5th January 2008, 11:22 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 92
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pengo
Well unlike win betting, all I need to do to win is for it to come 2nd-12th in a 12 horse race.. So I see that as being better odds for me in winning my bet where as trying to pick one horse to win. Granted I gotta risk a lot to win a little but still, smaller consistent returns is better than large inconsistent returns IMHO.
|
Pengo you've failed to grasp the maths of it. Laying a horse at, say, $16, is EXACTLY (not similar, not related, but exactly) the same thing as having a BET, at odds of, roughly, $1.06, that it WON'T win, as opposed to backing horses who WILL win. When all is said and done, it's the same thing, because a bet is a bet. You bet a horse "will win" or you bet he "will not win", either way you take odds about a proposition.
I couldn't be f**ked typing as much as I should about this so you get it, but I'll leave you with one last thing to think about : how is it mathematically possible for all LAYERS to win, and all BACKERS to lose, at the same time? Investigate the maths of that one, and you'll have your answer.
|