7.
WAGERING ON THE EXOTIC BETS:QUINIELAS, PERFECTAS AND TRIFECTAS
7.
WAGERING ON THE EXOTIC BETS:
INTRODUCTION
After 20 years of betting on horses, I had become fixed on the idea of playing just one horse to win. When I first approached jai-alai, I made straight win bets only. I would wait until one minute to post time, select the team or teams where the scoreboard odds gave me the greatest margin over what I felt the true odds were, and rush to the $10 Win window.I would walk back to my seat, only to find that my 10-1 shot had closed at 4-1. After this happened many times, I began to realize that others were directly or indirectly doing the same thing. Collectively, we were breaking the odds at the last minute.
My next step was to turn to Quiniela betting. But frankly, my experience with horse racing made me dread the idea of "worrying" about multiple entries in the same game. Watching two horses in a horse race, rooting for them to come in 1-2, is pure agony. On the other hand, making combination bets in jai-alai adds to your enjoyment rather than reducing it. In fact I think you will find that some form of boxing of three teams is best from the point of view of maximizing your entertainment value.
If you bet to win only, and your team loses the first time up, it often means a long game for you to watch. On the other hand, if you have three teams, one of them is usually on the court or about to come on, so you have a positive rooting interest in every point. If your top team is cold, one of the others may get hot, running up some points until your favorite can get up again.
Three-team Quiniela Boxes are fine, but Quiniela payoffs are generally low. If you are betting the stronger teams it is difficult to maintain an average payoff as high as $40. There are 28 possible Quiniela combinations, and the fans concentrate their money on the ones that come in most frequently. For example, almost three out of every five Quiniela payoffs involve Teams 1 or 2, and over 75% involve Teams 1, 2 or 3. The fans bet these Quinielas heavily, reducing the payoffs to unsatisfactory levels. If the smart bettor tries to go contra to this by playing Quinielas not involving 1-2-3, he finds that he gets very long losing streaks, even though the payoffs are much higher (e.g., on June 23, 1976 a 6-7 Quiniela at the Hartford Fronton paid $177.80).
Also, as mentioned earlier, the two ways to win with a Quiniela are not equally likely. Suppose you bet a 3-6 Quiniela. You will find that in over 70% of the times you win it will be with Team 6 coming in first and Team 3 in second place. This same phenomenon occurs for other combinations of numbers as well, although the proportions vary.
It is difficult to provide a simple explanation of why this should be so. It has to do with the way that the players come up in rotational order and what sequence of wins and losses must occur for any two teams to come in first and second in that order. Don't worry about it. It happens in the real world and our computers have verified that it is no temporary fluke.
The point is that when you bet a $2 Quiniela it is really like betting two $1 Perfectas, except that the payoff is the same no matter which way the two teams finish. I soon found that if I just bet Perfectas directly I could concentrate my bets on the higher probability combinations, ignoring the ones that hit infrequently.
Actually, it is not quite that simple. The 2-7 Perfecta is just as likely to come in as the 7-2. You cannot follow a simple rule. You have to know the percentages (we will come to them in a moment). But the critical thing to realize is that it is easier to get better odds relative to your chances of winning when you bet Perfectas than when you bet Quinielas. This is because there are 56 Perfecta combinations versus 28 Quinielas you can bet. The more alternatives that you give a betting crowd, the less well they will focus their money. This gives the smart bettor a better chance to find bargains.
BETTING QUINIELAS AND PERFECTAS
Because I find that Perfectas offer a better reward-to-risk ratio, I look to Perfecta opportunities first. In order for me to bet a Quiniela, both ways (e.g., 2-6 and 6-2) have to have about the same frequency of hitting, and the average odds on the two corresponding Perfectas must not be more than double the Quiniela odds. Don't let that complicated sentence frighten you.Suppose, for example, that you like Teams 2 and 7. I have already said that they are as likely to come in 2-7 as 7-2. Suppose that the Perfecta odds on 2-7 are 40 to 1, and on 7-2 they are 50 to 1. The average of these two is 45 to 1. Half of 45 is 22.5. Therefore, if the 2-7 Quiniela is 22-1 or less, I will bet the two Perfectas. If the 2-7 Quiniela is 23-1 or more, I will bet the Quiniela.
