Lesson learned: Can a losing wager still be a good one?

Good bets sometimes lose. The reverse is true, as bad bets win too. What makes a wager fall on the good side is tied to the given value of the horses in each play, measured by using standard handicapping practices in relation to the final odds.

If the value is enough to override the flaws, then the bet is worth a shot even if it loses.

To showcase this idea, I only have to look back to last Saturday's Canadian Turf Stakes (G3) at Gulfstream Park, where the speedy Siem Riep looked to reverse some bad finishes in his recent form in this spot.  

Speed horses give players a double-edged sword, as they hold a better position, but an unusually fast pace can make them fold quickly. Siem Riep finished seventh and ninth in his two prior starts. But he also faced a tough pace in those two races because the fast Abiding Star secured the lead both times and went wild up front.

When Siem Riep last raced minus the presence of Abiding Star, he finished a good second in the Old Friends Stakes at Kentucky Downs with a 123 TimeformUS Speed Figure. He also ran second in the Preview Tourist Mile at Ellis Park with a 124. In those two summer races, he lost to Next Shares and Mr. Misunderstood, graded stakes winners in their own right.

Siem Riep figured to go off as the third or fourth choice in the Canadian Turf and receive an uncontested lead according to Pace Projector. The public bet him down to 5-1, which still made him higher odds than Breaking the Rules, Hembree and Krampus.

With the soft pace scenario, high value and previous good form, Siem Riep looked like a logical bet on paper. He only needed to run back to the 120-plus range.

With those factors in mind, I made a win/place bet. Even if Siem Riep got caught late after a soft lead, he could still hold second like in those two runner-up finishes pointed out.  

Well, as expected, Siem Riep set the pace uncontested through moderate fractions. When challenged though on the far turn, however, the 5-year-old gelding put up no fight.

Perhaps Siem Riep lost a step. For a speed horse, he will never find an easier scenario than he did Saturday, strolling with more than a three-length advantage at one point.

Despite the loss, I believe the bet was sound because of the value.  

As an example of a “bad” bet in this same race, think about the favorite, Breaking the Rules, who finished second by an agonizing head. He won a stakes race in his prior start, but it came against 3-year-old horses only, and his win two starts ago came in an optional claimer. Furthermore, the pace scenario did not favor him as a midpack horse.

The War Front colt was not invincible in this Grade 3 contest, even if he held a good chance based on his sharp recent form. Yet, bettors pounded him from 9-5 to 3-5.

Win bettors lost their chance at a $1.20 profit for every $2, while place bettors only made $2.40 for every $2. That's not worth the time and effort.

The old saying goes, “If that horse is 3-5, then the horse’s name better be Secretariat.” Short-priced win picks need to stand out.

When the expected profits do not exceed the bet amount, that is a bad sign.

One race later in the Gulfstream Park Sprint (G3), bettors went wild at 2-5 for Recruiting Ready, who admittedly showed standout form and speed on paper.  

Recruiting Ready’s backers got a scare when the second choice Quijote displayed unexpected speed along with the longshot My Chinumado, giving him some mild adversity for his running style. Instead of coasting early, he needed to pass horses.

Despite the adversity, this classy sprinter rewarded chalk players with a win.

Was he worth a 2-5 win bet? Betting to win on a horse this low seems like a wager made only to get the feeling of winning, rather than aiming for a meaningful score. Sure, someone with $2,000 might earn a $1,000 profit on a horse who pays $3 to win. However, the casual player will only take in $10 profit for every $20 spent.

Given Recruiting Ready’s superior form at the same conditions, though, the point is arguable. Maybe betting him to win was not a “value” bet, but he laid over the field.

There is one method to make horses below even money offer some value. If longshots are thrown underneath the favorite in exotics, it helps soften the lack of value.

In Recruiting Ready’s case, it did not help his backers as Quijote finished runner-up as the second choice. The $1 exacta paid a measly $3.30.

But only two races later in the Herecomesthebride Stakes (G3) for 3-year-old fillies, the 4/5 favorite Cambier Parc won for trainer Chad Brown, while the longshot Princess Carolina finished runner-up at 21/1, the second-highest odds at post time.  

The $1 exacta paid $34.50, not bad considering Cambier Parc's chances of winning.

Of course, longshots will not always fall underneath the heavy favorite like that. Bettors still need to consider the entire situation, instead of betting blindly on longshots to throw underneath the favorite. Does the pace situation favor the longshots?

If the second choice is vulnerable, then it gives the betting situation some value.

What about the value within the Fountain of Youth Stakes (G2)? 

Admittedly, I passed on playing races after Siem Riep folded earlier. Hidden Scroll, however, was my top choice.

Most Hidden Scroll doubters argued he was a poor value at 6-5 in a two-turn graded stakes race off a one-turn maiden win on speed-biased slop.

But I felt the colt’s high speed figure and excellent pedigree overrode those concerns, and that was a mistake to quickly dismiss the inexperience factor.

Hidden Scroll actually ran a solid race and earned the highest TimeformUS Speed Figure, but his versatility is in question, and the value is not likely to improve.

In contrast, Code of Honor'a backers were rewarded with 9-1 odds on a horse who finished second in the Champagne Stakes (G1) last fall. His return flop in the Mucho Macho Man seems excusable now as a case of needing one race off the layoff.  

With popular horses, the public does not always receive a break in odds after a bad race, as familiarity remains a big factor in creating underlays. Code of Honor floated up anyway, as the Fountain of Youth offered too many solid alternatives. 

To repeat the first point, though, winning does not make a horse a good bet.

If the risk ranges from minimal to matching the expected reward, then that is a good bet, even if it loses. The risks are softened by searching for strong points using traditional handicapping methods, as that will strengthen the horse’s value. 

But, is it still a bet. Nothing is guaranteed.