Good handicapping terrible betting

[Tony]

My analysis and wagers

I reviewed Derby patterns for the past 10 years and noticed the most powerful number happens in horses third start which helped come up with AK.

Arch - Thought he was the best horse in the race probably pairs or goes to zero
Ranked third in Downey profile and only 1 strike according to John White list on HRTV

Brilliant Speed - fourth start pairs 5 at best no chance

Twice the Appeal - fourth start maybe pairs three, not working well according to Mike Welsch  -toss

Stay Thirst - Maybe an excuse last time pairs 3 at best, I tossed

Decisive - Fourth start pairs 4 at best  - toss

Comma to the Top - Fourth start maybe 4 at best - toss

Pant on Fire - good line and can pair 2 or maybe 1, 0 strikes - include

Dialed in - Thought he would pair up the 3 but I included because of Zito

Derby Kitten - If you included this horse you have to reevaluate your whole game

Twinspired - Pair the 5 - Toss

Master of Hounds - Biggest ? in the race. I tossed because of only one start this year.

Santiva - Thought he might have a chance to get back to one. Last race was bad enough for me to toss him

Mucho - Good line maybe pair up the 2 or better

Shack - Working great at Churchill and though he could pair or hit 1. Though he might be another Hard Spun - include

Midnight - Nervous because of baffert but this was his 5th start so a 3 was as good as it was going to get probably worse

Animal - decent line and working great at Churchill. Third start is always explosive and could freak on dirt and only one John White strike and ranked 4th on Downey profile - my second choice

Soldat - Had to include thinking Kirian can get him back to 1 or 2 range. Not a historical winning derby pattern

Nehro - good line pairs the 2 - include

Watch me go - Bad line for Derby, dont even think he gets back to 3

The Bet -

$1 super Arch/Pants,Mucho,Shack,Animal,Soldat,Nehro,Dialed In       $210
$1 super Pants,Mucho,Shack,Animal,Soldat,Nehro,Dialed In/Arch/same  $210

$1 tri  Arch/Animal/all and reverse
$1 tri  Arch/Shack/all  and reverse
$1 tri  Shack/Animal/all and reverse

GREAT EXAMPLE OF GOOD HANDICAPPING AND BAD BETTING

I came away with nothing

[plasticman]

Its not necessarily bad betting as much as its that you\'re shooting into the super pool, with almost 100k possible combinations with less than a grand. When you have a small bankroll (for Derby Standards) which is less than 1k, you need to concentrate on win, exactas and MAYBE some tri\'s. Supers are hard, especially since there arent dime options available.

On your bets, you \'gambled\' more than you \'invested\'. When someone is betting supers into a 19 horse field at a 1 dollar base with less than a grand, that\'s really just gambling. You could have invested your money a little wiser and into more conservative pools.

[Bigredgoer]

Plastic.. I am always interested in learning how other people that take this game seriously attack certain wagers looking to take as much as possible out of the pools...could you or anyone else elaborate on their plays, structure,etc....Thanks

[Tony]

Appreciate the advice and you make an excellent point

I thought I had a handle on this race which I did and swung for the fences. The air really went out of the balloon when I was hosting our derby party and saw AK cross the finish line and realized I should have spent another $400 and keyed him in the supers or at least in the tri

[ajkreider]

I think even with a \"small\" bankroll, swinging for the fences is the way to play the Derby.  It\'s the only race of the year that offers life-changing money.  Sure, a 3K tri would leave you smiling, but the six figure payouts of recent years gets you half way to a decent house.  And often, the odds will favor you anyway.  Last year, going from the tri to super paid 100-1.  The Street Sense year paid 70-1.  

Swing away, I say (I\'m sure it\'s purely coincidental that I haven\'t hit the derby since I stopped playing win tickets!)

[plasticman]

Big red, i often like to use the \'win and be there\' theory. If i was attacking trifectas with a small bankroll in a large field like the Derby, i\'d pick out a horse i liked, lets say i liked Animal Kingdom and thought that the other horse i liked was Nehro (all hypothetical of course). I would box AK and Nehro in the exacta, than i would take AK and Nehro, over a packet of contenders, over AK and Nehro....just to avoid getting \'split\' with my exactas running first and 3rd. If i get split, i have a few shots to hit the Tri.

If i was recommending a wager structure for a small bankroll in the Derby, i would say the first thing you need to do is to pick out the 2 horses you like the best. Than, pick out the 5 or 6 horses you\'re scared of. Lets say your two best picks are the 1 and 2 and the 5 horses you\'re worried about are the 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. You can make an exa partwheel 1,2 with 1,2,3,4,5,6,7. That costs 12 bucks and then you can go 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 with 1,2 and that also costs 12 bucks. I\'d get a 5 dollar exacta box 1-2 incase your two best picks actually finish first and 2nd. This bet will cost about 30 bucks and you have a great chance to make money if one of your top picks finish first or 2nd. You get a lot of coverage for a small amount and you still have a shot to hit your top 2 choices for a 7 dollar exacta if your handicapping is amazing and you run 1-2.

This is just one of the ways i like to structure bets.

[beastofeast]

When you have a horse that you like at 22 to 1, make sure that you bet some money to win. Why fool around with exotics. The derby may be the exception to the rule though.  If you are playing AK on top of exotics bet a few dollars to win. I learned my lesson a few years ago when Sarava won the Belmont at 70 to 1. I had not cashed a ticket Friday or Saturday until the saver bet on AK. I have been smiling ever since.

