How to Make Money in One Day at the Track

[barn32]

I recently had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Charles Romanelli and his lovely wife in Las Vegas. He's probably in his 80s now. During our conversation he mentioned that he had written a book on horse racing, circa 1989, with a forward by Tom Ainslie called "How to make money in one day at the track. (http://www.amazon.com/How-Make-Money-One-Track/dp/0671666525/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top)"

I'm currently looking around for a copy. There are a couple of used book stores in Las Vegas I'm going to check out. They were very nice people, and I think I would enjoy reading it.

Has anyone read it? Thoughts?

[jerry-g]

I just ordered it. Hope I get it cause only one left
in stock from that supplier. They have multiple
suppliers but this one from Florida may get it sooner.

[punteray]

Go to abebooks.com, put in authors name. several copies from $3.49 to $1.00

[DeltaLover]

Not that I want to start any flame war but I really cannot understand why would anyone like to read such an antiquated text? Don't take me wrong, I am not implying that the value of any book necessarily decreases as time goes since among my readings are books written several thousand years ago but I also believe that depending on the subject (horse racing is one of them) some old texts can easily be considered obsolete. Even the most influential writings of the past when it comes to horse betting have very limited value to offer and this only to the very beginner who is just now making his first handicapping steps.

[olddaddy]

I picked one up on fleabay for 4 bucks and change shipped. It may not help but cant see it hurting.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Not that I want to start any flame war but I really cannot understand why would anyone like to read such an antiquated text? Don't take me wrong, I am not implying that the value of any book necessarily decreases as time goes since among my readings are books written several thousand years ago but I also believe that depending on the subject (horse racing is one of them) some old texts can easily be considered obsolete. Even the most influential writings of the past when it comes to horse betting have very limited value to offer and this only to the very beginner who is just now making his first handicapping steps.

There are plenty of old handicapping books where the conclusions are antiquated but the line of thinking is the inspiration.Plus collective betting consciousness is a merry go round.Things will rotate in and out of value.There's usually something that can be gained from almost any book.

[RaceBookJoe]

There are plenty of old handicapping books where the conclusions are antiquated but the line of thinking is the inspiration.Plus collective betting consciousness is a merry go round.Things will rotate in and out of value.There's usually something that can be gained from almost any book.

Good point, each January i randomly pick out an old (pre-1970) handicapping book and read it again. This year it happened to be "Smart Handicapping Made Easy" by William Bauman..was my favorite book when i first read it in the early 70's and actually still is one of my favorites. Outdated yes, fun book that has given me good ideas over the years..definately.

[Dave Schwartz]

There are plenty of old handicapping books where the conclusions are antiquated but the line of thinking is the inspiration.Plus collective betting consciousness is a merry go round.Things will rotate in and out of value.There's usually something that can be gained from almost any book.

And every once in awhile you stumble upon an idea that you can escalate into something new.

BTW, I wrote to Barn32 - I have this book he is looking for. If he does not want it, I will send it to whomever responds here first. Remember, Barn gets first dibs.

Dave

[PaceAdvantage]

Not that I want to start any flame war but I really cannot understand why would anyone like to read such an antiquated text?Didn't you read the original post? He met the author in person. Perhaps he will find the book entertaining, if not informative, given that fact.

It sounds pretty simple to me. If I met someone who I took a liking to and found out they had written a book on horse racing, I'd probably want to read it to, no matter if I get anything out of it handicapping-wise.

[baconswitchfarm]

I have read lots of older books. Some bad , some ok. I didn't get exact things from any. But I did read a few things that caused me to look at things from new angles. In the long run I think it can only help or be a neutral. Reading something shouldn't make you dumber, so there is nothing to lose.

[DeltaLover]

Didn't you read the original post? He met the author in person. Perhaps he will find the book entertaining, if not informative, given that fact.

It sounds pretty simple to me. If I met someone who I took a liking to and found out they had written a book on horse racing, I'd probably want to read it to, no matter if I get anything out of it handicapping-wise.

OK, I understand what you are saying and it makes sense. But again any interest about the book should be just acedemic without any substantial expectation to find any good information in it.

[banacek]

As far as reading old books...that's all I read. In my opinion, there aren't many good recent books. Beyer's last book? 20 years ago. Lots of reissues with the name changed (e.g. Betting Thoroughbreds for the 21st century). My top books are all from 20-40 years ago.

I was looking forward to Quinn's new book, but as most reviewers said here..not much new. But racing has changed immensely. Horses win all the time after long layoffs. Drugs, super-trainers, polytracks, tons of things that no one talked about 30 years ago.

I am disappointed people like Beyer, Schmidt and Davidowitz aren't stepping up to the plate. They must have lots to say.

