Trifectas using SP's for selection

[Dowong]

Hello keen punters

A recent past post titled "Value" made me think about a mechanical trifecta selection method using SP's. Every Topic correctly stated that the fav wins most of the time, 2nd fav comes 2nd most of the time, 3rd fav comes 3rd most of the time.
Have just quickly checked some results (not nearly enough) to see how this goes. So far so good.
In fields of 10 or more stand out the fav for 1st, 2nd-6th favs for 2nd and 2nd to 8th favs for 3rd.
Also stand out the 2nd fav to run 2nd with 1st-6th fav for 1st and 1st to 8th favs for 3rd.
Also stand out 3rd fav to run 3rd with 1st-6th favs for 1st and 1st-8th favs for 3rd.

You will get the trifecta twice sometimes and even 3 times when the favs run 1-2-3 in order. The big divs come when either the 2nd or 3rd fav comes in with the other 2 unplaced.

I suggest the bigger races with larger pools so prices don't fluctuate so erratically.

Is there any quick way of checking past results based on SP?

Regards

Dowong

[Mr. Logic]

Sorry to disappoint you but I believe your method will lose long term. It is what I have seen many tote punters do. Stand out the favourite with a selection of other horses. Tote favourites wreck trifecta payouts because the tote wins every race. There is no simple, easy mechanical way to win at trifectas by just checking the tote prices shortly before they jump. I wish it was so easy. Then I wouldn't have to put in many hours of form study each week.

To Dowong:I would like to pass comment on your stats about favs coming first most of the time,2nd favs coming second,and 3rd favs coming third.Not so!!It has been statistically proven over many years that favs only win about 30%of all races,so if you equate that correctly they only win 30 races out of every 100 races run,so in actual fact,they lose most of the time!!If you follow the method you suggested,you will go broke!You also suggest operating in big fields,but in big fields the fav is often very short,and thus poor value.I personally won't bet in big fields at all,because of outrageous bookmaker's percentages,thus eliminating any value no matter which horse you back.more chance of interference,etc.etc.I would like to suggest an alternative method,also mechanical,using Saturday morning prepost markets.Rule 1.Take the 2nd,3rd and 4th horses (prepost)to win.Rule 2.Take the 2nd,3rd,4th and 5th horses(prepost)to come second.Rule three.Take the field to come third.My line of thought here is that statistically,2nd,3rd and 4th in the market between them colectively win roughly 50% of races,which dramatically improves your chances as against relying on the fav alone,which only wins about 30%.Also too many other punters stand the fav out,especially in small fields,so any chance of getting a good result is gone.I would suggest only operate on the better class races in Sydney and Melbourne,Saturdays only.Main race of the day,perhaps the first leg of the daily double?Field size maximum of 16.At a $1 unit,maximum cost with 16 runners $135,of course halve that if you want to bet in half units.I intend to begin operating this system starting this Saturday(14th Dec).I will keep you all posted as to results and dividends,if any!!!Just a passing thought,if there are more than one runner on the 2nd,3rd or 4th line,I will bypass that race and maybe choose another,depending on the class of race available.If there is anyone with the resources and the knowhow to research past results of this,would be greatly appreciated.I would also welcome any feedback.thoughts and ideas regarding the principles of this method.Looks good to me on paper,but the proof will come when my hard goes on!!Sorry this post is so long,cheers and good punting,and a very happy and prosperous Christmas and New Year to all.Cheers,Angel416.

[Dowong]

Angel

Let us know how you go.

Maybe I will forget about standing out the fav to win since it represents bad value in the long run.

Instead I will see how the stats go for standing out the 2nd fav to run 2nd with multiples for 1st and 3rd. Also stand out the 3rd fav to run third with multiples for 1st and 2nd. Should be much better value.

You can still get a div twice this way. If the fav doesn't figure in the finish then the div should be good.

The strike rate will go down considerably which is prob why I considered the fav for 1st originally. But, the return should be greater percentage wise.

Regards

Dowong

Dowong,I agree that your percentages wil be better by leaving the fav out,but I still don't like the idea of relying on one horse to fill a specified position.I think you will find your runs of outs will be frustating,i.e.what if your 2nd fav comes 3rd,and the 3rd fav comes 2nd?I like the idea of multiples much better because it increases the chances of hitting the trifecta more often,even though the outlay is greater.I am going to monitor the results on paper before I use this method.It may well be more cost effective to take 2nd 3rd 4th fav/2nd,3rd,4th,5th/2nd,3rd,4th,5th,6th,7th.8th.Cost only$54 at $1 unit as against $135 in a field of 16 using the other method.There won't often be fields of 16 anyway,average maybe 12/14.This method may suffer long runs of outs too,but my logic here is Value Value Value!That is my reason in leaving the fav out.I don't intend to operate this method on a completely mechanical basis.I am still going to study the form.If my own assessments give the fav a good winning chance,or an excellent place chance in a certain race,I will bypass that race.I think it's important you find the right races with this method,where you think the fav is a risk but the public don't.Let me know how your method goes regards,

[Dowong]

Angel

The cost of the trifecta is basically the number of combinations you take. We are trying to get more frequent returns (with value) with less outlay.

That is why I still think that if the 2nd fav comes 2nd more than any other runner and 3rd fav comes 3rd more than any other runner, then why not stand these out in these positions. I am just trying to reduce outlay here but still can get good dividends.
Maybe I will also look at standing out 2nd/3rd favs for second with multiples for 1st and 3rd. And, 2nd/3rd favs for 3rd with multiples for 1st and 3rd. That way if the 3rd fav comes 2nd or the 2nd fav comes 3rd, then can still be in with a chance.

Regards

Dowong

[rooburger]

ah yes some fellow trifecta punters.
a lot of flack comes with this topic.
we all know strike rates are low but with good money management and sound selections a good return can be had.
back to your formulas.
what about roving your favourite with the 2,3 or 4th favs?
its always hard to leave the toppie out so this way its covered.
the trots seem to through up good results if the fav is 2nd or 3rd.
another big thing is the size of the pool.
the amount plays a big part if you want to succeed.
well good luck Du and Angel.
"if we do not try we do not know"

[Mr. Logic]

Because it's "always hard" for most punters to leave out the toppie, that's why good profits can be made by punters betting intelligently against the crowd. Leaving out the toppie when it's big unders can lead to some big collects.

[Every Topic]

trifecta hunting is - in my opinion - a pretty dangerous pastime unless you really think it through first.
money goes downt he drain very rapidly, so beware and TEST,TEST,TEST first.

someone above pointed out trots favourite come second often - yes!

I would research picking the rank outsider first, the favourite second and the field third - but only in fields less than 10, preferably 8.

I used a similar system for greyhounds last year, more on that in another post.

best of luck
Every Topic