Wagering Systems Abound, But Few Add Up... Crunching The Numbers On One That Is
Trotman
Senior Member
Backing Up The Favorite - Or Hedging A Bet - A System Where Only The Bettor... "Backs Up."
A few honest souls will admit to IT and many more have done IT. And given the experience of those that have, it is astonishing to me that I still receive e-mails questioning whether or not I think IT a worthwhile "system." In addition, knowing how heavily IT prevails because one can read the tote board and the pools that show undeniably the practice is in full operation and when at the track continually overhear players saying that they just "did IT."
IT is the practice of betting the favorite to place and/or show, either in conjunction with the Win Bet or as a Stand Alone Wager.
Let it me said "There is absolutely no justification for betting place and show on the favorite." But of course there is no such thing as an absolute, so let's get the exception out of the way up front.
If you are a bettor who has never found a way to win at the race track, and only get $1 back for every $2 you wager then betting the favorite place and show is definitely for you. While it won't (as you are about to see in the figures presented below) make you a winner, it will appreciably cut down on your losses. Although if you have habitually lost a dollar for every two you bet regardless of how long you've played and how much you've worked at improving your game, I would suggest betting a new sport.
For everyone else... let's see exactly what kind of return betting the favorite to place and/or show would get you.
Let's first start by reviewing the general percentages for favorites. Taking into account just about every race track in the country that puts on what can be considered a significant meet, one that isn't Fair oriented or State mandated for a few days, the average price paid by the favorite and the percentage at which he or she wins falls within a tight curve. It is generally accepted that favorites win 34% of races and pay an average of $5.40. That means if you bet every favorite you would win slightly over one in three bets and get back a little over $5.40 for every $6.00 invested.
Think about those numbers for a minute. For point of reference we'll say that 34% winning favorites returns $5.45. That means you would lose 55 cents for every $6.00 you wagered, or about 18 cents on the dollar. It isn't a coincidence that the take-out on a win bet at just about every track in the country falls between 16% and 20%.
Betting the favorite over years and years at race track after race track returns almost exactly the dollars after the track takes their piece. That means there is absolutely no value in betting the favorite to win. As you will see below, there isn't any hedge in betting that favorite to place and/or show either.
There is a strange logic that justifies this "back up" or "hedge" bet. It goes something along the lines of, "if the horse is good enough to be the favorite, then if he does get beat it will likely be because he was upset by a drastically improved horse, or something went amiss in the running of the race (bad position, clipped heels, being steadied, etc.) that didn't allow him to show his superiority. " Well, that might be justification enough for a frightened bettor that is more concerned with "not losing" than he is with winning, but if one rival can improve, why can't two? And if your favorite can get in trouble, why would it be slight enough to allow him to get second when that same trouble could send him to fourth, sixth or last. Calling it fuzzy logic would be kind.
The bottom line is, favorites hit the board about 69% of the time nationwide. That is a little more than two in three. And since 34% of the time they win, that means that 35% of the time they finish either second or third and 31% of the time they are off the board. Given those numbers, it would never make sense to ONLY bet place or show or both without having a win bet.
There are any number of ways to explain how nonsensical it all is... but why don't we llet the numbers speak for themselves.
Below you will see conclusions from five days of racing at five different tracks, Belmont, Philadelphia, Monmouth, Churchill and Hollywood, and thefour days of racing at Arlington.Listed the results of the favorite in each of the days racing at each track and then summed up the results based on a $2 bet. Those results speak for themselves.
Belmont
CONCLUSION
Place Bets - Based on a $2 Wager
47 Bets returned $84.60 - That equates to $1.80 for every $2.00.
On three of the days there was a negative return and on two days a positive return. Considering that only 12 of 47 (27%) of favorites won, those are rather strong numbers comparatively.
Show Bets
44 Bets (there were three races in which no show wagering was accepted due to short fields) returned $86.50 - That equates to $1.96 for every $2.00.
Just as was the case with the Place Bets, on three of the days there was a negative return and on two days a positive return.
CHURCHILL DOWNS
CONCLUSION
Place Bets - Based on a $2 Wager
51 Bets returned $100.50 - That equates to $1.97 for every $2.00.
On three of the days there was a negative return and on two days a positive return. Considering that AN ASTONISHING 24 of 51 (47%) of favorites won, those are rather weak numbers comparatively. Churchill has been playing to just over 41% winning favorites all year, so people who are already prone to utilize this misguided wagering system might be further emboldened by a success ratio that is far above the national average. In fact, three of four favorites are hitting the board... and in the five day sample above, 35 of 51 (68%) favorites ran first or second and 44 of 49 (86% - there were two races where there was no show betting) hit the board. Yet still the place bet could not eke out a profit... and as you can see below... even by cashing 44 out of 49 show bets the R.O.I. was paltry to say the least.
