Betting Units
 

I'm a relatively new member to this site and still not completely caught up on the methodology, accordingly this thread is more about learning from other about how they wager than preaching the way that I wager.

I've read a good amount of strategy in the Follow Ups having to do with eliminating the favorite and after experimenting with that and reading some threads I've realized that that is not necessarily the ideal path to profit. In fact, I was early on completely misinterpreting the teachings and eliminating the favorite almost every race regardless of odds (I was hiding even 5/2 favorites... like I said, I'm new around here). This coupled with early patience issues of betting nearly every single race and it was a rough few weeks.

What was once a problem has evolved into more accepting understanding of favorites. I will gladly accept 2/1 favorites and even occasionally accept 9/5 to 1/1 favorites. The way by which I have trained myself to be accepting of these contenders is to wager more units on these horses accepting no less than a 100% ROI in any given race. That is, if I find a 2/1 horse in my top-3, I will bet $4 (2 units) on the horse while only accepting a horse of 5/1 as my second selection: $6 wagered for the chance to win $12 on either horse.

Certainly I deviate from the strict 100% rule if I feel I have a very, very strong chance to profit on a race (ie small field), but 95% of the time it's 100% ROI. It is rare that I ever have to settle for only 100% ROI, more often than not it is 133% (5/2) and 150%+. This strategy also allows me at times play 3 horses if I can expect to double my total investment should my low-priced favorite win the race OR if the expected return of my other two horses could potentially pay much greater than a 100% profit at which point I am willing to use my low-priced favorite as a "hedge" bet. In fact, I used this concept today in Laurel Race 6 to cash in on a $101.60 winner betting:

$6 on 2-1 #9 horse -$18
$4 on 8-1 #12 horse - $36
$2 on 49-1 #4 horse - $100

Winning on the low priced favorite would have netted me 50% profit while the other two bets would have resulted in profits of 260% and a whopping 733% (which did happen).

My question is, is there a minimum ROI investment that I should be aiming for at this stage (beginning stages) of learning the methodology? What are the betting unit guidelines that you personally use in selecting your contenders?

I believe your approach is all wrong in using betting unit guidelines for selecting contenders etc. What you should be doing is accessing weather the horse is a legitimate contender for winning and only concentrating on those horses for win.

Years ago hiding horses was a legitimate concept however today we have watered down racing with few foals, too many tracks, too few contenders and too many Gr 1 etc. Hell most these Gr 1 winners aren't even Gr 3 type horses. So what you have are only 2 real contenders in most races today and the public is all over them. Hiding these favorites really puts you on horses that are truly not win contenders. It like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

What to do? I concentrate on picking winners and let the odds fall where they may. Sure the public makes mistakes and you'll get a good payoff. But those horses are true win contenders. With these low paying horses I look to make money through Ex, DD, P3 etc. My first choice is DD as its easier to pick winners than ex. etc. I also demand at least double of what I'm investing so as to make a profit. Playing an ex. or DD that will pay $8 or $10 and putting in $12 is crazy. One should know before hand what your combinations are and you better be consulting the payoff matrics. Even on a P3 this can be judged by the DD payoffs. It is just amazing how many good payoff there are even with a favorite winning. When you can't get your price pass. No one ever lost money passing a race. There generally another one coming 20 minutes later.

Stick to true win contenders, they either measure up or they don't. Don't be so forgiving, especially for a horse that has raced at todays distance, surface and condition multiple time or is some 6 year old and up. Those that are young (3 yr)and haven't disgraced themselves are eligible to improve. Start by reading today's race conditions as an aide to discard horses or elevate them.
Mitch44

Good advice Mitch44. Doc and Jim said in the follow-ups get it narrowed down to legit contenders and don't be so forgiving. But racing has changed so much since Doc and Jimmy were around. Doc said in the follow-ups try to use a 5/2 minimum and that's what I still do....if it drops to 2/1 he's outta there...still the name of the game is getting a price and building the bankroll and it's hard to build a bankroll on low priced horses. Some days you have to pass a bunch of races and be patient and wait for your price opportunity to come up. I keep seeing big favs who look unbeatable getting beat fairly often....every race that I handicap I track the favs on a chart. This year so far the favs are winning 32.7 %....that means that they are losing about 67% of the time. That's about 1% higher than last year when the favs were about 31.5%. while I'm on here would like to mention something about reading DOCS follow-up articles. I take time periodically to re-read articles that re-mind me to keep using my brain and to keep improving. This morning before starting my day I pulled Follow-Up #34 off the book shelf and read an article by Dr. Robert Anthony Ph.D entitled Recognizing and Managing Pari-Mutual Stress on pages 48, 49, 50. Great article that should be read every now and then to help keep that mental focus. Hope this helps everyone....Randy A.

Poweshow -

Good questions from you and good answers from Mitch and Randy. Here is another view for you and this is how I play my winners:

Start by reading Huey Mahl's article in Follow Up #2. Let me know if you can't find it. Starts on page 33. This article will tell you exactly how to maximize your win bets and their returns - whether 1, 2, or more horses to win. Mainly its 2 horses to win with the Sartin Methodology. This is only my opinion of course, but I believe this is one of the very best articles ever published out of all the Sartin material. And I have nearly all of it.

First, continue to work on win contenders, staying consistent, as the guys above noted.

