Good capping vs Good betting

[jpops757]

Lotta complaints in here about CHALK. My contention is a nice pay can result from playing a card with chalk hitting. Yesterday I went to LS simocast and concentrated on Toga and Del mar. I mak a mistake a lot of the time after I trash a loosing ticket and look for the next race, anywhere to try to recop my loss. What folishness. Back to the point of chalk. Look at the pk3 pay endiing with CQ. I made a small $15 dolar pk3 wheel and colected about $400. I didnt get any bombs in the first 2 but horses that looked like if everything broke right they could winn . A 5 horse over 3 horse to th single to the Entry. Iguess what im saying is look at the entire card and uses the chalk to your advantage instead of complaining about it. Sometimes the chalk is a gift.

Originally Posted by jpops757

Lotta complaints in here about CHALK. My contention is a nice pay can result from playing a card with chalk hitting. Yesterday I went to LS simocast and concentrated on Toga and Del mar. I mak a mistake a lot of the time after I trash a loosing ticket and look for the next race, anywhere to try to recop my loss. What folishness. Back to the point of chalk. Look at the pk3 pay endiing with CQ. I made a small $15 dolar pk3 wheel and colected about $400. I didnt get any bombs in the first 2 but horses that looked like if everything broke right they could winn . A 5 horse over 3 horse to th single to the Entry. Iguess what im saying is look at the entire card and uses the chalk to your advantage instead of complaining about it. Sometimes the chalk is a gift.

I dont understand the theory about chalk. What other people bet does not influence who I bet. My top horse may or may not be chalk. If it is chalk then great, if not then great. My betting philosophy is to win each race. I play the horse that I think has the best chance of winning. Sometimes I am right, sometimes I am wrong. But I dont understand trying to beat the chalk. The name of the game is to win money. As long as your horse finishes 1st, then who cares what the odds are. Congrats on your pick 3 hit.

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by eurobounce

I dont understand the theory about chalk. What other people bet does not influence who I bet. My top horse may or may not be chalk. If it is chalk then great, if not then great. My betting philosophy is to win each race. I play the horse that I think has the best chance of winning. Sometimes I am right, sometimes I am wrong. But I dont understand trying to beat the chalk. The name of the game is to win money. As long as your horse finishes 1st, then who cares what the odds are. Congrats on your pick 3 hit.

I understand your theory . My concern about the odds are, if short odds how much you are willing to bet for a short return. Not all cashers are winners. I am a small player. Multi-race and exotic player,

Originally Posted by jpops757

I understand your theory . My concern about the odds are, if short odds how much you are willing to bet for a short return. Not all cashers are winners. I am a small player. Multi-race and exotic player,

I dont let odds influence what I bet. I have a standard $100 across the board wager I make. Now sometimes I may make that a $300 to win or bump it up to $500 to win like I did on Chace City. But, a cashed ticket is a cashed ticket regardless of the odds.

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by eurobounce

I dont let odds influence what I bet. I have a standard $100 across the board wager I make. Now sometimes I may make that a $300 to win or bump it up to $500 to win like I did on Chace City. But, a cashed ticket is a cashed ticket regardless of the odds.

But all cashed tickets are not always winners.

[2MinsToPost]

i could not pick an exacta in a 2 horse race anymore

Originally Posted by jpops757

But all cashed tickets are not always winners.

If you bet a horse to win, then your cashed ticket is a winner. This is why you should stay away from exactas and tri's. No offense, but exacta's and tri's are for suckers. Well wait, sometimes it is a good bet like in the Travers this year. But for the most part, you should stick to win bets, pick 3 and pick 4's.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by eurobounce

I dont let odds influence what I bet.

That is a huge mistake, IMO. Identifying the horse most likely to win the race is not enough.

I never make a bet unless I think the odds justify the bet. That does not mean I would never bet chalk. I would (and have!) bet a 3-5 shot if I thought it had a 75% chance to win the race. I'll also bet a 60-1 shot if I think the odds should be 40-1.

Unless you are the beneificiary of a truckload of inside info, you need to have some idea what fair odds are for a horse before you bet it.

--Dunbar

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

That is a huge mistake, IMO. Identifying the horse most likely to win the race is not enough.

I never make a bet unless I think the odds justify the bet. That does not mean I would never bet chalk. I would (and have!) bet a 3-5 shot if I thought it had a 75% chance to win the race. I'll also bet a 60-1 shot if I think the odds should be 40-1.

Unless you are the beneificiary of a truckload of inside info, you need to have some idea what fair odds are for a horse before you bet it.

--Dunbar

Dunbar, that's pretty much how I bet but, to me, there's one more important factor.

If I think a horse is 4-1 fair odds to win, I'm willing to bet him at 5-1 for $1x. But if the 4-1 fair odds horse goes off at 7-1, I will bet more, say $1.25x. And if he goes off at 10-1, then I max out at $1.50x.

To me, that's the key to success. Having MORE action going when actual/fair is higher.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

Dunbar, that's pretty much how I bet but, to me, there's one more important factor.

If I think a horse is 4-1 fair odds to win, I'm willing to bet him at 5-1 for $1x. But if the 4-1 fair odds horse goes off at 7-1, I will bet more, say $1.25x. And if he goes off at 10-1, then I max out at $1.50x.

To me, that's the key to success. Having MORE action going when actual/fair is higher.

