Dustin Korth
49
Anyone ever done any analysis on this? I was just wondering if Kentucky's move to penny breakage would have enough impact to create situations where this is worth considering.
11hReplyOptions

. In my view, the parlay is always preferable to the P3+, and sometimes preferable to the DD. You're able to pick your spots and avoid buying tickets that are "automatic losers"

The first disadvantage is the takeout is higher when you parlay.
Sure, the takeout is lower in the win pool, but if you're betting a 3-horse parlay instead of a P3, you get taxed THREE TIMES instead of once.

More importantly (to me), as @William Zayonce said, the inability to change your bet or even pass, is more important.

As someone who plays primarily horizontal bets, I spent a fair amount of time considering these options. In the end, for me, the horizontal wagers proved to be the right way to wager. Here are the primary factors:
1) The takeout is reduced for horizontal wagers.
2) There were more inefficiencies in the P3-4-5 pools than the win pools.
3) M/L choices (after the first leg of P3,4,5) were slightly overused.
4) I seldom found myself looking to change wagers after submitting my initial tickets.
My conclusions resulted from research conducted around 2010-2013. I have honestly not conducted any research since that time, But I have not encountered any reasons to make a change.

When there are a lot of people singling particular horses in horizontals, it is essential to make the right move as to whether to play the single or spread.

I saw a guy play all-5-all with the 5 being Easy Go'er at 2/5 and he won big, playing all-5-all twice, all-5-3 twice and all-5-4 twice. He hit 4 times for fairly big bucks.

On the other hand, it you can beat the single that "everyone" else is playing, you can also win big.

My point is that my perception is that the horizontals are likely to outperform the parlays.