To understand this a little better, let's assume that the 2-7 Quiniela is only 20-1. If I bet $6 on the 2-7 Quiniela and it comes in (paying $42 for $2), my $6 bet will return $126. On the other hand, if I had bet Perfectas instead ($3 each, for the same $6 total bet), my return would have been $123 if they came out 2-7 and $138 if they came out 7-2. In other words, I could do no worse than the Quiniela payoff and have a 50-50 chance to do about 10% better. It is the little things like this that add up to make you a winner. In actual practice, I find my returns (per dollar invested) average over 10% higher betting Perfectas as compared with Quinielas.
The important things about betting in either pool are that:
(1) your own wagering does not have much effect on the odds, and
(2) the odds are relatively stable so that the odds when you bet are likely to be fairly close to what the final odds will be.Whether you bet Quinielas or Perfectas is up to you. Perfectas involve more work; the odds are not displayed for as long as the odds on the more popular Quiniela; and there are fewer Perfecta betting windows. If you are willing to make the extra effort, you will be rewarded. If not, you can still have fun and come out ahead.
MAKING YOUR SELECTIONS
No matter which way you bet, your first decision should be the selection of your top team. Which team(s) to combine them with comes second.I begin by rating each team. This involves five steps.
1. Write down the skill ratings of the frontcourt man and backcourt man on each team.
2. Add or subtract points for any player who is clearly playing above or below his normal skill level thus far in today's program.
3. Add or subtract points from each team to adjust for post position (see below).
4. Total Items 1 through 3. This is the basic team rating.
5. Add up to 3 bonus points for any pair where you know that their ability as a team is greater than would be expected from just looking at their individual skill ratings. (Caution: This is generally more applicable to the more moderate players than the superstars who should play well together.)The team with the highest score is your most desirable team to bet.
It is important to note that for purposes of betting the Perfectas and Quinielas, I do not simply use the team post position adjustments described in Chapter 6. Instead, I use one-half of those values, with a maximum of 3 points.
Post
PositionAdjustment to Team Ratings Spectacular 7
ScoringSingle Point
Scoring1 0 0 2 + 0.5 + 0.5 3 - 1 - 0.5 4 - 2 - 1 5 - 3 - 1.5 6 - 3 - 2 7 - 3 - 2.5 8 - 2 - 3 Examples of these calculations will be given in Chapter 8.
The reason that I do not use the full post position adjustments worked out by the computer is that they force you to choose Teams 1 and 2 in a disproportionate number of games. But the odds on Perfectas involving the first two teams are often too low, resulting in the need to choose an alternate.
I have found that use of the less stringent adjustments spreads out my selections more evenly over different post positions, but still produces about one winner out of six games, and generates acceptable average payoffs.
At this point you have a set of ratings, adjusted for post position, and you have a top-rated team. What do you do next?
PERFECTA FREQUENCIES
Not all of the 56 Perfecta combinations come in with the same frequency. If they did, each would win about 1.8% of the time. The actual frequencies with which you can expect to see each combination win are shown below. While these vary slightly from fronton to fronton, they may be taken as a reliable indicator of what to expect over a typical season.
PERFECTA FREQUENCIES Place Post Position Win Post
Position1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total
Win %1 3% 2% 2% 2% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 13.5% 2 3% 2.5 2 2 2 2 2 15.5 3 3 3 1.5 1 1 1.5 1.5 12.5 4 3 3 2 1 0.5 1 1 11.5 5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.5 0.5 1 1 11.5 6 2 2.5 2.5 2.5 1 0.5 0.5 11.5 7 1.5 2 2 2.5 2 0.5 0.5 11 8 1.5 2 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.5 0.5 13 Total
Place %16.5% 18% 16% 14.5% 11.5% 7.5% 8% 8% 100% Note that 25 of the 56 combinations have below average (1.8%) winning frequencies. I do not normally bet on these 25 combinations, pinpointing my bets instead among the 31 combinations with above-average percentages.