It makes sense to do what you are doing, STS. I like the fact that you are only making a 50% bigger bet even when you see a huge discrepancy from your "fair odds". If your fair odds were 100% accurate, a much bigger increase would be justified. Problem is, our "fair odds" are estimates, and it's wise to be conservative in using them.

I size my bet to win a certain amount. Say it's $Z. So, I would bet $Z/2 on a horse that's 2-1 (but only if I think the horse should be 8-5 or less). I'll bet $Z/10 on a 10-1 shot (assuming I think it should be, say, 7-1). But I will shade those bets the same way you do--betting a little more when the discrepancy from my "fair" line is bigger.

The choice of $Z itself is a reflection of my bankroll, my estimated overall edge in capping horses, and my confidence in my ability to estimate that edge.

--Dunbar

Originally Posted by Dunbar

That is a huge mistake, IMO. Identifying the horse most likely to win the race is not enough.

I never make a bet unless I think the odds justify the bet. That does not mean I would never bet chalk. I would (and have!) bet a 3-5 shot if I thought it had a 75% chance to win the race. I'll also bet a 60-1 shot if I think the odds should be 40-1.

Unless you are the beneificiary of a truckload of inside info, you need to have some idea what fair odds are for a horse before you bet it.

--Dunbar

What I meant is that if I like a horse and the public has that horse at 10-1 I am not going to get off of it (unless it is a first time starter). On the flipside, if a horse i love is 3-5 then I will still bet it. I rarely will increase my bet unless it is a hose I really really love. Like Chace City. Since I bet so much, I dont see a reason to increase my wager. I may move a the show wager to the win wager giving me $200 to win and $100 to place.

[Revolution]

Originally Posted by eurobounce

I dont let odds influence what I bet. I have a standard $100 across the board wager I make. Now sometimes I may make that a $300 to win or bump it up to $500 to win like I did on Chace City. But, a cashed ticket is a cashed ticket regardless of the odds.

i do not like to tell people how to bet, but place and show betting is for the masses. they are terrible bets. too much depends on where other horses finish. you are better off playing to win and playing the horse under in the exacta. atleast with the exacta pools you can get a ballpark of what the prices are. i never understood how people will bet not knowing the return on their money.

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by eurobounce

If you bet a horse to win, then your cashed ticket is a winner. This is why you should stay away from exactas and tri's. No offense, but exacta's and tri's are for suckers. Well wait, sometimes it is a good bet like in the Travers this year. But for the most part, you should stick to win bets, pick 3 and pick 4's.

An accross the board bet is not always a winning bet either if the horse dosent win and you only cash the place and or show portion.

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

It makes sense to do what you are doing, STS. I like the fact that you are only making a 50% bigger bet even when you see a huge discrepancy from your "fair odds". If your fair odds were 100% accurate, a much bigger increase would be justified. Problem is, our "fair odds" are estimates, and it's wise to be conservative in using them.

I size my bet to win a certain amount. Say it's $Z. So, I would bet $Z/2 on a horse that's 2-1 (but only if I think the horse should be 8-5 or less). I'll bet $Z/10 on a 10-1 shot (assuming I think it should be, say, 7-1). But I will shade those bets the same way you do--betting a little more when the discrepancy from my "fair" line is bigger.

The choice of $Z itself is a reflection of my bankroll, my estimated overall edge in capping horses, and my confidence in my ability to estimate that edge.

--Dunbar

A big puzzler thiyesterday when the entry Scat Cat an CQ hovered anywhere from 9/5 to 6/5 untill shortly before post when it went off odds on. The 9/5 was a gift it appeared. I actually thought they would go off closer to 2/5.

Originally Posted by jpops757

An accross the board bet is not always a winning bet either if the horse dosent win and you only cash the place and or show portion.

Itis rare that the combination of the place and show bet is a losing proposition. If you play $100 across that is $300. Even if the place paid $2.80 and the show paid $2.40 you still make money.

[ninetoone]

The name of the betting game is to bet the races with bad favorites. Anyone who bets all of the races, chalk or not, is going to lose at this game.

Double down when you like a horse that the public doesn't. Don't bet the simulcasts, or even live races, with two minutes to post because you want the "action". That's probably the toughest thing for people to do. Just my take.

[2Hot4TV]

Originally Posted by 2MinsToPost

i could not pick an exacta in a 2 horse race anymore

When I put my money on Circular Quay and he was 15 lenghts behind I said the same thing to my Beagle, He left to room.

[2Hot4TV]

Originally Posted by Revolution

i do not like to tell people how to bet, but place and show betting is for the masses. they are terrible bets. too much depends on where other horses finish. you are better off playing to win and playing the horse under in the exacta. atleast with the exacta pools you can get a ballpark of what the prices are. i never understood how people will bet not knowing the return on their money.

You know what a show bet will pay from the pool totals. You just don't know who you have to share the pool with. The whole object for me is not to bet against myself , too many multi combo tickets and don't throw the ticket on the ground, meaning if the winner is going to be 4/5 why bet a 3/1 shot with no chance of winning.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by jpops757

A big puzzler thiyesterday when the entry Scat Cat an CQ hovered anywhere from 9/5 to 6/5 untill shortly before post when it went off odds on. The 9/5 was a gift it appeared. I actually thought they would go off closer to 2/5.

This is definitely a problem sometimes, jpops. I try to not cut it too close on beating what I consider "fair odds". I would not take 6-1 on a horse I pegged at 5-1, for example. It would have to be at least 7-1 with 1-2 minutes to post.

Still, I've had times when the final odds dipped below what I considered fair, and I regretted the bet.

--Dunbar