Passing Winners

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Had a conversation with a friend that has fallen into a bad habit (for him). He is a very selective sharp handicapper that seeks higher probability spots that offer value spreading his money with win and exactas with occasional doubles/pick 3's.

Jimmy places great empahasis on his selections and has a good opinion..HIS PROBLEM is when he passes a pre-determined bettable race due to the latest factors available (odds, track conditions, track bias(if any) etc) and the horse wins!! this seems to throw off his ryhthm and his discipline is affected occasionally falling prey to chasing his losses...need i say anymore.

Any thoughts and comments about keeping his discipline and accepting that this game is all about making decisions and imo one should not punish himself for making these choices.

[The Hawk]

Good topic.

If this is indeed the case then I would lower my threshold for bets to the point that I'm no longer bothered by passing up winners. If it's currently 3-1, and losing out on an $8 winner bothers him, the threshold should be 5-2, or 2-1, etc., until the win prices don't adversely affect him.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Good point Hawk.

[Robert Goren]

Perhaps he goes too far, but passing up a good winner should upset you as much as betting a bad loser. Too much is made here of the discipline of sitting on your hands and not enough of having the courage to bet your convictions. Too often bettors spend too much time hunting for excuses not to bet a horse.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Perhaps he goes too far, but passing up a good winner should upset you as much as betting a bad loser. Too much is made here of the discipline of sitting on your hands and not enough of having the courage to bet your convictions. Too often bettors spend too much time hunting for excuses not to bet a horse.

Robert what you speak about is confidence in one's ability to make decisions and accept the outcome win or lose as simply one random event, one bet of a thousand. i know this type of confidence is rare, except among the 'hard core' professionals where this is essential for their success.

[thaskalos]

We can't have it both ways; either we are disciplined, price-conscious players...or we are not.

I don't see how lowering the odds requirement can work; your friend will still be bothered by winners that will still be passed on because they didn't meet the new lower odds threshold.

Your friend needs to be reminded that we ALL have to deal with problems of this type, when we play for a long-term profit...rather than the short-term gratification of cashing on the race at hand.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

We can't have it both ways; either we are disciplined, price-conscious players...or we are not.

I don't see how lowering the odds requirement can work; your friend will still be bothered by winners that will still be passed on because they didn't meet the new lower odds threshold.

Your friend needs to be reminded that we ALL have to deal with problems of this type, when we play for a long-term profit...rather than the short-term gratification of cashing on the race at hand.

Would you agree that confidence does play a factor in this scenario. Also the recordkeeping factor helps as a player can look back on a large series of wagers and determine where his strengths or weaknesses lie.

[Tom]

Your friend is focusing on the wrong thing. It's not about picking winners, it's about making a profit. He needs to understand missing a winner is nothing.
I pass race after race. I probably bet 10% of the races I handicap. I see a lot of winners go by me, but in order to have them, I have to pass up the profits. What's the point of hitting 2 more races every 10 if it costs you money to get them?

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Your friend is focusing on the wrong thing. It's not about picking winners, it's about making a profit. He needs to understand missing a winner is nothing.
I pass race after race. I probably bet 10% of the races I handicap. I see a lot of winners go by me, but in order to have them, I have to pass up the profits. What's the point of hitting 2 more races every 10 if it costs you money to get them?

Tom,

That is the part that is perplexing as he is a price conscious player avoiding what appears to be below his estimation of a fair value transaction. he seems very content choosing his spots carefully and not simply looking for winners, however, Tom when a passed winner connects, especially if the gimmick also connects we are talking about a good sum that is off the table.

I have told him that this is all a process of playing the game as it is not an automatic step up and wager game..at least not for most players.

[The Hawk]

Your friend is focusing on the wrong thing. It's not about picking winners, it's about making a profit. He needs to understand missing a winner is nothing.
I pass race after race. I probably bet 10% of the races I handicap. I see a lot of winners go by me, but in order to have them, I have to pass up the profits. What's the point of hitting 2 more races every 10 if it costs you money to get them?

