|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
12-28-2013, 09:31 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Betting advice question
at what point is it worth to put a horse to win rather than play it on top of a trifecta. I usually play a trifecta spending $12 per $1 play, a few times I have placed longshots on top from 12-1 to 25-1 that have won but did not manage to complete the 2nd or third spots for the tri.
Another situation today is at Santa Anita race 6, I absolutely loved the 1 and 6, stone cold for 1st and 2nd. I thought the best play was to play a super, I played a $1 super 1/6/2,3,4/ALL which cost $21 dollars, it won for $314, but if I had just played the Exacta I would of gotten back $357, if I played the tri I would of gotten back $539. Was it worth the risk to hope for a bomb for 4th or should I have just stuck to the straight exacta bet and or play a tri multiple times since I felt so strongly about the race. Thanks Last edited by Seattleallstar : 12-28-2013 at 09:37 PM. Reason: . 
|
|
#2
12-28-2013, 09:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think the super is a trap bet...even if you have a strong feeling of the 1 and 2 spot the need to spread in the other spots eats into your profit. I would stick to the exacta and simply crush it
|
|
#3
12-28-2013, 11:03 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Very
|
|
#4
12-28-2013, 11:03 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Elaborate
|
|
#5
12-28-2013, 11:04 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Redboard
|
|
#6
12-29-2013, 10:26 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
After doing this for 15 years I am thinking I am an idiot when it comes to betting, that's why I'm asking for some advice. Sorry for the redboard, I had an example that's all
|
|
#7
12-29-2013, 01:16 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I very seldom play tris. I think exactas give the best value in the long run. But it's just my opinion.
|
Hybrid Mode
