top 2 contender choices

[imofe]

Just did a little review of my contenders in each race this year. My top 2 have won 53% and the return is on them is 92.5%. I just seem to zig and zag between them until my head spins. Bet the 5/2 and the 5-1 wins. Bet the 5-1 and the 5/2 wins. Between my lack of ability to assign exact odds and the board changing anyway, how do I go about improving on this situation?

[Overlay]

How are you arriving at your contenders? Are you employing a consistent overall methodology, or more of an intuitive race-by-race process? Having isolated the contenders, what criteria do you then use to determine which horse you bet on? Would it be possible to find some common thread to occasions when Contender A wins, Contender B wins, or neither of them wins, that would help you to either focus your wagering on the winner a higher percentage of the time; pass more races where conditions do not look favorable for either of the contenders; or else capitalize on identifiable occasions when one of your contenders is going off at odds that justify the risk of betting on it, given its past performance under similar conditions? When one of your contenders wins, where does the other one finish? If the non-winning contender is finishing close an appreciable percentage of the time, would exotic wagering improve the situation?

[VeryOldMan]

Originally Posted by imofe

Just did a little review of my contenders in each race this year. My top 2 have won 53% and the return is on them is 92.5%. I just seem to zig and zag between them until my head spins. Bet the 5/2 and the 5-1 wins. Bet the 5-1 and the 5/2 wins. Between my lack of ability to assign exact odds and the board changing anyway, how do I go about improving on this situation?

Can you back check the exacta box ROI on your picks?

[pondman]

Can you give a hint as to your method? What is your estimate of the unknown? Is your method independent of the odds, based on a variable(s) prior to to morning lines consideration?

I personally believe you should set the lower limits of your bet at $2 + 9-5 in a Dutch bet scenario. I wouldn't do 5-2. You need to be almost 4-1 minimum in a two contender bet.

[imofe]

Overlay

It is a consistent overall methodology in which a identify and rank the 1st 4 contenders. Right now the 3rd and 4th choices are not pulling their weight ( combined 22% and poor ROI). The 2nd choice outperforms the 1st choice on ROI even though the 1st choice wins more. I have not found a way like betting on the higher price or any specific types of races that have helped me decide which one to play and when.

VOM

Right now the exacta boxes hit at 20% for a return of 134%, but there have been a few big ones and I can not see this holding up. I have not broken down straight AB and BA which I will do next.

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by imofe

Just did a little review of my contenders in each race this year. My top 2 have won 53% and the return is on them is 92.5%. I just seem to zig and zag between them until my head spins. Bet the 5/2 and the 5-1 wins. Bet the 5-1 and the 5/2 wins. Between my lack of ability to assign exact odds and the board changing anyway, how do I go about improving on this situation?

At those odds, you could dutch them. divide 100/3.5 and 100/6 and bet a multiple of those amounts. My rule is if the numbers add up to less than 50, it is a bet. With your ROI, you could set it higher.

[imofe]

Pondman,

I have spent a long time trying to perfect contenders in rank order. I know a lot of people say anyone can pick the contenders, but picking the winner from that group is what will make you a winner. I agree and disagree with that. Obviously, I am having trouble separating even two so I can not disagree with that part of it. But getting the contenders down to the smallest possible number without drastically lowering the hit rate is important to me.

As far as what I use. Most of it is fractions and speed, but the key is I have identified a way to eliminate some horses that most people think are contenders. Not sure what you mean about when to and when not to dutch, Can you explain that again for me?

[imofe]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

At those odds, you could dutch them. divide 100/3.5 and 100/6 and bet a multiple of those amounts. My rule is if the numbers add up to less than 50, it is a bet. With your ROI, you could set it higher.

Yes. At those odds. So would you say I should just wait for scenarios where I can bet both?

[imofe]

I failed to mention that most of the ideas I got are from Dave's Monti video. That really helped me. The only part of the Monti I can't get is which door to open at the end.

[VeryOldMan]

Originally Posted by imofe

VOM

Right now the exacta boxes hit at 20% for a return of 134%, but there have been a few big ones and I can not see this holding up. I have not broken down straight AB and BA which I will do next.

I'm just a recreational bettor but learned to embrace the chaos and make the exacta box bet at my favorite track when I felt I could identify the top two. Don't ignore your ROI on that bet; make sure it's a large enough sample, but don't throw out the possibility that you've found a winning strategy.

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by imofe

Yes. At those odds. So would you say I should just wait for scenarios where I can bet both?

Yes, provided you get enough bets. At least, until you find away to separate them with some degree of accuracy.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by imofe

Just did a little review of my contenders in each race this year. My top 2 have won 53% and the return is on them is 92.5%. I just seem to zig and zag between them until my head spins. Bet the 5/2 and the 5-1 wins. Bet the 5-1 and the 5/2 wins. Between my lack of ability to assign exact odds and the board changing anyway, how do I go about improving on this situation?

So dutching them returns .925 ROI and hits 53% ?

That's pretty good. These numbers can mean more or less depending on if they are "all playable races", "all total races", etc...

regardless:

It seems like you are close, and now have 2 big choices to make on every race.

1. Does this race fit my value criteria?

2. Does either of the 2 contenders have a significant value edge?

If you find #1 to be true, you can still dutch both contenders even if you can't answer #2. If you can answer both questions, and be right a good percentage of the time, you are on your way to flirting with profitability.

Kind of didn't answer your question, but hopefully helped some

[HUSKER55]

just a thought,

what you need is a way to "split hairs". For example, which horse is more consistent, which horse is closest to its average winning distance and etcetera.

evidentially your system is picking the right contenders so I wouldn't mess with that. I think adding a fudge angle or two would do the trick.

but, everyone has their own idea.

good luck!

[Capper Al]

This is one thing that I'm rethinking also at the moment. Maybe passing until one of your top two is going off at natural odds (random odds) or better is a solution.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by imofe

Just did a little review of my contenders in each race this year. My top 2 have won 53% and the return is on them is 92.5%. I just seem to zig and zag between them until my head spins. Bet the 5/2 and the 5-1 wins. Bet the 5-1 and the 5/2 wins. Between my lack of ability to assign exact odds and the board changing anyway, how do I go about improving on this situation?

Based in your description, your top2 picks seem to be highly correlated with the favorite and co-favorite of the race. In contrary to what have already been said I find your picks very bad for betting purposes and you should seriously consider drastic changes in your handicapping process.

More than this, I have to notice that targeting for such a high winning frequency as 50% is not the way to go when betting horses. My research and betting experience has convinced me so far that I am getting the best results betting much longer shots something that needs sufficient large bankroll, sound handicapping and more than anything the confidence to overcome long loosing streaks.

As a starter, I would advice to direct your research towards the starters you did not pick as opposed to your top 2! I am sure you will learn more there than trying to 'split hairs' applying ad hoc rules refining your bets between your top2....