Place Vs. Fave/Long Exacta Running Tab

[Grits]

Originally Posted by Payson Dave

Just thinking out loud here....
If you bet WP and your horse runs first or second you will always cash the place wager.
If you bet W & Chalk/your selection, and your horse runs first or second then you will probably cash your exacta ticket about 33% of the time...(assuming that favorites win a third of the time)...
Doesn't it come down to... the average exacta payouts that you cash need to be more than 3 times the average place payouts that you cash???...

I would figure that to be right. In all of this though, I add that I do not handicap for a living, day in, day out. But, I've been a student of the game for a good, long while. Others that do, may be able to agree or disagree with you Dave.

I've walked in and created a firestorm it seems. That's not always a good thing, sometimes, yes, sometimes, no.

[Payson Dave]

Grits,
I sure don't see this thread as a firestorm...in fact imho this is a great thread that I'm looking forward to seeing more results on...I would be surprised if there are many people on here that see this as a firestorm...

...once again imho... wagering stategy is just as important as handicapping ability...

[blackthroatedwind]

Just, please, stop including the redundant win bets. It pads the totals while skewing the difference. What you want to know is how much more you will win playing the exacta in percentage terms. Adding the same bet to each total will alter the results.

[Payson Dave]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Just, please, stop including the redundant win bets. It pads the totals while skewing the difference. What you want to know is how much more you will win playing the exacta in percentage terms. Adding the same bet to each total will alter the results.

Not sure that I completely agree....I think that what is important is the delta between the two stategies....I don't think that including the win bet will change that delta...both stategies include the win bet....including it or not including it should not matter one way or the other....if i'm missing something please explain.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Payson Dave

Not sure that I completely agree....I think that what is important is the delta between the two stategies....I don't think that including the win bet will change that delta...both stategies include the win bet....including it or not including it should not matter one way or the other....if i'm missing something please explain.

First of all....why bother with the calculation?

But secondly, while I agree that the total play is the correct way to make the bet, the question is which method produces more and by how much. Let's say, for arguments sake, we get 300 examples. The totals will be around $4000 for the place vs. exactas. The win bets will add roughly $10K to EACH total. Suppose it is then $14k vs. $14.4K ( either way ) or roughly 2.9%. However, what the results would accurately show, but couldn't be easily determined, is that the exacta or place bet increased THAT return by 10%.

[Payson Dave]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

First of all....why bother with the calculation?

But secondly, while I agree that the total play is the correct way to make the bet, the question is which method produces more and by how much. Let's say, for arguments sake, we get 300 examples. The totals will be around $4000 for the place vs. exactas. The win bets will add roughly $10K to EACH total. Suppose it is then $14k vs. $14.4K ( either way ) or roughly 2.9%. However, what the results would accurately show, but couldn't be easily determined, is that the exacta or place bet increased THAT return by 10%.

You are right...the ROI for these place wagers versus the ROI for these exacta wagers is really what is most important...
Both the place wagers and the chalk/selection exacta wagers are basically insurance bets...It will be interesting to me to see which one is the better of the two.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Payson Dave

You are right...the ROI for these place wagers versus the ROI for these exacta wagers is really what is most important...
Both the place wagers and the chalk/selection exacta wagers are basically insurance bets...It will be interesting to me to see which one is the better of the two.

Right, it seems like the heart of the question is " which is the better hedge ".

[Grits]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Just, please, stop including the redundant win bets. It pads the totals while skewing the difference. What you want to know is how much more you will win playing the exacta in percentage terms. Adding the same bet to each total will alter the results.

I agree with this, in that we're looking at two apples, though different varieties.

Let's don't throw kumquats in the basket with the apples, it muddles things.

[pmacdaddy]

After reading this thread and thinking I understood the consensus, I took a look at the results and got promptly confused.
I believe it is because win $ are factored in.

If the Win wager is removed (as it is equal between scenarios and therefore a wash) the results will more clearly show when the place wager paid and the exacts wager "failed".

When our horse runs 1st or 2nd and the exacta with fav is not hit, the Place player will have earnings and exacta player will have a zero for that race.

Under the current method, you need to back out Win payouts to see that the exacta failed in the cases where our horse ran 1st. Without the win $ in, these will stick right out.

In any case this is very interesting.

Next I vote for the Triple Partial Wheel versus Exacta Box study...

[Grits]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Seems as though I have picked a perfect time to not bet to place anymore. Thats 4 straight seconds, one at 10-1,6-1,14-1, and the last at 25-1. Should have had each exacta but I am not playing too hard today and am just betting to win, although the favorite has only won one of those races. This game sucks.

I was beginning to wonder if anyone around here made FLAT WIN bets! This is good to know.

It's a great game, it just sucks when we're not cashing.

[randallscott35]

From now on just the place bets vs. the exactas will be tracked...not that including the win made a difference as the differential btw the two totals is what matters....But whatever I'll go with the crowd. That's the way it will be posted starting today.

Grits would also like to me to keep track of how many exactas occur so I will do that as well.

[randallscott35]

DAY TWO MARCH 9, 2007 Carryover PLACE BETTING +$59.40

Gulfstream: Race 4-- PL: 15.40
Gulfstream: Race 7-- PL: 19.80

Aqueduct: Race 6--PL: 8.60

Santa Anita:Race 7--PL: 12.00
Santa Anita:Race 8--PL: 11.80 + 17.00

TOTALS SO FAR: EX- $14.00 PL $158.00
DIFFERENTIAL: PL +$144.00

Total Number of 10-1's or higher in spots 1 or 2: (13)
Total Exactas so far: 1

A 12 Furlong Race for sure but I broke out of the gate like Caller One and Grits---well let's just say she broke like Evening Attire...Of course Caller One won't run 12 panels and EA just won his last race---bad analogy.

[Grits]

RS, could you go back and edit the first days results? As everything reads right now, from two days, its a mess. ( I still maintain we would have gotten what we needed without Snipers figures, they are very confusing to the entire study.)

The columns would serve better, titled Exactas--Longshots, rather than our names. This would help anyone in following the study. No one cares who we are. LOL

We need a daily total for each column, with cumulative figures brought forward at the top of each new day's figures, rather than simply "RS's carryover" in green ink, with no figure posted regarding the exacta amount. The cumulative figures have got to be added as they are most important to the study. (Or if you like, place the cumulative figures under the daily totals at the end of the daily report.) Somewhere.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Grits

RS, could you go back and edit the first days results? As everything reads right now, from two days, its a mess. ( I still maintain we would have gotten what we needed without Snipers figures, they are very confusing to the entire study.)

The columns would serve better, titled Exactas--Longshots, rather than our names. This would help anyone in following the study. No one cares who we are. LOL

We need a daily total for each column, with cumulative figures brought forward at the top of each new day's figures, rather than simply "RS's carryover" in green ink, with no figure posted regarding the exacta amount. The cumulative figures have got to be added as they are most important to the study. (Or if you like, place the cumulative figures under the daily totals at the end of the daily report.) Somewhere.

I changed the name aspect which I agree with since it doesn't matter who we are. The differential from day 1 is correct and I added the exacta column you asked for yesterday. The exacta amount will be posted every day as Exacta next to a race where it comes into play. There was no exacta you hit today, therefore you didn't see it. I will also add a cummulative with both sets going forward..Therefore, the exacta total was 14.00 going into today and the place was 73.40...These are good additions. RS Give me 10 minutes and it will be updated.

PS- The columns are a bit better now. This isn't excel you know. Haha

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Grits

RS, could you go back and edit the first days results? As everything reads right now, from two days, its a mess. ( I still maintain we would have gotten what we needed without Snipers figures, they are very confusing to the entire study.)

The columns would serve better, titled Exactas--Longshots, rather than our names. This would help anyone in following the study. No one cares who we are. LOL

We need a daily total for each column, with cumulative figures brought forward at the top of each new day's figures, rather than simply "RS's carryover" in green ink, with no figure posted regarding the exacta amount. The cumulative figures have got to be added as they are most important to the study. (Or if you like, place the cumulative figures under the daily totals at the end of the daily report.) Somewhere.

Um, no. It would have proven absolutely nothing without "my figures". All you would have proven is that the exactas pay out better than the place bets when you neglect to include half of the best place payouts. I think we all already knew that.

[Grits]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Grits, I honestly feel like I'm going in circles here. I can't make everybody happy. I changed the name aspect which I agree with since it doesn't matter who we are. The differential from day 1 is correct and I added the exacta column you asked for yesterday. The exacta amount will be posted every day as Exacta next to a race where it comes into play. There was no exacta you hit today, therefore you didn't see it. I will also add a cummulative with both sets going forward..Therefore, the exacta total was 14.00 going into today and the place was 73.40..This is the best I can do. I think it works, and looks good. And for what we need to do makes sense. RS Give me 10 minutes and it will be updated.

Good-to-go.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Grits

Good-to-go.

Great, I want to make you happy. Nothing like a woman scorned.

[randallscott35]

Couple of thoughts about what it might look like going forward.

The interesting thing to me is that looking at exacta probables today, that side can make up ground much faster. A 3-1 fave over a 25-1 shot will be a big payout...Plus the disadvantage for the place side is that the favorite's place pool will pretty much always be the largest thus diluting the place payout on the longshot...The problem for the exacta side is, even if the fave wins 30% of the time, that 30% must be followed by a longshot so the number of times that happens could be as few as 8% or lower. Will that be enough to make up the grinding profit of the place bets. We'll see but this will be fun....Tomorrow should bring at least 15 new entries as there are more races and fuller fields.

[Grits]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

My mentor always told me to always look out for number one. And try not to step in number two. Now those are words to live by.

This man's a teacher DaHoss, and he teaches me well. He leaves nothing unturned.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Grits

This man's a teacher DaHoss, and he teaches me well. He leaves nothing unturned.

Haha. For the record Grits, I'm a teacher as well.

--good one by the way Dahoss