Show Bets
49 Bets (there were two races in which no show wagering was accepted due to short fields) returned $104.50 - That equates to $2.13 for every $2.00.
On three of the days there was a positive return and on two days a negative return... .and yet the R.O.I. was a scant +6.5%.
Overall, the two figures at Churchill Downs were the best averages of all six tracks computed.
MONMOUTH PARK
Conclusion
47 Bets returned $87.80 - That equates to $1.87 for every $2.00.
On four of the days there was a negative return and on one day a positive return. Considering that AN AMAZING 23 of 47 (49%) of favorites won, those are rather weak numbers comparatively. Whereas the aforementioned Churchill has been playing to just over 41% winning favorites all year, Monmouth has been playing to 43%. Again, this emboldens hedge bettors. At Monmouth, due mostly to short fields, over three of four favorites (78%) are hitting the board... and in the five day sample above, 31 of 47 (66%) favorites ran first or second and 38 of 45 (84% - there were two races where there was no show betting) hit the board. Yet still the place bet could not eke out a profit... and as you can see below... even by cashing 38 out of 45 show bets the R.O.I. was still in negative territory.
Show Bets
45 Bets (there were two races in which no show wagering was accepted due to short fields) returned $86.20 - That equates to $1.91 for every $2.00.
On one of the days there was a positive return and on four days a negative return.
HOLLYWOOD PARK
6/11 - 6/15... 5 Days of racing.
43 Place Bets Returned $86.20 or Exactly $2.00 for every $2.00 Bet.
15 favorites won and 11 more finished second, which calculates to 26 of 43 or 60%.
42 Show Bets (One Race of no Show Wagering) Returned $77.30 or $1.84 for every $2 Bet.
Only 4 of the remaining 16 favorites that didn't run first or second, ran third, meaning the on-the-board percentage was "only" 71%... which while decent enough was short of the above listed tracks... .but close to the overall long term national average.
On two occasions the Place Bets showed a daily profit but on no occasion did the Show Bet.
PHILADELPHIA PARK
6/9 - 6/16... 5 Days of racing.
47 Place Bets Returned $67.90 or $1.44 for every $2.00 Bet.
14 favorites won and 9 more finished second, which calculates to 23 of 47 or 49%, a figure that surpassed only that of Arlington (see below) from all the tracks calculated.
45 Show Bets (Two Races of no Show Betting) Returned $73.40 or $1.63 for every $2.00 Bet.
Only 7 of the remaining 22 favorites that didn't run first or second finished third, meaning the on-the-board percentage was 67%...which is slightly lower than the long term national average.
On one occasion the Place Bet showed a daily profit but on no occasion did the Show Bet.
ARLINGTON PARK
6/12 - 6/15... 4 Days of racing.
41 Place Bets Returned $54.60 or $1.33 for every $2.00 Bet.
Only 10 favorites won and only 7 more finished second, which calculates to 17 of 41 or 41%, which is by far the lowest figure of the six tracks.
41 Show Bets Returned $72.30 or $1.76 for every $2.00 Bet.
10 of the remaining 24 favorites that didn't run first or second did run third, which managed to up the on-the-board average to 66%...again, below the national average.
It is worth noting that these four days at Arlington were significantly below their overall average of 39% favorites winning and 70% hitting the board. But what the sample does show is that even a four day period such as the one in Illinois can really crush a bettor who believes in this system.
Add the above results from all six tracks and you find that 276 total Place Bets Returned $481.60, or $1.74 for every $2.00 and 266 total Show Bets Returned $500.20 or $1.88 for every $2.00.
OVERALL SUMMARY - There is no way you can apply a single wagering system to every race. Hundreds of different combinations have been looked ar... and there is not a one that will have you finish on top over a long period of time.
First and foremost is the fact that every time you make a straight wager you leave 16% to 20% of your investment with the race track. That is a difficult number to overcome. You won't beat it with automaton wagering... especially one that doesn't work.
If you are going to win at the race track you are going to have to be selective. You are going to have to play to Win when the value is there.
Not suggesting that anyone eschew place betting all together? Of course not! There are times when the tote board and the odds will tell you that a place bet is as good, or better, than a win bet based on the probabilities for your horse and vulnerability of the favorite in a given race. But understanding that takes experience and know how, which won't ever come from a "blind betting system."