Then, in a nutshell, after you are finished handicapping a race: select your top 2 horses to win, then note your third and possibly a fourth horse (along with all of their odds). Take the odds of your top 2 and figure the return when betting them with a proper split (Huey has a great chart in there to split bets properly). This return is easier to figure than people realize. I can do it in about 10 seconds. The formula is in the article and goes like this: add 1 to the odds of both horses. Then take those two numbers and multiply them. Divide that answer by those same two numbers added together. Then subtract one. That tells you precisely what the 2 horses will pay regardless of which one wins.

Example: 2-1 and 7-1 horses. Add 1 to each. (3x8)/(3+8). This equals 2.18. Then, lastly, subtract 1. So the two horse entry pays 1.18-1. Close to 6/5. Huey explains in the article to not go lower than 1/2 entry odds. I stay up around .75-1. The average Sartin Player, over the long haul, should have a 2 horse winning odds of about even money to about 1.25-1. So the example above, even though 6/5 sounds low, is on the mark.

Sometimes you can split 3 horses. In the Travers this year, my top 3 horses were 11-1 (the eventual winner), 9-1, and 19-1. You have to run it through the equation a second time to include the third horse, but this was a 3 horse play at 3.25-1. A fourth horse probably could have been added as well.

This is how Sartin players get price horses....because we dutch them and have more than one way to win. I see from above that you nailed a $100 horse and so you have already experienced the reasoning. A tremendous hit!

A few other points and then I'll go. Almost nobody will bet 2 horses to win. Anytime somebody tries to explain why it shouldn't be done, I ask them if every exacta ticket in their pocket is a straight exacta including only one horse in each slot. Of course almost every exacta play by the typical player has 3 or 4 horses boxed or wheeled. So they have 3 or 4 horses to win on their exacta ticket, but meanwhile it is "stupid" to play more than one horse to win.

Lastly, only experience can guide you when your 2 horses are below the minimum you will take. If my second choice is a low priced favorite, I may play my first and third horses. When the low priced favorite is the top horse, I may single him, or may hit him in the place pool alone, or pass. Or consider the exacta. Its hard for me to have a consistent approach on this situation. But when the favorite is third or worse, go for it. Especially when he does not fit the win model.

Best of luck and keep it pumping!

Chuck

Good post Chuck. I've been a 2 horse bettor to win since joining the group in 1990. Love the exacta question you used. Will have to remember that when debating the use of 2 horse betting.
Tim G

Hi Tim - thanks for your comments. Another good comeback for the guy who thinks betting on 2 horses is bad......try this: ".....so you have just one stock in your retirement portfolio?". That comment usually gets the wheels turning a little bit.

There are surely a lot of good one horse bettors out there and I don't want to knock them. But I started playing horses from the beginning with this method, so I have always bet multiple winners. I was in the World Series a few years ago and proved that I need help if I am going to be competitive in the $2 win/place tournaments. I hate trying to narrow it to one.

One great advantage of 2 horse betting is in a real money tournament. This is where I have excelled - there are 2 of these tournaments every year at Laurel. I've been in that one many times and have talked to many of the regulars there. One guy is a sharp player who I had seen finish near the top several times. And one time, after I shot passed him near the end, he came over and asked what I played. I told him about the 2 horse play and he said the winner was his second horse. I told him to play them both next time that situation came up and he said he had never considered that option. I was surprised because is a very good handicapper.

Funny story then I'll go....at that Laurel tournament one year, I played 2 horses in a sprint on the inner dirt. They came around the corner and my 2 horses were way out in front and side by side. At about the 1/8th pole, one veered over and knocked the jockey off of the other. So without the jockey, that horse was DQd, and the other one was DQd for causing it!

Best regards!

Chuck

Chuck,

LOL! I thought I had some bad beats lately but that story takes the cake! Would almost make a man want to cry!

Regards,
Pook

Pook - True story on that Aqueduct race. In that tournament you put in $200. The only rules are: must be win, place, or show bets only, must play at least 10 plays and each must be a minimum of $20. So once you get your bank up to, say, $400 to $600, that is normally enough to where you can wait till near the end and go with an 'all in' type of play. Or split it in half to give yourself 2 shots. And you can play more than one horse at a time.

On that day with the DQ, I managed to go 0 for 10 and busted out! My big claim to fame was in 2012 where I got to the end in 4th place with one Hollywood turf route left in the tournament. I split my bank on the top 2 sustained horses. One controlled the front end of the race; the other closed and nailed it at the wire, and I was able to win the tournament.

A guy sitting near me came over and asked me if I knew the winner was 1 for 16 (or something like that) at Hollywood. I said no I didn't, but he had the best 3rd fraction in the race and he proved it!

I think real money tournaments are reality based. The horse I'm talking about above only paid about $9.20, but in a real money tournament, just like any day at the track, you are not just picking a horse. You have to decide how much you want to play on him. A lot different than the $2 win/place tournaments. When you think about it, no players really walk into the track and single a 30-1 horse. But a few of those types of plays are part of what it takes to win the DRF tournament. Someday I hope to have time to get serious about that type of tournament.

Must go....best of luck guys!

Chuck

Cew
 

I just love it when people at the track say that you are wasting money when you bet 2 horses to win....I just laugh to myself and think about it's their money that I'm winning

Can't seem to find Huey Mahl's article in "Follow up #2".