To be specific, depending on my selection of the team I like most, I usually couple it in Perfectas only with the numbers listed below.
Top Rated
TeamAcceptable Second-Place
Teams in Perfecta1, 7 or 8 2, 3, 4, 5 2 All 3 1, 2 4 or 5 1, 2, 3 6 1, 2, 3, 4 These are the ones listed in the table of Perfecta Frequencies as having a 2% or higher frequency. If the odds are sufficiently high, I will occasionally take a chance on the combinations with a 1.5% frequency when I think the second team is particularly strong.
Do I bet all of the acceptable combinations? No. My favorite approach is to bet only the two highest rated.
What do I do about splitting teams with identical ratings? I use the team with the highest rating without regard to the post position adjustment.
Do I bet regardless of the odds? Absolutely not! I want minimum odds of 25-30 to 1, with just two exceptions. If my top team is #6, the minimum acceptable odds go up to 30-35 to 1, while if the top team is #3, I'll accept 20-25 to 1 (these were all worked out with the aid of the computer).
What happens if the odds are not acceptable? Surprisingly, getting your minimum odds is much easier in Perfecta betting than when betting straight (i.e., to Win only) or in the Quiniela pool. In those situations where the odds are less than I require, and the Quiniela odds are equally unattractive, sometimes I switch to my second-rated team (if they are close to the top-rated team); sometimes I pass the game and go get a hot dog; and sometimes I rationalize and bet my top team anyway. Look, I never said I wasn't human, did I?
Since I've admitted that much, I might as well confess that I also have other weaknesses. I don't go to the fronton and bet as mechanically as I have indicated above. Oh, I do all the rating arithmetic for the entire program. In fact I try to have it done before I even get there, if at all possible. But I have biases and prejudices like everyone else. Sometimes I vary from the rules, but not too much.
For example, one team may not be a clear-cut favorite in my ratings. Or just two teams may stand out from all the rest. I often bet Perfectas involving both of my two top-rated teams, coupled with one or two of the acceptable teams shown in the last table. But my overall control is always how much I bet per game.
Ideally, I bet two Perfecta combinations per game. This costs $6. But I bet an average of $10 per game. Therefore, I have several choices. I can "save" $4 for a later game. I can bet two Perfectas on each choice," over-betting" by $2 on the game. Or, I can bet two Perfectas on my "most preferred" combination, and just one on the other combination, for a total of $9. If the Quiniela odds are more attractive, I may elect to spread my money that way. I'm flexible.
Commonly, I make additional bets involving my top-rated team in second place, with another high-rated team on top on the Perfecta ticket. This provides some coverage against an "almost" win by my favored team. Of course I only do this in a combination which has an above average chance of scoring in the Perfecta pool.
My objective is to cash an average of more than one Perfecta ticket per 12-game program. With one Perfecta per program I usually break even. If I can average more than one, I'm a winner.
The general approach I have described picks the winning team for me an average of two times per program, once I have the player ratings established fairly satisfactorily. My approach to selecting Perfectas gets me the place team 40%-50% of the time when I've selected the winning team.
Therefore, I expect to average between 0.8 and 1.0 Perfectas per 12 games. That is based on buying two Perfecta tickets per game or 24 per program. However, I usually double up such that I actually buy 40 tickets per program. This brings my expected number of tickets cashed up to between 1.3 and 1.7 per program. *
* 2 winners x 40% place x $40/$24 = 1.3
2 winners x 50% place x $40/$24 = 1.7
QUINIELA FREQUENCIES
If you don't want to play Perfectas, and you want to play Quinielas without worrying about the Perfecta odds, there are two approaches I recommend. Both involve boxing or partial boxing of three teams.Before going into them, let's first take a look at the expected frequencies associated with each of the 28 Quiniela combinations. Again it is obvious that not all come in the average of 3.6%. Usually I avoid the 8 combinations which come in with less than 3.5% frequency. These are 4-5, 4-6, 4-7, 5-6, 5-7, 6-7, 6-8 and 7-8.