A few honest souls will admit to IT and many more have done IT. And given the experience of those that have, it is astonishing to me that I still receive e-mails questioning whether or not I think IT a worthwhile "system." In addition, knowing how heavily IT prevails because one can read the tote board and the pools that show undeniably the practice is in full operation and when at the track continually overhear players saying that they just "did IT."
IT is the practice of betting the favorite to place and/or show, either in conjunction with the Win Bet or as a Stand Alone Wager.
Let it me said "There is absolutely no justification for betting place and show on the favorite." But of course there is no such thing as an absolute, so let's get the exception out of the way up front.
If you are a bettor who has never found a way to win at the race track, and only get $1 back for every $2 you wager then betting the favorite place and show is definitely for you. While it won't (as you are about to see in the figures presented below) make you a winner, it will appreciably cut down on your losses. Although if you have habitually lost a dollar for every two you bet regardless of how long you've played and how much you've worked at improving your game, I would suggest betting a new sport.
For everyone else... let's see exactly what kind of return betting the favorite to place and/or show would get you.
Let's first start by reviewing the general percentages for favorites. Taking into account just about every race track in the country that puts on what can be considered a significant meet, one that isn't Fair oriented or State mandated for a few days, the average price paid by the favorite and the percentage at which he or she wins falls within a tight curve. It is generally accepted that favorites win 34% of races and pay an average of $5.40. That means if you bet every favorite you would win slightly over one in three bets and get back a little over $5.40 for every $6.00 invested.
Think about those numbers for a minute. For point of reference we'll say that 34% winning favorites returns $5.45. That means you would lose 55 cents for every $6.00 you wagered, or about 18 cents on the dollar. It isn't a coincidence that the take-out on a win bet at just about every track in the country falls between 16% and 20%.
Betting the favorite over years and years at race track after race track returns almost exactly the dollars after the track takes their piece. That means there is absolutely no value in betting the favorite to win. As you will see below, there isn't any hedge in betting that favorite to place and/or show either.
There is a strange logic that justifies this "back up" or "hedge" bet. It goes something along the lines of, "if the horse is good enough to be the favorite, then if he does get beat it will likely be because he was upset by a drastically improved horse, or something went amiss in the running of the race (bad position, clipped heels, being steadied, etc.) that didn't allow him to show his superiority. " Well, that might be justification enough for a frightened bettor that is more concerned with "not losing" than he is with winning, but if one rival can improve, why can't two? And if your favorite can get in trouble, why would it be slight enough to allow him to get second when that same trouble could send him to fourth, sixth or last. Calling it fuzzy logic would be kind.
The bottom line is, favorites hit the board about 69% of the time nationwide. That is a little more than two in three. And since 34% of the time they win, that means that 35% of the time they finish either second or third and 31% of the time they are off the board. Given those numbers, it would never make sense to ONLY bet place or show or both without having a win bet.
There are any number of ways to explain how nonsensical it all is... but why don't we llet the numbers speak for themselves.
Below you will see conclusions from five days of racing at five different tracks, Belmont, Philadelphia, Monmouth, Churchill and Hollywood, and thefour days of racing at Arlington.Listed the results of the favorite in each of the days racing at each track and then summed up the results based on a $2 bet. Those results speak for themselves.
Belmont
CONCLUSION
Place Bets - Based on a $2 Wager
47 Bets returned $84.60 - That equates to $1.80 for every $2.00.
On three of the days there was a negative return and on two days a positive return. Considering that only 12 of 47 (27%) of favorites won, those are rather strong numbers comparatively.
Show Bets
44 Bets (there were three races in which no show wagering was accepted due to short fields) returned $86.50 - That equates to $1.96 for every $2.00.
Just as was the case with the Place Bets, on three of the days there was a negative return and on two days a positive return.
CHURCHILL DOWNS
CONCLUSION
Place Bets - Based on a $2 Wager
51 Bets returned $100.50 - That equates to $1.97 for every $2.00.
On three of the days there was a negative return and on two days a positive return. Considering that AN ASTONISHING 24 of 51 (47%) of favorites won, those are rather weak numbers comparatively. Churchill has been playing to just over 41% winning favorites all year, so people who are already prone to utilize this misguided wagering system might be further emboldened by a success ratio that is far above the national average. In fact, three of four favorites are hitting the board... and in the five day sample above, 35 of 51 (68%) favorites ran first or second and 44 of 49 (86% - there were two races where there was no show betting) hit the board. Yet still the place bet could not eke out a profit... and as you can see below... even by cashing 44 out of 49 show bets the R.O.I. was paltry to say the least.
