|
Google Site Search | Get RDSS | Sartin Library | RDSS FAQs | Conduct | Register | Site FAQ | Members List | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read
General Discussion General Horse Racing Discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
04-19-2019, 08:34 AM | #1 |
Abiding Student
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 711
|
Vulnerable Favorites and Win Odds Distribution
For the last several months, I have bet only on races where I thought a favorite was vulnerable. As Dave Schwartz says, "It gives you a bigger pool to bet into." Richard Diamond has posted that it helps create a positive expected value (+EV).
I've also tried to find legitimate contenders with mid-to-long odds. My results have been mixed. I'm losing on win bets but winning on exactas. Having my bet-to-win "odds" horses run second is keeping my head above water. Last night, unable to sleep, I updated a spreadsheet I've been keeping for the last month. I was interested in the "win odds" distribution of these "vulnerable favorite" races that I had bet into. I found some bad news and some not-so bad news that may help going forward. Horses paying 2-1 or less won 40%. Obviously my skill at finding vulnerable favorites needs work. Horses paying between 5-2 and 5-1, however, won 43% of those races. So it's not a hopeless situation. And horses paying between 6-1 and 9-1 won 11%. Find one of those occasionally and it will certainly help your bankroll. Once you get to 10-1 and higher though, winners are few and far between. I must confess that I've been betting those horses to win with little to show for it. Several have run second, however, and filled out nice exactas. So my statistical foray in the middle of the night produced a few points to ponder. My win bets should be confined within the 5-2 to 5-1 range with the occasional exception for a solid 6-1 to 9-1 horse. Those in double digits, however, are best played underneath in exactas and trifectas. They will occasionally win and beat me but over the long term, they're a losing "win" proposition. But what to do about all those "vulnerable" favorites that keep winning? It's not quite as bad as that 40% seems though. In some of the races, I identified one low-odds, vulnerable favorite only to be beaten by another. And, of course, there's the fact that favorites continue winning at an ever increasing rate. (Richard Diamond told me that at Keeneland this spring, favorites in dirt races are winning 55%.) Still, my "mental pencil" needs to be sharper. Here's the chart I created in the wee hours this morning. I bet all of these 99 races, from various tracks, distances, surfaces and conditions. The only thing these races have in common is that I thought there was a vulnerable favorite. In a sense, it provides me with a "track profile" for odds, if you catch my drift. |
04-19-2019, 09:49 AM | #2 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Valley Stream NY
Posts: 9,041
|
Mick what handicapping factors are you using to declare a favorite as vulnerable?. Thanks for posting your stats.
Tim
__________________
Trust but verify |
04-19-2019, 12:23 PM | #3 |
Abiding Student
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 711
|
Oh, the usual suspects like a layoff horse with inadequate work (unless it's one of the Servis brothers who I think work their horses privately), wrong running style for my pace projection of the race or the track profile (e.g. closer in a dirt sprint on a fast track), energy % contrary to the profile, returning maiden/claiming winner, claimer with lifetime top speed figure, claimer with paired tops, chronic hanger or horse with seconditis.
Occasionally, I'll see something like this, think the ML favorites are vulnerable and get interested (but #6 was bet down to 2-1 and ran second behind #5). |
04-19-2019, 12:43 PM | #4 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 606
|
Let's define a vulnerable low odds (3-1 or lower) horse: one which has little or no chance to win. That is the subjective version, obvious to everyone, but of little practical use. Let's move on to some objective criteria:
First, let's classify the race as predictable (ML favorite 2-1 or below) or open (ML favorite 5-2 or above). In predictable races, we are looking for a low odds (3-1 or less) horse that we can toss that is NOT the favorite so that we can bet ON the favorite if it is going off at 1-1 or better. Because favorites in predictable races are so strong, I would suggest that to toss such a favorite that its odds be 3-2 or LOWER to give us an extra probability cushion (since we are bucking such a strong win probability of favorites in general). Most of the time, in a predictable race, when the favorite does not win, it is won by the second favorite (and occasionally the third favorite). In open races, I would suggest win bets on up to 2 horses going off at 4-1 or higher, boxing those 2 horses in an exacta, and hedging your win bets by betting an exacta with the top 3 tote odds horses over your horse if you only bet 1 horse to win. If your win contenders create bets on 3 (or more) horses in such a race, pass since your analysis is flawed. If you are creating a betting line (or your program does that), I would classify a "toss" low odds horse as one where your betting line on that horse is at or above "random": i.e., in an 8 horse field, random odds are 7-1, so toss any low odds horse where you betting line reads 7-1 or higher. Richard |
04-19-2019, 12:45 PM | #5 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Valley Stream NY
Posts: 9,041
|
Ok then would it be fair to say the rest of your contenders have no flaws thus rendering the favorite vulnerable. What I looking at is that if the other contenders are also flawed then I wouldn't consider the favorite vulnerable[assuming it is the top tiered horse] since it would still be the best of flawed horses. One other question if I may. When you say track profile are using result charts or do you mean a track model. Thanks
Tim
__________________
Trust but verify |
04-19-2019, 12:56 PM | #6 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 606
|
Let's define a vulnerable low odds (3-1 or lower) horse: one which has little or no chance to win. That is the subjective version, obvious to everyone, but of little practical use. Let's move on to some objective criteria:
First, let's classify the race as predictable (ML favorite 2-1 or below) or open (ML favorite 5-2 or above). In predictable races, we are looking for a low odds (3-1 or less) horse that we can toss that is NOT the favorite so that we can bet ON the favorite if it is going off at 1-1 or better. Because favorites in predictable races are so strong, I would suggest that to toss such a favorite that its odds be 3-2 or LOWER to give us an extra probability cushion (since we are bucking such a strong win probability of favorites in general). Most of the time, in a predictable race, when the favorite does not win, it is won by the second favorite (and occasionally the third favorite). In open races, I would suggest win bets on up to 2 horses going off at 4-1 or higher, boxing those 2 horses in an exacta, and hedging your win bets by betting an exacta with the top 3 tote odds horses over your horse if you only bet 1 horse to win. If your win contenders create bets on 3 (or more) horses in such a race, pass since your analysis is flawed. If you are creating a betting line (or your program does that), I would classify a "toss" low odds horse as one where your betting line on that horse is at or above "random": i.e., in an 8 horse field, random odds are 7-1, so toss any low odds horse where you betting line reads 7-1 or higher. Richard |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|