[PonyBologna]

Love the betting strategy discussion because that\'s where I usually blow it in big races. Of course this year I feel I bet the race well just blew the handicapping.

I usually structure my ex pw as plasticman stated above with my Keys over A+B horses (where my A level includes my keys) then flipping that with A+B over K.  For tris I follow what sekrah had posted as his strategy K/A/A+B, A/K/A+B and A/A+B/K.  If you have 2 keys, 5 As (incl keys) and 6 Bs that\'s a $216 total bet on a $1 tri p/w and $88 on exactas.  Clearly I\'m a big time player. hehe

I\'ve tried to keep track on my own but wanted some other opinions. Anyone have a strong feeling on doing, say, $20 ATB vs $60 to Show?  Seems that there\'s usually not a huge difference in payout.  For example, doing these bets on AK on Saturday would\'ve netted you $780 on the Show and $764 on the ATB. Just curious what most people do.

[TGJB]

Words to live by.

[albany]

Coincidence?

In my view, if you like a horse it\'s a good idea to collect if it wins. It\'s like football; you have to convert when you\'re in scoring position. Those opportunities are precious. Where I have a single, therefore, I will bet between 75-80% straight.

Rick Lang once said that before the proliferation of exotic wagers he always had money in his pocket at the end of the day. With the exception of the daily double, there were no exotic wagers when racing was at its peak. Coincidence?

I know many who read this post will wonder how you can make a big score if you primarily use the straight pools. Well, you need to bet big to win big. If you are not willing to make a substantial wager on a horse, maybe you really don\'t like that horse very much. In that case, wait until you trully like a horse.

[ajkreider]

Lang is no doubt right about exotics.  But the Derby is just such a different animal.  (The \"coincidence\", was tongue-in-cheek, BTW).

I can\'t agree with the betting strategy. (Hope my math is right)

With a $500 bankroll, betting $400 on the winner would have gotten you approx.

2011 - $8800
2010 - $3600
2009 - $20K
2008 - $1500
2007 - $2400
2006 - $2800
       ------
       $39100

Betting a $1 tri with the winner/all/all + a $58 win bet ($400) + gets you approx.

2011 - $4400
2010 - $1700
2009 - $24K
2008 - $1900
2007 - $450
2006 - $6100
       -----
      $38500

So for the last six derbies, betting the tri with no thought past the winner got you almost exactly the same result.  But, if you are able to throw out just five horses from the tri to make $2 bets, you would have doubled your ROI.  Toss 10 horses and you quintuple it.  And if betting big is the thing.  Betting 6K on the winner each year would get you around 600K.  Betting 6k on $1 supers with the winner/all/all/all would have gotten you $560k.  Throw out 5 horses and you get to around 1.5 million.  Toss ten and you\'re looking at over 6 mil.

If you think you can handicap the winner, and at least 5 no hopers - bet the exotics.

[Rick B.]

In the scenarios you provided, either \"buy all\" or \"toss ten\" trifectas don\'t return enough.

\"Buy all\" ~ same as return on win bets? Why bother?

\"Toss ten\" doubles your reward, yes...but what is the increase in risk? Far more than 2X, IMO.

On big days with tons of casual money around, good ol\' Mr. Win Bet is still right there, providing huge value.

[ajkreider]

You\'re right, of course, that the buy all bet isn\'t a good one.  But the issue was whether playing big on the winner is a better play than the tri.  If the payout on the big win bet isn\'t a better payoff than the winner over a buy all tri, then it\'s not a better bet.

The tri gives you twice the value just by tossing 5 horses.  Tossing 10 gives you 5X the payoff (in the last 6 derbies, anyway).  Whoever is a good enough handicapper to put 80% of their bankroll on the winner is good enough to toss five horses underneath in the tri.  In this year\'s derby, how many horses would you have to go through to get to Nehro and MMM?  How many to get to Ice Box and Paddy last year?  Or Eight Belles and Dennis? Not 10, and certainly not 15.

[albany]

Moreover, if you cash win bets you don\'t have deal with the IRS.

[Rick B.]

ajkreider Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Whoever is a good enough handicapper to put 80% of
> their bankroll on the winner is good enough to toss
> five horses underneath in the tri.  

Kind of sketchy. Don\'t think I agree. Handicapping the winner is a far different skill than handicapping for the underneath spots.

In \"Money Secrets At The Racetrack\", Barry Meadow opined that you have to use many horses in the last slot of the trifecta sometimes, because \"even Living Filth can stumble home for third\".  

> In this year\'s derby, how many horses would you have to
> go through to get to Nehro and MMM?  How many to get to
> Ice Box and Paddy last year?  Or Eight Belles and Dennis? Not
> 10, and certainly not 15.

Easy to speculate about this now. I threw out Nehro this year, threw out Ice Box last year, both during \"crunch time\" -- when I was doping out my tickets...not after the fact. Just sayin\'...

Nah...no clever trifecta \"schemes\" for me, thanks. If I dope out a $43 Derby winner next year, I can just bet $500 to win on him, and skip home with over $10K in winnings without giving a hoot about who ran 2nd and 3rd (or without crying in my beer because I HAD the big-priced winner and didn\'t cash, like some of my racetrack buddies always seem to do).

Call me old-fashioned, I guess. I can live with that. I just don\'t understand guys who soil themselves with joy over exotics that pay low in relation to the actual risk involved, but sneer at the thought of making a win bet on a price horse.