Show Bets
49 Bets (there were two races in which no show wagering was accepted due to short fields) returned $104.50 - That equates to $2.13 for every $2.00.
On three of the days there was a positive return and on two days a negative return... .and yet the R.O.I. was a scant +6.5%.
Overall, the two figures at Churchill Downs were the best averages of all six tracks computed.
MONMOUTH PARK
Conclusion
47 Bets returned $87.80 - That equates to $1.87 for every $2.00.
On four of the days there was a negative return and on one day a positive return. Considering that AN AMAZING 23 of 47 (49%) of favorites won, those are rather weak numbers comparatively. Whereas the aforementioned Churchill has been playing to just over 41% winning favorites all year, Monmouth has been playing to 43%. Again, this emboldens hedge bettors. At Monmouth, due mostly to short fields, over three of four favorites (78%) are hitting the board... and in the five day sample above, 31 of 47 (66%) favorites ran first or second and 38 of 45 (84% - there were two races where there was no show betting) hit the board. Yet still the place bet could not eke out a profit... and as you can see below... even by cashing 38 out of 45 show bets the R.O.I. was still in negative territory.
Show Bets
45 Bets (there were two races in which no show wagering was accepted due to short fields) returned $86.20 - That equates to $1.91 for every $2.00.
On one of the days there was a positive return and on four days a negative return.
HOLLYWOOD PARK
6/11 - 6/15... 5 Days of racing.
43 Place Bets Returned $86.20 or Exactly $2.00 for every $2.00 Bet.
15 favorites won and 11 more finished second, which calculates to 26 of 43 or 60%.
42 Show Bets (One Race of no Show Wagering) Returned $77.30 or $1.84 for every $2 Bet.
Only 4 of the remaining 16 favorites that didn't run first or second, ran third, meaning the on-the-board percentage was "only" 71%... which while decent enough was short of the above listed tracks... .but close to the overall long term national average.
On two occasions the Place Bets showed a daily profit but on no occasion did the Show Bet.
PHILADELPHIA PARK
6/9 - 6/16... 5 Days of racing.
47 Place Bets Returned $67.90 or $1.44 for every $2.00 Bet.
14 favorites won and 9 more finished second, which calculates to 23 of 47 or 49%, a figure that surpassed only that of Arlington (see below) from all the tracks calculated.
45 Show Bets (Two Races of no Show Betting) Returned $73.40 or $1.63 for every $2.00 Bet.
Only 7 of the remaining 22 favorites that didn't run first or second finished third, meaning the on-the-board percentage was 67%...which is slightly lower than the long term national average.
On one occasion the Place Bet showed a daily profit but on no occasion did the Show Bet.
ARLINGTON PARK
6/12 - 6/15... 4 Days of racing.
41 Place Bets Returned $54.60 or $1.33 for every $2.00 Bet.
Only 10 favorites won and only 7 more finished second, which calculates to 17 of 41 or 41%, which is by far the lowest figure of the six tracks.
41 Show Bets Returned $72.30 or $1.76 for every $2.00 Bet.
10 of the remaining 24 favorites that didn't run first or second did run third, which managed to up the on-the-board average to 66%...again, below the national average.
It is worth noting that these four days at Arlington were significantly below their overall average of 39% favorites winning and 70% hitting the board. But what the sample does show is that even a four day period such as the one in Illinois can really crush a bettor who believes in this system.
Add the above results from all six tracks and you find that 276 total Place Bets Returned $481.60, or $1.74 for every $2.00 and 266 total Show Bets Returned $500.20 or $1.88 for every $2.00.
OVERALL SUMMARY - There is no way you can apply a single wagering system to every race. Hundreds of different combinations have been looked ar... and there is not a one that will have you finish on top over a long period of time.
First and foremost is the fact that every time you make a straight wager you leave 16% to 20% of your investment with the race track. That is a difficult number to overcome. You won't beat it with automaton wagering... especially one that doesn't work.
If you are going to win at the race track you are going to have to be selective. You are going to have to play to Win when the value is there.
Not suggesting that anyone eschew place betting all together? Of course not! There are times when the tote board and the odds will tell you that a place bet is as good, or better, than a win bet based on the probabilities for your horse and vulnerability of the favorite in a given race. But understanding that takes experience and know how, which won't ever come from a "blind betting system."
Comments
And he lays alot of money on these races. Of course his feeling is that if you handicap correctly you are susceptible to a bad trip etc. But usually the horse will still get up for second.