Dilemna.. any suggestions?
 

I operate 3 main systems on Saturdays, each having a very good profit.

The problem is though.. over the last 2 weeks I have had 3 selections
in 3 different races, sometimes betting each horse 2-3 units.

All races have been total wipeouts, all unplaced. Maybe unlucky..
What does one do when 3 selections are available in the one race?

Back them all?
Leave it alone?

Cheers.

I would back all of them.

It does suggest the race must be a particularly close race and you would expect some good odds. You could also try taking them as Quinellas instead ?

Good Luck with it.

Personally I would back all of them, because its the individual system one is betting , not the individual race.
Anyway , one should be thinking twice about backing a horse under $3.00

Cheers.

Punter 76, yes I would also agree to back all of the selections, but I have come across that one where differing amounts are involved(stakes) that it turns out that whichever won (if any) you still lose,....... well! in a case like that the answer is obvious. But in a scenario like say

If "a " wins you break even... or

If "b" wins you lose a bit..... or

If "c" wins you win heaps,.....

I would still back all 3

eg. only

Learn how to Handicap ? :-)

Punter 76, bet all 3 horses if....after dividing their individual (paying) prices into 100 and the total of that sum (adding the 3 results) totals around 75 then by investing the individual result on that horse for the win (and do this for the other 2 horses) no matter which horse wins you win.

Example
Horse A. paying about $6.50 div. into 100 = 15.3....
Horse B. paying about $2.60 div. into 100 = 38.4....
Horse C. paying about $4.25 div. into 100 = 23.5....
Total of the 3 results 76. Figures rounded off.

Invest $15 on Horse A.
Invest $38 on horse B.
Invest $23 on horse C.

Do the maths and no matter which horse wins your return will be $97-98
for a total investment of $76.

After a few trys it's quite easy and quick....there is also some quick maths for reducing the total investment to give the same result.

Cheers.

The problem with the Dutch use for systems is you are often then operating on a [3 bets combined] extremely poor odd-on proposition. In Squiter's example [and I realise it might not reflect the actual situation metioned here], $76 for a return of say $98 would be a lousy risk/result proposition.

The common rule for a Dutch is that the bets combined stay above odds-on. Any one of 'A', 'B', 'C', horses backed for a place would probably be a better risk/result proposition than a duch in the above example. We would be stuffed if 'D' or 'E' wins [as they often do] and kills our Dutch.

These sort of bets in the long term a very high SR is required to return a [very small] profit for a high risk $$$ outlay. 3 or 4 'outs' and your losing serious money that only offered a very small return in the first place. A single horse Place bet would be far more attactive.

For a system that is throwing up more than 1 bet, [3 in this case] it would probably be worthwhile to work out a rule to separate the 3 to 1 only bet only or alternatively, ignore the race as a poor betting proposition. There are plenty more bets coming up without the problem of 3 horses being thrown up by the system. Just my opinion anyway.

I think the latter posts are losing site of the original question. It's not one system throwing up 3 horses, it's 3 systems picking a different horse. If you have independant systems they presumably have their own staking plans so the horse and the bet are predetermined.
If you believe in the systems, which you obviously do, just make the bets they tell you, cheer when one of them wins and curse gently to yourself when all three lose.

KV

Thats what we do here Kenny. You mean we are supposed to stick to the point? That would be somthing new :-)

Two cents from twobets,
 

Cause I'm a bit of a whimp I'd take the other road. As I see it, if your systems are telling you different things then I would treat it as a warning for that race that things are a little dodgy. If two of the three agreed then that would be the green light for me.