QUINIELA FREQUENCIES Post Position Post
Position1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 5.5% 5% 4.5% 4.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 2 5.5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4 4 2 3 3 3.5 5 2 2.5 3.5 6 1.5 2 7 1.5 8 (Minor inconsistencies between this table and the
Perfecta Frequency Table are due to rounding)
Under both approaches I use, the first step is to come up with adjusted team ratings as described in the section "Making Your Selections."
In the first method, I box the highest-rated team among post positions 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 with the two highest-rated teams among post positions 1, 2 and 3. The rationale behind this approach is that you just can't afford to ignore the first three teams in Quinielas. So you couple the two strongest among them with the best of the teams in the worst five post positions. When using this approach, I require that the sum of the odds on the three Quinielas in the Box be at least 55.
For example, suppose the three teams selected for the Box are 2-3-5. The Quiniela odds on the three tickets might be as follows:
2-3 Quiniela ..... 17 to 1
2-5 Quiniela ..... 20 to 1
3-5 Quiniela ..... 21 to 1
Total 58Since 58 exceeds my minimum acceptable "total odds" number of 55, I would make my bet. If not, I would substitute the second highest-rated team among post positions 4 through 8 and check the total odds on a Box involving that team plus the two highest-rated among posts 1 through 3. However, since I am settling for second best, I now increase my requirement for the total odds from 55 to 60. If this test fails also, I don't bet a Quiniela Box this game.
The second method I use simply boxes the three highest-rated teams, with two exceptions. At least one of the teams must be the best of post positions 1, 2 or 3. And I will not play any of the eight low-frequency combinations mentioned above. For example, if my three teams were 2-7-8, I would play the 2-7 and 2-8 Quinielas but not the 7-8. When this occurs I either bet only two Quinielas that game, or I also couple the two higher-numbered posts with another high-rated team among posts 1, 2 and 3, making four Quiniela bets that game.
While either of these methods produces reasonable results, I find that the Perfecta-betting approach described earlier produces a much more satisfactory return on investment over the long term.
TRIFECTA WAGERING
Since the odds in the Trifecta pool are unknown, it should come as no surprise to you that I don't favor it as a way of betting. But, beyond that, Trifecta wagering is such a longshot proposition (the most frequent combination to hit, 5-3-2, comes in less than 1% of the time) that it takes on some of the characteristics of the Lottery.Nevertheless, no book on jai-alai betting can ignore the Trifecta, because the fans love it. I get a big kick out of watching some guy with his face taut, screaming an exhortation at two teams playing off a tie for Show, needing that point to cash his Trifecta ticket. The roars and yells that you hear when a several thousand dollar payoff is posted are all part of the color at the Fronton.
There have been occasions when only one ticket has been sold on the winning combination. When this occurs, that person gets the entire net pool being distributed (usually over $10,000) and an invitation to fill out some forms that the Internal Revenue Service enjoys reading.
Many people pick three numbers and buy an $18 Trifecta Box. If you are the type of person who plays your birthdates numbers, or the numbers on your license plate, or your street address, I guess boxing those numbers is as good a way to bet as any.
But if you want to bet Trifectas in some fashion other than randomly, you should know something about the frequency with which each of the 336 Trifecta combinations pays off. Based on statistics for over 12,000 Trifectas, I have constructed a table of frequencies similar to the ones we looked at for Perfectas and Quinielas. Rather than blur your vision with a giant grid of numbers, however, I simply indicate in the table below whether the various combinations have relatively high, medium or low payoff frequencies.
Keep in mind, however, that any Trifecta combination only hits infrequently. The ones I have labeled High, for example, only come in a little more often than once in 200 games.
