miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Most rolling DD pools at major venues run much
> closer to parlay value because of the lack of
> liquidity and it\'s only a two race sequence.
Having tracked DD Will Pays regularly since before puberty, I can unequivocally confirm Boscar’s comment that DD pools, on average, do not skew much from win odds (I’ve posted about this topic on more than one occasion on the board). Yes the DD pools aren’t as liquid as the win pools (which are also more efficient), but liquidity is an argument for why the DD pools might
not track the win odds as close as they do, which doesn’t bear itself out in the evidence.
> DD pools track far closer than pick 4,5,6s
This is only true in terms of variation between individual results, not for the overall average. Results for longer sequences will naturally see more individual variation because they include more races, but the overall averages for all horizontal sequences converge pretty much where you’d expect them to based on the math (I did a study, albeit a small sample, on Pk3’s, Pk4’s and Pk5’s in the SoCal circuit a few years back that confirmed this).
> Have seen many 3x > parlay multiples when
> an overweight horse/horses {is} out of sequence.
This can certainly happen, especially in Pick 5’s and Pick 6’s where the expected payout is close to twice the parlay anyway when you adjust for takeout (the fact that you’re only getting hit with the takeout once in the multis). A 3x payout is not altogether uncommon in Pk5’s and Pk6’s and does not necessarily indicate that a heavy chalk was overbet.
If this were the case, then you’d expect to see the opposite (huge underlays) occur when such horses
are part of the sequence. When I filtered the results of the study indicated above for any winning horses that were 2/5 or lower, I found that the results for the sample of sequences were, on average, pretty close to those of the overall total. They did tend to pay a bit less than the overall total, but the difference was minor, and still
higher than what was expected based on the takeout-adjusted parlays in this particular study. And certainly nowhere near the type of underlays you’d expect if you were to see 3x to 5x
overlays when these horses were
not part of the sequence:
Do Heavy Faves Get Overbet in the Multis?As for Rob’s comment re: the Haskell, the Pick 3 paid +45.4% above the parlay, which was actually a little more than the +31.2% expected after adjusting for takeout. The Pick 4 did pay a little less than expected, but it wasn’t out of the realm of normal variation (+22.1% more than the parlay vs. an expectation of +79.1%).
Not saying that a heavy \"single-type\" chalk can’t be greatly overbet in the multis in any individual sequence, but on a regular basis? I’m not seeing any evidence of it.
Rocky R
