02/20/2014 1:50PM

Protecting a lead late in a contest


Later in today’s column, we’ll look at what’s going on at NHCQualify.com and BCQualify.com this weekend, but before that, I wanted to write a follow-up piece about end-of-tournament strategy. We’ve already examined the question of whom you might want to play while in hot pursuit of the tournament leader. But what if you are the leader going into the last couple of races? How should you approach the contest then?

A lot depends on the specifics of the leaderboard. Is there one player within reach of you or a bunch of players who might pass you with a logical horse? Two races out, you’re going to want to play the horse you like, pretty much regardless of price.

If you’re not committed to a particular horse, my general inclination would be to play a longer price, the bigger your cushion, because these are the ones you have to worry about. With a pack of people behind you, my general thought would be to pick the best horse in the mid-odds range. These are statistically likely winners who could knock you off your perch.

The last race is its own animal. One significant difference is that it might no longer make sense to play the horse you like. Once you get to the last race, there are certain horses that you’ll already “have,” so there is no need to play those. For example, if you’re ahead by $21, you own everything that’s 5-1 or lower anyway. You have what is known as “the protection of the chalk.”

:: Click here to purchase a copy of “The Winning Contest Player” by Peter Thomas Fornatale

There is a mathematical formula to determine this number, similar to the Rule of Three discussed in my previous article. But in this scenario, you need to make sure you’re protected even if there is a late odds increase on a horse who might beat you. To be safe, you can take the gap between you and second place, divide by three, and then subtract two points in the odds. So, in the example above, $21/3 is 7. Subtract 2 from 7, and you get 5, meaning you’re protected against 5-1 shots and below.

As for which 6-1 shot or higher to play, you’ll obviously want to go with the horse you like best, and no matter whom you choose, you now have multiple ways to win. You win if your horse wins, and you win if you simply block the person in second. You can force your opponent into a situation where he is drawing dead.

As the leader, you can use game theory as well. The player in second might assume you’re going to play the first horse whose odds can beat you, so you can play even higher. But this, of course, is dangerous. You really don’t want to ever get beaten by the horse you like best. So, you’ll almost always want to pick the horse you like best who is at the minimum odds that can catch you.

However, there is an exception to this rule. It doesn’t come up often, but it is worth mentioning. For this to work, you really would have to like one of the shorter-priced horses’ chances of either winning or running second. But assuming that’s the case, here’s what you have to consider. You know that all the players below you are gunning for your score going into the last race, sometimes down to the penny. 

So, if you play the favorite, even if it just runs second, the place price you get might leapfrog you over the person who just caught the winner. You win anyway. You are essentially trading one “out”– the opportunity to block whomever is chasing you – for a potentially better out:  the chance to have your horse run second and still get the money.

This weekend's tournaments

Entries are now open for Sunday’s contest on NHCQualify.com. It’s a one-day contest with a buy-in of $165, with up to five National Handicapping Championship seats being awarded.

On Saturday, there is a qualifying contest at BCQualify.com with a buy-in of $190 and four spots being awarded. Free past performances are available for contest participants. The selected races are:
4:03 Gulfstream 8
4:08 Oaklawn 5
4:33 Gulfstream 9
4:39 Oaklawn 6
4:55 Fair Grounds 8
5:03 Gulfstream 10
5:09 Oaklawn 7
5:25 Fair Grounds 9
5:33 Gulfstream 11
5:38 Oaklawn 8
5:55 Fair Grounds 10
6:25 Fair Grounds 11

Roger More than 1 year ago
Peter all I have to say is Ugh...
Peter Fornatale More than 1 year ago
I apologize if I brought up a sore subject!!
Bill Feingold More than 1 year ago
Pete, I can't help thinking of our friend, the late great Cary Fotias, as I read this. Cary loved contests and was very good at them.
Peter Fornatale More than 1 year ago
Totally! I was thinking of Cary and Jeff Sotman constantly on the NHC this year. I miss those guys terribly. Cary was particularly good in live bankroll formats. I can remember him telling me that the $2WP format was better for "contest dorks" and live bankroll was where it was at!
Dennis More than 1 year ago
I touched on this subject in the comments section a couple of weeks ago. Last weekend going into the final race of the Nhc qualifier on Horsetourneys.com,the 2 leaders had over a $20 cushion in the field. The last race was a relatively small field, and by my calculations there were only 2 possible horses that could take them out of the qualifying positions. For some reason, they both took the even money favorite. Needless to say, Rathbaun got up at over 20-1 and capped out the payoffs and those two dropped out of their qualifying spots. Even if you think the favorite couldn't lose, or couldn't be worse than 2nd, it was still a bad decision. They had 6 horses of the 8 horse field on their sides going into that final race. With the right play, they could've made it 7 of 8. Maybe they learned their lesson. Congrats to those that swept by.
Peter Fornatale More than 1 year ago
Indeed, Dennis. Your comment gave me the idea to write this piece! it's very, very rare where it's wise to play under the score that can catch you and I'd be disinclined to ever play an even money shot under those circumstances.
Kevin Cox More than 1 year ago
Actually, Dennis, I half agree/half disagree with you. I wholeheartedly agree that they were wrong for playing that favorite in that spot. The best time to play a horse like that is when you're on the fringes. There were 4 horses in that race that could've mushed 'em, I believe , and they were 11-1,14-1, 29-1, and 45-1. The first two were definitely the more logical plays, both because of their odds, and form. But as illustrated by someone I know in Pete's book, "The Winning Contest Player" : 1-( Although this wasn't a pick and pray ), "....sometimes it's good to play higher priced horses in the last legs of P & P's. " 2-"Illogical is the new logical....above the cap is sometimes the way to go." And as for that bomb coming in, and wiping people out, my favorite contest quote is from the movie " No Country For Old Men "---"You can't stop what's coming."
Peter Fornatale More than 1 year ago
Kevin, thanks for commenting and thanks for the plug! How is your new found celebrity treating you? ;) I look forward to watching HORSEPLAYERS tomorrow night -- hey, one nice plug deserves another! I only wish we'd worked that NO COUNTRY quote into the book. Hmmm, maybe you just gave me the topic for Thursday's column!
Eric More than 1 year ago
Certainly not a great play in retrospect for the leaders. With any luck the leaders put a nice wager on the two horses they were vulnerable to and made a nice hedge score. I have won $5,000 cash last year in a similar situation (I have leveraged a contest lead multiple times last year...as the last race always seems to find those crazy longshots for some reason). You lose your chance at the coveted entry, but earned a nice cash sum anyways. Those are the best situations because it makes everyone a winner.
Peter Fornatale More than 1 year ago
Eric, does your homegrown data reflect the same % of a cap horse winning in the last two legs as the source as I cite above?