Thursday, November 8, 2012

Horse Betting for Profit


Let's look at 'horse betting' like you would a business.  In any business you have to know some statistics related to the business.  You have to know the risk involved and where the odds are in your favor.  You also need a business plan.

I have spent time at the race track just observing the nature of people with respect to how they bet. You learn a lot about what NOT to do by picking up tickets on the floor after a race to see what LOSING bets were made for that race.  It is very revealing.  Try it some time.

For years I have collected 'empirical statistics' at specific tracks as well as across tracks. One statistic that holds true for most tracks in the US and Canada is that the morning line favorite in the 'long run' wins between 28 and 32 percent of the time depending on the track.  This is very useful if you looking at 'horse betting' as you would in a business.  There is one other 'empirical statistic' to go along with this one that is very important and most people are completely unaware of.  Here it is.  The third morning line favorite wins between 25 and 30 percent of the time in the 'long run'.  This is true across tracks.  Now how can this information be used to structure a betting pattern that can lead to a 'long run' profit if followed consistently?

To be a bit more specific let me introduce some symbols and definitions.  Let's define the 'morning line favorite' with ML1 and the 'third morning line favorite' with ML3.  From the empirical statistics above (of all the horses in a race) ML3 will win almost as often as ML1.  Both win about 30% of the time.  Just knowing these two empirical statistics gives you important information on structuring your bets inorder to have the odds in your favor.

Using the notation ML1,ML2,ML3,ML4,...,MLn 'n' stands for 'the number of horses in the race'. If n=10, then there are 10 horses in the race etc.  The morning line odds are always readily available for any race at any track. I have chosen, over the years, to stick with the morning line odds because of this fact.  [Remember we're considering 'betting' as a business.]  We need data that is always available and reliable.

Let me point out an observation that should be obvious.  ML3 will always be larger than ML1 (ML3>ML1).  Therefore the payoffs for ML3 are always larger.  As an example, ML1 might be 7/5 and ML3 might be 7/2. Don't be fooled, sometimes when the horse that starts out as the third morning line favorite (ML3) suddenly becomes the 'tote board favorite' when large amounts of money are placed on the ML3 horse before post time.

So let's take the information we have layed out above and propose a 'business plan strategy'.

Strategy #1: Place a $3 to win on the horse ML3 and a $5 to show on the horse ML1.

"Over the long run" this approach works well.  Note that depending on your tolerance for bet size this could be $6 to win on ML3 and $10 to show on ML1 or $30 to win on ML3 and $50 to show on ML1.  You decide.  I have tested the ratio over time and it is about right for a "long run" return on investment (ROI) of 15 to 20%.

Caveat Emptor:

I have also studied each of the races on a day's card.  There are usually 8, 9, or 10 races /day on a card at a track.  My empirical statistics have shown that some races work better than others for strategy #1 above.  I will break the races into two categories: #1 'the race follows the form most of the time' and #2 'the race that tends to be wide open'.  The races that tend to follow the form are 1,2,3,7,8,and 9.  Races 4,5,and 6 tend to be wide open.  I have found that using strategy #1 with races 4,5, and 6 are losing bets a large percentage of time.  Strategy #1 seems to be quite profitable with races 1,2,3,7,8 and 9.  Always look at races 4,5,and 6 very closely, particulary if there are over 10 horses in the race.  In fact be leery of any race on the card with over 10 horses in the race. Strategy #1 should not be used indiscriminately. 'Wide open' races are purposefully carded with lots of horses (>10) to make the race more difficult.

No comments: