNR 02677 00047 02% 06% 12% 0.59
MTH 00981 00013 01% 05% 13% 0.43
NP 00698 00017 02% 06% 12% 0.73
OP 00368 00012 03% 07% 12% 1.07
PEN 02542 00064 03% 06% 12% 0.88
PHA/PRX 02123 00029 01% 05% 12% 0.40
PID 01244 00019 02% 06% 13% 0.53
PLN 00147 00004 03% 05% 12% 0.92
PM 00672 00011 02% 04% 11% 0.55
PRM 00554 00007 01% 07% 14% 0.42
RD 00583 00011 02% 06% 14% 0.54
RET 00767 00015 02% 04% 08% 0.64
RP 01842 00035 02% 04% 09% 0.63
RUI 00335 00007 02% 05% 10% 0.59
SA 01033 00020 02% 05% 11% 0.64
SAC 00084 00002 02% 06% 12% 0.77
SAR 00732 00017 02% 06% 11% 0.76
SR 00233 00008 03% 06% 12% 1.02
SRP 00097 00001 01% 06% 10% 0.44
STK 00059 00001 02% 05% 08% 0.53
SUF 01362 00023 02% 06% 14% 0.68
SUN 00613 00014 02% 06% 11% 0.88
TAM 00991 00015 02% 05% 12% 0.55
TDN 01053 00017 02% 06% 14% 0.54
TP 01337 00021 02% 05% 11% 0.59
TUP 01247 00021 02% 05% 10% 0.58
WO 02584 00043 02% 05% 10% 0.58
ZIA 00490 00007 01% 04% 10% 0.53

Art Vandeleigh · 02-15-13, 06:16 AM

Originally posted by Sator

RawBillyIce ,You assumption is that the longshot are not randomly distributed . Do you have any reason to think that ?

I think that the result of a race is memoryless and so the fact that you had 20 races without longshot winner those not change the probabilty that the next race is won by a longshot.(As in the example of BGboothA with the roulette).

But It can be a good filter if for example after 20 races with no longshot winner the people that usally bet those horses have less money to bet and so the odds get higher.

I don't think racing is quite like roulette. The phrase "a day at the races" is a familiar one in racing, and I have to agree that the fact that each day is seperate from others is important. You've got factors like weather on that day (rain, wind, heat&humidity), track bias on that day, the human element (jockey not feeling 100%, or rode a winner or two earlier in the card and taking it easier later in the day), race card issues (4 maiden races on a Thursday is different then higher quality racing on weekends), and bettor issues (such as a couple of heavy favorites miss early in the day, causing a lot of money to start chasing losses later in the day) - I think all these factors can contribute to long shots being more likely to occur on certain days, and not being quite as random an event as you may think. That said, I doubt OP's method is the way to go, but then again, there might be something to it (how's that for hedging my bets?)

chitowncraig · 02-17-13, 02:08 AM

I wonder how this theory would work on harness tracks. Harness tracks seem to produce alot more longshot winners.

Optional · 02-17-13, 02:22 AM

you'd be better off picking the top 10 tracks where longshots are currently winning the most and bet them there. At least that way you are betting with any track bias that may exist for longshots rather than against it.

Kev the Brit · 02-21-13, 05:36 PM

Originally posted by RawBillyIce

Actually though I just thought of something... right when I was about to throw in the towel,

I remembered my strategy. If the long shots win 1 out of every 50 according to Jake's chart... I am very closely monitoring a few tracks and keep in mind that I am not betting shhit until 25 races go by without a long shot winner on that track. If I get in 19 races and a 60/1 longshot wins on race #20 then the clock resets.

FYI Most ideas are simple and folks get off track with their strategy. start betting over here and over there,
and exactas and show bets. You get the picture.

according to the numbers.... the 20/1's + WIN 2% of the time. Not hard to comprehend that this is a bad bet.

but... if u wait 25 races or 30 or 35 whatever your strategy as long as u stick to it. 25 races go by without a long shot winner on that particular track and now its time to start betting the 20/1 + to win. same bet size same strategy. problem I think with the cherry picking is that it ruins the whole simple strategy. The you start analysing,etc etc.

Handicapp other races of course. don't let this experiment get in the way of your handicapping.

This is the think tank and I am just throwing out an idea. prob junk I know.

I think you're onto something. So, 25 races go by without a winner at 20/1 or greater. Your next bets are at the lowest odds at or above 20/1 until you get the winner, hopefully before the 20th bet. Forget capping. It can't be done with outsiders; they have no tangible form/PP to use meaningfully. The fact is that they improve to winning fitness when away from the track where their potential to win huge bets for the connections is hidden from the betting public. Choosing the lowest price at/above 20/1 is the only guide you will have to the hidden support (potential) for the horse.

TravisVOX · 02-22-13, 06:45 AM

I actually think this approach is more thinking the roulette wheel will spin-off a black after ten reds. While it's true that factors impacting earlier races on a card could have an impact on later races (track bias, weather etc.), I don't think they play a role as much in whether or not a longshot comes in and are probably over-stated anyway.

If you're looking to bet longshots, I think the key is finding tracks/races that are likely to produce longshot results. Competitive races, evenly matched fields, larger fields etc.

RawBillyIce · 02-23-13, 07:38 AM

@Kev the Brit exactly! Most ideas are simple. The stock market produces lots of losers because of over analyzation.

I agree that cherry picking through laborus footwork/handicapping should be best, but like roulette, poker,lotto,etc ... over a large enough sample size the numbers will come out close to exact. Granted horseracing is a little different (hence paramutual wagering odds) are different and this is where I think u guys point to the fact that it IS NOT like roulette.

If you ask me I say Boothe is one of the best handicappers I have seen in a while. I have read a lot of his posts and that guy is on point!

...but back to the Aussies. My criteria has been refined to the following: I watch the AUSA & AUSB races. AUSC I am not able to wager on with the site I use so is irreleovent to me.

For a race to be counted in the long shot experiment the field must be a min of 8 deep. It must have at least 1 LS in the race with odds that are final of 19/1+ If, for example I wager on the LS and odds at post are 23/1 but the final odds end up being 18/1 ... well then I just bet a horse race outside of the LS experiment and it is simply disregarded.

I simply monitor that's all. When 25 races go by without a 19/1+ winner, that fit the criteria ... then I start to wager on the longshots.

For now it is not about hitting huge, but showing a profit. LS's may come random like 1 out of 65, then 1 out of 54 then 1 out of 113 then one hits after 11 races,etc but by playing after 25races have gone with no LS it is reducing the gaps. (or so it seems)

So if you wager on a LS and hit... then the clock also resets and u must patiently await for 25 to go by again. The good news here is I am monitoring BOTH AUSSIES A & B also, the reason I have chosen the aussies is that I am a night owl...lol oh and they have very thick fields a lot and I have seen numerous 80/1, 90/1's go off.

The last thing is for anyone who cares... we had some semi longshots go off yesterday but no 19/1's or better. The count is at 27 on the AUS A so I am going to be playing a couple LS's per race from here out. Wish I had the courage and extra dough to play the EX (LS,ALL) tix

Salud!