[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

Racing Forum

agree with fezzik and ricky

Posted By: Dunbar
Date: 17 May 02, 9:18 pm

In Response To: My comments and predictions: Fade the Pro (Fezzik)

Gary's exacta bets don't make much sense to me, either. I had the same immediate thought upon reading his post. And the assertion that most exacta bets are overlays on Preakness day is very weak. Not that many exactas are overlays on ANY day, and certainly not exactas that include an overbet favorite.

Gary, you seem like a gentleman, and you clearly know a hell of a lot about handicapping, but I can't see any way that the kinds of exacta bets you make will win in the long run.

It makes no sense to declare a horse overbet, yet still put him on top of some of your exactas. Every exacta is a separate bet. If you want to bet exacta boxes, fine. But both sides should be reasonable.

We all understand that the exacta pool is separate from the win pool, but you cannot tell me that you believe that a horse that is as overbet to win as you are predicting for Medaglia d' Oro, will be somehow underbet in the exacta pool. Joe Blow is going to jump all over Medaglia d' Oro to win, but is going to forget about him in the exacta pools? No way. Joe Blow is going to be all over him in the Exacta pools, too.

As a matter of fact, I would like very much to fade your exacta action, if I could wrestle it away from Fezzik. But of course, our host wouldn't like that very much, and I would never make a bet like that anyway without lots of time to nail down the details. But here's a gentlemen's bet I'll make with you: I'll bet that if you do hit an exacta, it will NOT satisfy the minimum criterion for long term profitability set out in the "Fair Exacta Payoffs" table that I posted. It will pay less than a fair payoff.

You have handicapped Medaglia d' Oro at 5-1 and War Emblem at 9-1. A fair $2 exacta payoff for 2 horses with those odds is $100. (That is a theoretical value obtained with the Harville formula, but the TRUE fair payoff should be even higher. Why? Because War Emblem is precisely the kind of horse whose chance of coming in 2nd is probably overestimated by the Harville formula. War Emblem if probably either going to win the race, or fade badly.) But let's assume that a fair payoff is "only" $100. You know damn well that a Medaglia d' Oro/War Emblem exacta is not going to pay anywhere near $100. This is not going to be one of the many Preakness Day overlays you referred to. More likely it would pay around $30. There are only 2 possible conslusions: Either the Medaglia d' Oro/War Emblem exacta is a bad bet, or your estimate of their chances to win the race is way off.

The bottom line is that when you make bets like this, it appears as if you do not believe your own handicapping.

To close on a more positive note, I like the way you keep records. I also like the way you took the ML's and converted them to a theoretically plausible ML that added to 100%. I hope you will keep posting and posting your record, because the discussions have been productive.

--Dunbar

Password:

Messages In This Thread

My comments and predictions: Fade the Pro -- Fezzik -- 17 May 02, 5:31 pm
agree with fezzik and ricky -- Dunbar -- 17 May 02, 9:18 pm

 


Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Picks Post?
Message:

If you'd like to include a link to another page with your message,
please provide both the URL address and the title of the page:

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:

If you'd like to have the option of deleting your post later,
please provide a password (CASE SENSITIVE!):

Password:

If you'd like e-mail notification of responses, please check this box:

 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

Racing Forum is maintained by Pi Yee Press