I have liked some of Dave Schwartz's work, but am not interested in any more videos - nothing personal Dave.....just not my learning style.

I'd love a great new book to put on the night stand to read that truly deals with what's happening now. Right now I have "My $50000 Year at the Races" sitting there - Andy is such a good writer. And "Handicapping the Wall Street Way" has found a purpose in life - as a door stop in my office.

[MJC922]

Had a large collection of handicapping books that I sold on ebay back around 2001. Now that I'm following racing again after more than 10 years away I've been seeking to reclaim some of what I sold off. Romanelli's book was actually one that I remember having owned. Despite the over the top title and the fact that I got it years ago for like $2 on clearance at Kmart or something it turned out to be a better than average book. Everyone has their own opinions on books and I would say going back from the late 1970's to 2000 most handicapping books were pretty bad overall, but if The Winning Horseplayer and Winning At The Races are 9 /10 this book was maybe a solid 5 or 6. If you read a lot of these things and can pick it up cheap it's definitely worth a read but I wouldn't go to great lengths to get this one back onto my bookshelf. Anyone interested in used VB6 books? I have an absurd amount at this point, can't imagine I will ever use them again.

[Johnny V]

I have read the book and IMO it is pretty good. Yes, it is somewhat dated of course but it is a well written 265 pages that is a pretty good read and is one I would recommend as worthwhile reading.

[barn32]

Not that I want to start any flame war but I really cannot understand why would anyone like to read such an antiquated text? Actually, I agree with you. That's why I have never read the Bible.

[DeltaLover]

Actually, I agree with you. That's why I have never read the Bible.

:ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

The Bible is the most current book at any time..

[therussmeister]

Was Barn 32 being sarcastic? Hard to tell.

[PaceAdvantage]

Actually, I agree with you. That's why I have never read the Bible.Talk about flame war... :lol:

Let's all just agree to leave this shot alone... :lol:

[Drifter1]

:) Amen, Brother!

[CincyHorseplayer]

As far as reading old books...that's all I read. In my opinion, there aren't many good recent books. Beyer's last book? 20 years ago. Lots of reissues with the name changed (e.g. Betting Thoroughbreds for the 21st century). My top books are all from 20-40 years ago.

I was looking forward to Quinn's new book, but as most reviewers said here..not much new. But racing has changed immensely. Horses win all the time after long layoffs. Drugs, super-trainers, polytracks, tons of things that no one talked about 30 years ago.

I am disappointed people like Beyer, Schmidt and Davidowitz aren't stepping up to the plate. They must have lots to say.

I have liked some of Dave Schwartz's work, but am not interested in any more videos - nothing personal Dave.....just not my learning style.

I'd love a great new book to put on the night stand to read that truly deals with what's happening now. Right now I have "My $50000 Year at the Races" sitting there - Andy is such a good writer. And "Handicapping the Wall Street Way" has found a purpose in life - as a door stop in my office.

That's funny.After responding to this thread I dug out Beyer's 50K book myself and have it on the nightstand!And feel exactly the same way about the latter book you mentioned.

Regarding Quinn.I'll read his book after I get through the short pile I got in front of me and after Pandy's book.I always get something out of his writings even if it's between the lines or a commentary.Mainly I just like going through his analysis because he has a great understanding of how age,form,and class interact.I read all his other books repeatedly anyway,why not something new?!

[CincyHorseplayer]

Actually, I agree with you. That's why I have never read the Bible.

:lol: .Wow.That's dicey.I'll indulge you though.

Badly written.Poorprose.Archaic and absolute style that tests the reader's patience.Get's high marks on Song Of Solomon and Ecclessiastes and in general morality.The new book is a vain attempt to salvage mythology.-Cincinnatus Maximus,12 AD.

[andicap]

Actually, I agree with you. That's why I have never read the Bible.

Well the first installment was pretty good but I didn't care too much for the sequel. (I'm Jewish)

:D:D:D

[davew]

Dave Schwartz, I'll take the book if barn32 passes. - thx

[Dave Schwartz]

Sure. Please email me your address. (Not a PM, please.)

[davew]

I got the book from Dave today (thanks, Dave), skimming through it looks rather interesting (kinda looks like a Dick Mitchell book for style and content). I will give a review in a week or so after reading.

[Dave Schwartz]

You are welcome.

It was not a "bad" book. I enjoyed the read but admit that I turned on the "super charger" when I read it. Took me like 20 minutes as I recall.

Dave

[Pensacola Pete]

One of the key ingredients in a spot play I use came from the old Scott Flohr book from 1969. Some things stay valid.

[thaskalos]

One of the key ingredients in a spot play I use came from the old Scott Flohr book from 1969. Some things stay valid.

