- This topic has 12 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
A few days ago, I was chatting to a regular in my local betting office and he couldn’t quite understand why I backed two horses in the same race. His theory was that only one horse will win and the rest of your stake money is lost (which could go on other horses in other races). I mentioned that if I change my mind, the other horse that I fancy might win as well as looking for value odds that may save my stakes if one of them wins. It Turned out that one of my horses won at Wolverhampton (China Excels 1st at 10/1 (part of a Lucky 15) and the other, Saffire Song (£3 straight win) finished 5th at 13/2). Although the tiny profit I made wasn’t gonna get me an early retirement, at least the bookmaker didn’t win!
So, what’s the highest number of horses you’ve backed in a race? Mine was 6 in this year’s Grand National but, unfortunately, the bookmaker won that time
I once backed three in a four horse race, and you can guess the result…….
Charles Darwin to conquer the World
99% of the time i back all 4 in a four runner races when doing a placepot.
Have backed three in some of the multi runner h’caps(at the likes of ascot) but all have to be double figure prices
I hardly ever bet on more than one horse for the reason given, waste of money but yesterday being a bit more adventurous I did a e/w acc – failed on first race and in a race with 8 runners I couldn’t decide which between two and backed both and typically they both finished outside top 3.
So back to normal for me each way one horse in a race of 8 runners or more or a paddy power powercast tricast/forecast for any race with 7 runners or less.
I generally try and stick to a rule whereby if I really can’t choose between 2 horses I fancy then I won’t have a bet. Especially if they are both win bets.
The only time that rule is broken is the Grand National, I think I had 4 in this years race.There is a race today actually, the 2.15 group 2 Mill Reef at Newbury. I like the chances of Raucous and Ribchester but they are around 13/8 and 11/4 respectively. If someone gave me a tenner, I would stick my neck out and say Raucous but I’m not sure as King Robert also looks decent.
If you really have that special knowing feeling that it’s definitely between two horses and one or both is a good price then great.
The only thing I would say is be prepared in the worst case for a double slap in the face if they both lose. Not a nice feeling.Can’t see any problems combining two or more chances in any event, it’s just taking a opinion. If you lay a horse in an eight runner contest you’re actually betting the remaining seven runners combined and if betting one of the eight to win you’re actually laying the other seven.
On day to day racing I would usually only select one but in the Grand National and other huge handicaps I might pick two or three at big odds. The Ayr Gold Cup has three picks for me this year but they were at 14/1, 20/1 and 25/1
Ante-Post I might pick several but only if they are huge odds that I feel might prove value. As the race approaches and I feel my earlier picks have no chance of winning I might look elsewhere for some value and the chance to cover the overall investment. This year I took a very early viewpoint that Ol’ Man River was going to be a bust. I am not fully sure why, it was just a feeling I had when I described him on the forum as “This year’s Geoffrey Chaucer”
I don’t see a problem in backing several horses when the betting is 25/1 the field, for example, but I couldn’t be one of those punters who is squeezing the value out of races by backing the first three in the betting at relatively short odds on the day. You can’t criticise that either though, because it is all about making a profit for some people and as long as their method yields a profit it’s all good in staying ahead of the bookies.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
“A few days ago, I was chatting to a regular in my local betting office and he couldn’t quite understand why I backed two horses in the same race. His theory was that only one horse will win and the rest of your stake money is lost (which could go on other horses in other races). I mentioned that if I change my mind, the other horse that I fancy might win as well as looking for value odds that may save my stakes if one of them wins. It Turned out that one of my horses won at Wolverhampton (China Excels 1st at 10/1 (part of a Lucky 15) and the other, Saffire Song (£3 straight win) finished 5th at 13/2). Although the tiny profit I made wasn’t gonna get me an early retirement, at least the bookmaker didn’t win!”
If you back a horse at – let’s say 2/1 – why shouldn’t back 3 horses at 14/1 each of them?
It’s just a return on investment thing and having a bit of fun.
Maybe your bookie should also ask the owners why they run their horses in race, since there can be only one winner.The first time I recall someone backing two relative shorties was way back in 1985 when I watched a guy put £200 on Luca Cumani’s Bairn at 2/1 and £200 on Rousillion from the Guy Harwood stable at the same odds. I asked him why he was backing both and he said he couldn’t split them but was positive one of them would win.
I had been following Rousillon that season and stuck with him despite some feeling in the press that the horse wasn’t reliable and I recall one pundit saying that he felt Rousillon would struggle to cope with stable mate Cataldi who had won the Lincoln that year.
Rousillon won and the intrepid punter collected £600 for his £400 investment, which meant he was effectively betting 1/2 his money.
Some people seem to feel that backing two at an effective 1/2 is better than backing one horse at that price, because if one horse has an off day the other should, in theory anyway, collect and if you just back one odds-on shot and something goes wrong with it you are goosed.
One of my ex colleagues lost heavily on Bairn that day and also in the 2000 Guineas, just to rub the salt in he had a thick ante-post on him for the Derby and he never ran. I think he felt badly enough to have eaten his own bairns after that horse’s failures!
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
In 30 odd years betting I’ve never backed more than 1 horse in a race
I figure that if you really can’t decide between two or more horses then move on and look at another race, there’s plenty of them !
Unlike Ginge who regularly backs every horse in every race I will often back 2 or 3 in the same race but most of the time I only back one.I will back the same horse umpteen times though.
I backed 10 in the Topham Trophy in 2004, all at big prices including the winner Cassia Heights at 75.0.
At the time I was plundering Betfair with small stakes on a range of runners, mainly in handicaps. Admittedly 10 was a bit excessive but I assume I was opposing a number of seriously underpriced horses at the front end of the market.
I’ve often backed 10 in the National on a sliding scale based on perceived chance/value.
As a principle, I’d have no problem doing it regularly if I was a regular punter. As punters we become accustomed to getting X times our money for backing a winner, but in the example Steve gives of an experienced punter very confident about an outcome, if he were to say to a non-punter ‘Give me £100, wait there for five minutes and I’ll bring you back £150’, your man in the street would be astonished at such a return.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.