I respectfully disagree. Due to the house cut, 4/1 horses have worse than a 1/4 chance of cashing, regardless of your calculations. And 20/1 horses have worse than a 5% chance of winning. Any endeavor where the house does not care who wins is a POOR bet. Slots and ring poker also fall under this category with a huge fixed house edge, and are also poor bets in the long run.
who is saying that horse has a 5% chance of winning-- the people!! not the house therefore if you are better than the people you can win-- follow me??
I'll take the horse that can run the distance the fastest when it's in condition. Final time is the key for me.
If a horse runs 45 for 4f but finishes in 112 and any horse in condition on that day that can run 111.4 should/will beat him. What the early fractions are means little because the horse that runs the fastest final time wins every race. You can go fast early or go fast late but it's the final time that matters. IMO.
I'm not a big fan of final times, because of all the different track conditions that happen throughout a meet. I feel like the internal fractions (1/4 and turn time) can tell more about a race then anything else. IMO.
I need to have watched the horses last race to get a good feel for them and how they will perform that day.
That is what makes betting horse racing so attractive. I just ABHOR the huge take out, and that keeps me from participating. Hitting a 15/1 shot or a $200 exacta is as exhilirating as it gets. The problem is that these instances happen so little. Also, as another poster stated, he tries to look for a beatable favorite, which I think is VERY WISE. But good luck figuring out which of the remaining 9 horses are going to upset him.
If you can find enough long shots to beat the high vigorish, I applaud you. I just think the nature of the game eventually deals any astute handicapper very long losing streaks, and the big payoffs need to be even bigger to offset these losses.
And anyone that consistently bets 5/2 shots or less will go broke quickly. One needs to win an insanely high percentage of these wagers just to break even in the long run.
who is saying that horse has a 5% chance of winning-- the people!! not the house therefore if you are better than the people you can win-- follow me??
You are absolutely correct that you are handicapping against other people. But the take out needs to be fair IMO, and I think it is currently a joke. Why not let the tracks take out 40% if it is immaterial? I am all for letting the house take a cut for providing a service, as long as they are not so greedy about it.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
