Bet Size when Betting more than 1 Horse

[Bill V.]

Hi I found that betting three horses this past summer at Del Mar
not to be a good investment.Its good for the ego but eventually it did not pan out. About half way through the meeting I got into a mindset that I wanted the two horse win bets to show more profit than the 3 horse win bets so I began
to work on my line selection , Anyway
3 horse win bets have too many losing bets.
What I try to do in your case is make two win bets and maybe a place and show
bet on the third horse. When I feel like betting exactas, I will bet 1 of the 3 would be win bets and the favorite over my two win bets

Example BLBL
Horse A   9/2
Horse B   6/1
Horse C  12/1
Horse D  1/1

I would bet A and B to win
I would bet C to place or Show or both
or I would bet C-D / A B in an Exacta

Good Skill
what ever you find is best for you

Bill V

[JimG]

I agree Bill that betting 3 horses to win is not a good bet. I think a rare exception is if you can confidently eliminate the top 2 favorites. But for the most part, betting 3 horses to win really means you do not have a very firm opinion of the race and you should probably pass.

Jim

[For The Lead]

I'll start by addressing your question.

I think the first thing you have to do is keep some records.
1 - how often does this situation ocurr?
2 - when these situations do ocurr, how often does one of the horses you would consider betting actually win?
3 - of course, how often do they lose?
4 - over time, what would the outcome be (profit or loss)

Record keeping goes a long way towards answering your question. Perhaps your question would become a moot point. (i.e.-Bill V's last response)

Now, in reading over the responses to this point, I like Mikesal's suggestion to perhaps just passing the race. If you are that unsure of the race that you need to bet several horses, perhaps keeping a firm hold on your bankroll is the best option.

I also like hollowway's point when he said "If you dont like the favorite and are sure he wont beat you ( for me thats 2 different things usually )" I agree with this. "Not liking" and "being as sure as you possibly can that the favorite can't beat you" IS two different things.

The idea of betting 2 or 3 horses AND THEN betting something on the favorite "just in case" is just crazy. The whole idea here was that you "didn't like the favorite", which really isn't a good enough reason to bet 2 or 3 other horses in the race. You have to "know", as best you can, that the favorite will not win. For some people this will work out better than for others.

Ask yourself this;
1 - Am I betting to actually WIN money?
2 - Am I trying to NOT lose money?
3 - Am I just looking for ACTION?

Whether we like it or not, favorites and second choices (also usually low odds) win about 60% of all races.
EXACTLY how much don't you "like" the favorite (or low odds second choice)?
EXACTLY how sure are you that the favorite (or low odds second choice) cannot win?

Yeah, I think I like Mikesal's idea the best. Forget about betting 2 or 3 horses (perhaps 3 or 4 with a "saver" on the favorite you didn't like to begin with) and just PASS THE RACE!

[atkinsrr]

Hey guys..don't think that you have to wager the same way every race..each race presents a different scenerio...Depending on the situation and/or the tote board I may bet 1 horse to win but in the next race I may bet three horses to win or 2 horses to win.
We are always aware of those low priced favs beating us..but remember Doc always said
try to stay as close to even as possible until the big price is in front of you...as for me, on average, out of every 10 races I handicap I end up betting about 3 or 4 ...I want to be sure that that is a bad fav before I go against it...best to all Randy A.

[davew]

I have learned to limit my bet size to a certain race (including all linked exotics (DD,P3,P4...) and exotics (ex, tri) and straight pool

as I have found my results are either
1- hit race and ran like I thought it would
2- rather close (mostly ran like I thought but 1 horse popped)
3- missed race


so if you are used to betting $X to win on your pick, I would still bet $X on the race but divided among the 2-3 runners

flat bet (5,5,5), my rank bet (6,5,4), dutch bet (8,4,3-or whatever odds dictate) all seem to do well and of course each short period of races has one out-performing the others

I like this approach because it reduces variance and losing streaks - and pay-offs are frequently similar to odds-on favorites

[partsnut]

Hi Dave,

I have to agree with Bill V. and Jim G.
Betting 3 horses would be cutting it a little thin for me.
For me, betting one horse to win is optimal but is not comfortable.
Betting 2 seems more secure for me depending on what the odds are at post time.
If anyone of my 2 horses fall below 5-2 odds I would discount that horse.
I might bet the remaining horse for win and place depending on how high the odds are on it. Normally, I would look for at least 5-1 or higher in a decent field size, otherwise I would bet the remaining horse for win only.
Small fields and the favorite winning will drop the place money dramatically.
Example. Last night at PEN in the second race I played a 13-1 shot for win and place in a 5 horse field. My horse finished second and paid $5.20
So, one or 2 horses would be my maximum bet.
The bet size would be determine by my bankroll. I try to look for at least 40 betting units for 2 horse betting.
Example: A $500.00 bankroll would initially have 41 betting units of $12.00
each. so I would bet $6.00 on each contender for a 2 horse bet to win.
If I elected the win/place option then I would bet $6.00 win/place for 1 contender.
If I were forced to bet on just one horse it would be a $6.00 bet.