Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up - View Single Post

CEW · 11-25-2019, 08:51 AM

Hi guys -

For anyone reading along, I use Huey's proportional betting based on the article in Follow Up #2, so anything I say below can be found thoroughly explained in that article. I've been doing it ever since I read it in the 1980s.

Bill - Two 3-1 horses dutched (split) evenly yields even money or a hair higher, as I am sure you know. Two things need to be applied to understand why Huey says this is the ultimate way to bet:

How to figure ROI and how to know when you have an advantage.

1) Howard always suggested adding up your $2 mutuels and dividing by the number of winners in a given cycle in order to come up with your average mutuel. However, as Huey explains, this does not take into account the losing horse in your bet. The easiest way to figure the winner and loser together for the actual odds of your play is to take the gross return from the bet divided by the cost of the bet minus one. So in your example, you bet $5 each on two 3-1 horses. It pays at least an $8 mutuel (either $8.20 or $8.60) times 2 1/2 (since you bet $5 each). So on the lesser horse you get back $20.40. Divide by the bet of $10 then subtract 1. Your net odds were 1.04 to 1, which takes into account the winning bet and the losing bet. If the $8.60 horse won, you received 1.15 - 1. I write this number down after every play. After you have about 10 to 20 races, simply average these odds for your true average mutuel. This number is what counts when referring to everything Huey talks about in the article. (Mitch - by the way - if you do this quick calculation after each race, you can easily apply it to Kelly as you go along between simulcast races, but I sense you really don't need to based on how you describe your style using Kelly.)

2) Then the other step is to go to the graph on page 47 of Follow U #2. Say your average mutuel over a number of plays is 1.0 to 1 (even odds). Go up the left hand column to 1.00.....as you go to the right on the graph, you see that you have a positive expectancy as long as you win at least about 51% of your races. At even money and hitting the Sartin average of 63% nets a Kelly advantage of about 27%.

So the answer to splitting two 3 - 1 horses is as long as you are hitting half of your races, you are in positive territory. More likely you are hitting at least 60% whereby your advantage is over 20%. So any bank amount you start with will grow.

And lastly, as to when not to make a play....Huey uses .50 cents to one as the lowest acceptable odds in the article. This is based on the player's example and his win % and average mutuel. I have found that my low cutoff is around .75 cents to one.

Best regards!

Chuck

11-25-2019, 08:51 AM	#7
CEW Grade 1 Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 121	Hi guys - For anyone reading along, I use Huey's proportional betting based on the article in Follow Up #2, so anything I say below can be found thoroughly explained in that article. I've been doing it ever since I read it in the 1980s. Bill - Two 3-1 horses dutched (split) evenly yields even money or a hair higher, as I am sure you know. Two things need to be applied to understand why Huey says this is the ultimate way to bet: How to figure ROI and how to know when you have an advantage. 1) Howard always suggested adding up your $2 mutuels and dividing by the number of winners in a given cycle in order to come up with your average mutuel. However, as Huey explains, this does not take into account the losing horse in your bet. The easiest way to figure the winner and loser together for the actual odds of your play is to take the gross return from the bet divided by the cost of the bet minus one. So in your example, you bet $5 each on two 3-1 horses. It pays at least an $8 mutuel (either $8.20 or $8.60) times 2 1/2 (since you bet $5 each). So on the lesser horse you get back $20.40. Divide by the bet of $10 then subtract 1. Your net odds were 1.04 to 1, which takes into account the winning bet and the losing bet. If the $8.60 horse won, you received 1.15 - 1. I write this number down after every play. After you have about 10 to 20 races, simply average these odds for your true average mutuel. This number is what counts when referring to everything Huey talks about in the article. (Mitch - by the way - if you do this quick calculation after each race, you can easily apply it to Kelly as you go along between simulcast races, but I sense you really don't need to based on how you describe your style using Kelly.) 2) Then the other step is to go to the graph on page 47 of Follow U #2. Say your average mutuel over a number of plays is 1.0 to 1 (even odds). Go up the left hand column to 1.00.....as you go to the right on the graph, you see that you have a positive expectancy as long as you win at least about 51% of your races. At even money and hitting the Sartin average of 63% nets a Kelly advantage of about 27%. So the answer to splitting two 3 - 1 horses is as long as you are hitting half of your races, you are in positive territory. More likely you are hitting at least 60% whereby your advantage is over 20%. So any bank amount you start with will grow. And lastly, as to when not to make a play....Huey uses .50 cents to one as the lowest acceptable odds in the article. This is based on the player's example and his win % and average mutuel. I have found that my low cutoff is around .75 cents to one. Best regards! Chuck