ROTW

[cubfan0316]

and playing from living room downs, you like the 3-1 second choice because hes 8-1 today. the only thing wrong is hes all washed up and looks like crap in the paddock.theres your underlay?

[Topcat]

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cub,
>
> Favs win 30-35% at average meet but $4.00
> horses(even money shots) win at closer to the low
> 40\'s%(all unfiltered)
>
> Think the idea is to filter favorites and play
> against those you perceive to be weak/bad for
> whatever racing/data reasons you use(see
> ROTW).Playing against every horse that you \"know\"
> is best, but short priced, is not a model than can
> possibly be successful over the long term without
> extreme luck. You are bucking all the
> odds/historical data.
>
> The \"I don\'t ever bet favorites\" bravado is ill
> conceived and is impossible to overcome in my
> view.Major money can be won in this game by
> sometimes constructing wagers into large pools
> using a short priced horse/s as a bridge to the
> next leg.
>
> Good luck
>
> Mike


Yep . . . one is frequently compelled to use short-priced pieces in horizontals who aren\'t likely to offer extreme value, but who serve as bridges to overlooked pieces in other legs . ..

[miff]

Top,

There are a fair number of instances when a heavy favorite is so overweight in a multi race pool, that at best, you get neutral value, sometimes negative(parlay less chop in all legs)This can even happen at major venues with good sized multi race pools.The pick 5/6 pools at the majors seem to be immune from one leg of an overweight favorite, pick four not so much,rolling pick 3 and DD,not at all.

Except if you are jamming money for rebates, the above is the single most relevant issue in staying out of multi race pools at small venues. Illiquid pools the 800 lb gorilla in the room for anyone trying to beat the game via those pools.

Mike