Posted by Johnnymac 10:01 AM
Interesting, although I wouldn't discount the argument that a "guaranteed" 20% return is still pretty good compared to a long shot 500% (5-1) return, but then again, it's still technically gambling compared to making an actual investment.
For a horse with those odds, you would have to bet $5 to win $1 -- plus get back the amount you wagered. But there's a saying around the track: If you've got the $5, why do you need the $1? That's why some bettors snub the favorite and take a horse with higher odds to improve their payout. (Like the people who bet on Birdstone in the 2004 Belmont Stakes. With 36-1 odds, the longshot beat Smarty Jones, the horse favored to win the Triple Crown. In that race, a $10 wager on Birdstone returned $370.)
Another way of looking at it is to say that 5 out of 6 times, a bet on Big Brown to win would return something, whereas only 1 time out of 6 would the other bet return money. That's the whole idea of "odds."
Random thoughts from a lawyer, an accountant, a commodities trader, an ex-Marine and a WSOP Main Event money finisher that don't know as much as they wish they did...