* - Less than 0.1%
TRIFECTA FREQUENCIES Third Place Team Win-Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1-2 Low Med High High High Low 1-3 High * Med Med Med Med 1-4 High Low * Low Med Med 1-5 High Med Low * Low Med 1-6 Med Med Med Low * Low 1-7 Med Med Med Med Low * 1-8 * Med Med Med Med * 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2-1 Med High High High High Low 2-3 High Low Med Med High High 2-4 High Low * Low Med Med 2-5 High High Low * Low Low 2-6 High High Med Low * Low 2-7 Med High High Med Low * 2-8 * Med High High Med * 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 3-1 High High High Med Med Med 3-2 High High High Med Med Med 3-4 Med Med * * Low Low 3-5 Med Med * * * Low 3-6 Med Med * * * * 3-7 Med Med Med Med * * 3-8 Low Med Med Med Low * 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 4-1 High High Med Med Med Med 4-2 High High Med Med Med Med 4-3 High High Low Low Low Med 4-5 Med Med Low * * * 4-6 Low Low Low * * * 4-7 Low Low Med * * * 4-8 Low Med Med * * * 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 5-1 Med Med High Med Low Med 5-2 Med High High Med Low Med 5-3 High High Med Low Low Med 5-4 Med High Med * Low Low 5-6 Low Low Low Low * * 5-7 Low Low Low Low * * 5-8 * * Low Low * * 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6-1 Med Med High High Low Low 6-2 Low Med High High Low Low 6-3 High High Med High Low Low 6-4 High High Med Low Low Low 6-5 Low Med Med Low * * 6-7 * * Low Low Low * 6-8 * * Low Low * * 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7-1 * Low Med High Med * 7-2 Low Low Med High Med Low 7-3 Med Med Low High Med Low 7-4 Med High Med Low Med Low 7-5 Med Med High Med * * 7-6 Low Low Low Low * * 7-8 * * * Low * * 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 8-1 * * Med Med High Med 8-2 * * Low Med High Med 8-3 Low Med * Med High High 8-4 Med High Med Low Med Med 8-5 High High High Med Low Med 8-6 Low Med Med Med Med * 8-7 * Low Low Low Low * What does all this tell us? First of all, there are only 62 "high frequency" combinations. 89 are low frequency, and another 74 are of such infrequency that I don't even dignify them with the descriptive adjective "low." Thus we see that practically half of the Trifecta combinations can be pretty well ignored as they collectively account for less than 20% of all the winning Trifectas. At the high end, on the other hand, less than 20% of the combinations account for about 40% of the winners.
How then would I suggest betting Trifectas? As I said, I don't bet Trifectas, but if I did I would go at it in one of two ways. Either I'd pick one team to win (based on the skill rating system I use for Perfectas) and play it in the high frequency Trifecta combinations; or I would select a Perfecta combination that I liked and couple it with a third team(s) in a high frequency Trifecta combination.
To be more specific, the next table shows the best Trifecta combinations with each of the possible winning teams.
Winning
Post
PositionHighest Frequency Trifectas 1 1-5-2 1-2-5 1-2-6 1-3-2 2 2-3-1 2-5-1 2-4-1 2-3-7 3 3-1-2 3-1-5 3-2-5 3-2-1 4 4-2-3 4-3-2 4-1-3 4-2-1 5 5-3-2 5-1-4 5-2-4 5-2-3 6 6-3-2 6-4-2 6-2-5 6-1-5
6-4-17 7-4-2 7-2-5 7-5-3 7-3-5 8 8-5-3 8-3-6 8-5-2 8-4-2 Whether or not the payoffs would be high enough to justify the bets required is difficult to say, given the extreme variability of the payoffs. If you can pick two winning teams per program (which you can with the methods explained in this book) and you bet 4 Trifectas ($12) per game, you should hit one about every two or three days. This would involve $288-$432 of wagers for each winner. This seems like a reasonable amount which should be recovered, plus a profit, when you score. But I think you would have to be a several-times-a-week regular before you would have the Law of Averages working for you. Betting Trifectas can produce incredibly long losing streaks.
My second approach would be to pick one or two Perfectas, as previously explained, and add one or more third place teams, using the Frequen