Was it the "million-dollar move"? :)

[cnollfan]

Good point, each January i randomly pick out an old (pre-1970) handicapping book and read it again. This year it happened to be "Smart Handicapping Made Easy" by William Bauman..was my favorite book when i first read it in the early 70's and actually still is one of my favorites. Outdated yes, fun book that has given me good ideas over the years..definately.

I loved Smart Handicapping Made Easy! It was the first handicapping book I read, and it helped me understand the past performances as a dynamic, not a static. I still remember Lawn Mower and Betting Tool.

[RaceBookJoe]

One of the key ingredients in a spot play I use came from the old Scott Flohr book from 1969. Some things stay valid.

I actually liked that Flohr book also when i read it early 70's. Its like most books i have read where i do better when instead of doing exactly as a book states, i grab the concept that is being taught and then combine it with other things i have read and my own stuff. Some of those early books are funny to go back and read nowadays though.

[GameTheory]

I thought Charles Romanelli was not his real name? Or it is his real name, but the book had been previously published under a different name (and maybe different title)? Something like that?

[Pensacola Pete]

Was it the "million-dollar move"? :)

Yes it was. One of the few things in the book worth a hoot. Flohr had the dynamics wrong, but he had the right idea.

Flohr's idea was that the horse stayed on or up close to the lead for the first two calls. Then it lost ground/lengths between that and the stretch. from the stretch to the finish, it lost (almost) no more ground/lengths. Example:

1-1 2-hd 5-8 5-8
2-1 3-1 8-8 7-8
1-1 1-hd 6-7 7-7½

Not qualified:

2-4 2-3 6-5 6-5 (not close enough)
3-hd 2-1 6-5 5-7 (lost ground from stretch to finish)

Flohr's contention was the "no unraced horse would run like that." A horse that naturally quit wouldn't stop quitting from the eighth pole to the finish. His idea was that the jockey, knowing that the horse wouldn't last the whole race or under orders from the trainer, gave it a good workout to the second call, then let it ease back to the eighth pole, then urged it along for a mini-workout for the last eighth.

The problem with Flohr's idea is that the front runner may have been quitting at the same rate as the horse in question, but losing ground to most of the other horses. For example, this may have been the position of the horses at the stretch call in beaten lengths behind the leader, with KEY being the horse in question:

ONE 1-6
TWO 2-6
THR 3-6½
FOU 4-7
KEY 5-8
SIX 6-17
SEV 7-18

And this may be the finish:

ONE 1-no
TWO 2-no
THR 3-½
FOU 4-1½
KEY 5-8
SIX 6-8½
SEV 7-8½

The running line might show 2-1 2-1 5-8 5-8 and it appeared that the key horse lost no ground from stretch to finish. In reality, every horse except the tiring leader gained at least 5 lengths on the key horse, meaning the horse did continue to quit, relative to most of the field.

Still, the idea is good, once modified and with a few more things added to it. Bob Pandolfo uses versions of it in his excellent Pro Simulcast System and in parts of his also-excellent new longshot book. It's also the basis of a lot of "bombs" for the pace handicappers. Never underestimate the power of early speed.

[farmrose]

I am reminded of a paperback I read in 1971 called "The Loser" by a guy from East St.Louis. He was a good capper, but could not get ahead. After ruining his name and borrowing from everyone he could, pawning, hot checks etc. In a last ditch effort he secluded himself with DRFs then went to the track. Once again, bad day. But, this day he met a kindered spirit in the same sinking rowboat. After drinks and drunk, with DRFs in seperate rooms they crammed alnight. Next day; plan: only bet on horse in race they BOTH agree on. Then, only bet to show. Yada-yada, two losers start making money. Any who one succombs to greed and makes a win bet. Bad news, deal falls apart. The end. My favorite horseracing book. Lesson to be learned. Did I mention, I Love the races! Later players.

[davew]

I thought Charles Romanelli was not his real name? Or it is his real name, but the book had been previously published under a different name (and maybe different title)? Something like that?

The forward by Ainslie make it soumd like Romanelli is his real name, and at the time was a school teacher in Staten Island. The 2nd copyright has 1989 and the first is 1965. Since the 1989 version has many examples after 1965, I am guessing that content was expanded and updated.

[GameTheory]

The forward by Ainslie make it soumd like Romanelli is his real name, and at the time was a school teacher in Staten Island. The 2nd copyright has 1989 and the first is 1965. Since the 1989 version has many examples after 1965, I am guessing that content was expanded and updated.Yes, it is starting to come back to me -- pretty sure the original was under a pen name and also under a different book title so it is tough to look it up since I can't remember that title...