Harness: Looking at the bigger picture when considering ticket structure

Perhaps the most popular wagers in harness racing right now in terms of pool size are the Pick 4 and Pick 5. They present a certain lure in that people think they can make a big score. While the validity of that theory is questionable, people are convinced and it really doesn't matter much.

Most vital when playing these multiple-race wagers is process and ticket structure. So I ask the question: How do you handicap a Pick 4 or Pick 5?

Do you examine each race and write down the horses you want to include on your ticket(s)? Or maybe you break each race into your top selections (A) and secondary choices (B)?

While the second method is preferred since you can't possibility like all horses in each leg equally, I'm more interested in the overall thought process of the ticket. Despite the tendency to go leg by leg and write down the horses you'd like to include, multi-race wagers require you to consider all of the legs prior to any ticket construction. It is essential because you want a ticket that makes sense as a whole rather than independent parts. You may say, what on earth does that mean?

When making a WIN bet you are hopefully analyzing the merits of each horse to win the race and also how accurately the odds of each horse match their chances of winning. For instance, if the 5 horse has the best chance to win and is offering 8-5 odds, but the 3, 4 and 7 all rank as contenders offering 5-2, 6-1 and 12-1, logic states that the longest-priced horse is the "best" bet. Perhaps that horse isn't the most likely winner, but they make the most sense at that time, in that race.

With multi-race bets there are no actual values assigned to horses in legs after the first because wagering has not commenced in those races. There is a bit of guesswork required to assign potential value to each horse. The idea is to examine each race in the sequence and uncover the best course of action for that wager while considering what may happen in the other legs. If you see that odds-on favorites are going to win legs two and three, using a large group of horses in the other legs is a bad idea because the payout will be limited regardless of how "lucky" you get in your spread legs.

Perhaps the best example of treating a ticket as a whole occurred at Cal Expo on April 2. The early Pick 5 included four odds-on favorites on paper that figured to be difficult (not impossible) to beat. If each of these horses came out on top it was impossible for the payout to be more than $10-$15 for a 20-cent base wager. Knowing this, it would be foolish to buy a ticket that would cost more than $10. You simply can't make bets where you can hit the race and come away a loser.

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem using combinations in which you break even (though some people would argue that is a bad idea as well) because I understand that sometimes getting your money back is the difference between being able to make another bet or being tapped out for the night. Not everyone treats wagering like a business or a job. For some people it is simply entertainment and stretching that wagering dollar for another race with a "saver" type bet can help accomplish that goal.

► Sign up for our FREE DRF Harness Digest Newsletter

Anyway, back to the Cal Expo example. The winners returned $6.20, $2.60, $3.00, $3.00 and $3.20. The Pick 5 returned $7.76 for a 20-cent ticket.

If you examined each race as individual contests in the Cal Expo Pick 5, a handicapper could've easily come away with the opinion that going six-deep in the opener and using two horses in each of the other legs was a viable option. There were horses capable of pulling off a slight upset in each leg, but that ticket would've cost $19.20 and more than likely was going to leave you a loser.

There are many people out there who believe that using as many contenders as possible in a Pick X sequence is the best option. Certainly if the only goal is to "cash" a ticket, then yes, that will work. But if the idea is to maximize profit, you really need to examine the wager as a whole and determine whether it makes sense from an investment angle.

Those who read my daily Meadowlands analysis will notice I don't provide Pick 4 or Pick 5 tickets. This is intentional because if I start providing tickets it will set a precedent to do it for every card and quite frankly, I don't want to give out a play that I don't believe in. Now sometimes I don't have a choice because it is part of the job. In those instances I do attempt to relay my confidence level in the bet verbally or in writing.

The point is that my job as a public handicapper is to help you win, not to get you to spend more money by playing a bigger ticket that is not in your best interest. Some Pick X bets call for a $2.40 investment and others for a $96 play. It is all relative to the sequence and the outside parameters like carryovers and pool size.