What's the Odds?

[freowaytogo]

For the experienced ones here, when you place a bet on a horse at evens or 2-1, do you think your chances are better than the odds?
At the casino, most bets are 'what you see is what you get', apart from the casino advantage.
If a horse is evens to win, do you think it really has a fifty fifty chance of winning?

[becareful]

On 2002-09-22 11:43, freowaytogo wrote:
For the experienced ones here, when you place a bet on a horse at evens or 2-1, do you think your chances are better than the odds?
At the casino, most bets are 'what you see is what you get', apart from the casino advantage.


If you are serious you should ONLY ever bet if you think the horses chances of winning are better than the odds. Personally I never bet seriously on anything paying less than about $7 - I occassionally have fun bets on shorter priced horses but that is for fun only (I am not saying you can't make money on the shorter priced horses - but my personal system doesn't work well below $7). In my opinion it is VERY RARE for a horse to have a greater than 50% chance of winning a race so odds-on does not make a lot of sense to me.

Regarding Casino odds - yes what you see is what you get - unfortunately it is always in casino's favour (with exception of card-counting blackjack players). At least with horses there are lots of opportunities where the odds can be in your favour if you are good enough.

[freowaytogo]

I was in the casino the other day and my friend told me that a guy was playing the crossing over system at one of the roulette tables.
We watched him on and off for a couple of hours and he looked to be doing ok, and had some big stacks of chips in front of him.
It is supposed to be based on the law of the third and you are on the numbers that are hitting the most.
My friend said it was one of only a few ways to win at the wheel?
Going back to your 7-1 selections, do you gets wins better than the odds?

[Mr. Logic]

I hope you don't mind me saying, but this sounds like superstitious nonsense to me.
"The law of the third" Who invented that law? Sounds like a good name to con people with.
"The law of the third."
What an absolute laugh.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mr. Logic on 2002-09-22 18:01 ]</font>

[becareful]

Have to agree with Mr Logic on the roulette system - unless you have a biased wheel (unheard of in casinos these days) then no numbers are more or less likely to appear than any others. Probably the guy was just having a lucky day and if you had watched him the next day he would have lost it all!

Yes I regularly get wins at better than the odds - my average dividend is about $12-$13 and strike rate between 9.5%-10%. On Friday my winners were $8.30, $9.60, $11.40 and $24.40.

[freowaytogo]

If you only have a 10% strike rate, then you will need most of your winners to be more than 7-1 then, wont you.

The law of the third indicates that a 37 numbered wheel will have hits on 2/3's of the numbers if spun 37 times.
So one third will not hit.
That is the theory.
I will look out for the fellow again, and report on how he does next time.

[becareful]

Yes, 7-1 is the MINIMUM I bet on. As per my previous post my AVERAGE dividend is between $12 and $13.

Without doing the maths myself I will take you word on the "law of thirds". I can't see how this information is of any use to you at all though. There is no way of knowing, prior to those 37 spins, which numbers are going to be hit and which ones are not so simply knowing that 2/3 will be hit and 1/3 will not is useless. Of course this is also a long term average so in a given set of 37 spins the real value could be 50% hit, 66% hit or 80% hit - still totally useless though.

[TheDuck]

I'll be happy to figure out how this law of the thirds equates in terms of probability. In the meantime, you might go here while waiting.

http://www.thewizardofodds.com/game/roulette.html

You might also go here to see how these 'no-fail' systems stack up.

http://xerxx.nu/oops/

But wherever you go and whatever you do, don't be fooled into thinking you can constantly and consistently win at roulette.

-Duck

[Rain Lover]

Freowaytogo,
The Duck has put you on the right track with the link to Wizard Of Odds. The problem with all Casino games (apart from the boredom) is the fact that the house always pays less than the true odds (probability). Therefore you simply cannot win - long term. The longer stay at the table, the more time you give for the house percentage to grind away at your bank. Plonk down a couple of bets to be sociable and leave, win or lose.
The advantages of going to the track (apart from the excitement)are that you can get odds offered that are greater than the true probability of a horse winning. The odds offered by the TAB or bookies are simply votes expressed by the betting public in the form of cash. If the weight of opinion is wrong (which it is 2/3 of the time), then there's your opportunity. Take it!

[freowaytogo]

I remember the Perth Cup a few years back when there was a big plunge on a certain horse and he was way out in front as favourite.
I stuck by the one I was certain was going to romp it and yep he came home first.
I think it may have been Willouby.
That is at least one ocassion I thought the odds on the favourite were way off.
Do you think there is any factor that can give better odds for the punter than what is actually offered.
Eg. A Mega top favourite with the second favourite at about 3-1.

[Rain Lover]

Freowaytogo,
You got it in a nutshell with your last post. The way to get "over the odds" is to stick to your opinion irrespective of the weight of money on others. Opinions are formed by having a reliable method of rating horses which proves itself over time. If you purchase someone else's opinions or try to make automatic system selections, you're not helping yourself form your own opinions on the merits of the horses you're backing.

Most of the experienced punters on this site seem to have developed their own rating system, based on previous form. Where they differ is how much emphasis is placed on the factors involved - class, weights, times, jockeys, barriers etc.

But you still have to select winners at a rate consistent with the price band you are operating in. I concentrate on the 2nd or 3 rd line of betting and rarely back anything under 2/1 ($3.00), unless it's called Northerly. If you get average dividends around $6.00 then you only have to have one in 5 selections get up to stay afloat. One in 4 would mean a tidy profit.
Cheers