Right, but when you see these winners go by you, which ones burn? Does it bother you if the horse pays $8.00 to win? $10? $20? Maybe his odds limit is 6-1 and it bothers him when a horse he passes pays $12. In that case he should lower his requirement to 5-1, because the point was (from what I understood) was that it adversely affected his play later in the day.

[098poi]

I don't know if this helps but I think it is important to not take the outcome of a race personally . You know you didn't have time to handicap a race and then you do a last minute look, something pops out at you, should I, shouldn't I, you pass and the horse wins and then the voice inside says "It figures". Or your 7/2 gets beat in a head-bob by a 12-1, it figures. Or your 12-1 gets beat in a head-bob by a 7/2 and "I should have bet to place, it figures" The result of a race has absolutely nothing to do with me! Sounds obvious and easy but I am sure a lot of us have let that concept influence our wagering. If you are going to pass races it's much better that the ones you passed won, that should only inspire confidence when you do wager.

[Overlay]

The only other thing that I could recommend in addition to what has already been said would be to try to eliminate subjectivity and personal opinion/judgment as much as possible from the selection process. In my experience, that provides greater confidence in play/pass decisions, and also facilitates going back and analyzing whether any changes to my selection criteria might be indicated. (And another benefit of the record-keeping that was mentioned in an earlier post is that it can serve as a reminder of all the losing horses that were also passed, and that it wasn't just winners that were tossed or not bet.)

[Valuist]

No offense to your friend, but I question if he should be gambling. If he gets upset over every winner he had a mild opinion on, he shouldn't be betting horses.

The mental aspect of the game is very important, and we've all had to watch countless horses that won that we thought about using, but didn't.

[Edward DeVere]

This helps me; maybe it'll help your friend.

Let's say you handicap 350 days in a year. Well, it is INEVITABLE that you will will win some days with good handicapping and good trips, lose some days with good handicapping and bad trips, lose some days with bad handicapping, win some races when the other half of the entry wins, win AND lose some races that you'd never have bet if you knew the odds would plummet at the last minute.

And you're going to make NUMEROUS hair-splitting decisions on whether or not to bet a horse. Some of these decisions will be right and some of these will be wrong. It's INEVITABLE - you're looking at a zillion races over the course of the year.

The more I remind myself of the above, the easier it is to deal with the results that make one unhappy.

I also keep a bottle of hard liquor nearby.

[thaskalos]

I also keep a bottle of hard liquor nearby.

Or a white wine spritzer, in case you happen to be handicapping the California races.

[Stillriledup]

Had a conversation with a friend that has fallen into a bad habit (for him). He is a very selective sharp handicapper that seeks higher probability spots that offer value spreading his money with win and exactas with occasional doubles/pick 3's.

Jimmy places great empahasis on his selections and has a good opinion..HIS PROBLEM is when he passes a pre-determined bettable race due to the latest factors available (odds, track conditions, track bias(if any) etc) and the horse wins!! this seems to throw off his ryhthm and his discipline is affected occasionally falling prey to chasing his losses...need i say anymore.

Any thoughts and comments about keeping his discipline and accepting that this game is all about making decisions and imo one should not punish himself for making these choices.


The crushing nature of this game from a mental standpoint means its a never ending challenge to keep telling yourself to stay strong, stay the course, be mentally tough and turn the page. It hurts when a mistake is made, but its worse to actually bet and lose, than to skip and watch a horse win that you like.

The key for me is that if i conciously pass a horse i originally liked, i tell myself its ok if the horse wins because ive made the decision before the race. I tell myself that its my pick so i expect it to race well but it just wasnt a good enough BET for me this time.

Picks and bets are two different things....work hard on the mental game and keep telling yourself that its ok to pass races, there's another one right around the corner.

Skip the race, work on your craft, make notes for next time and be observant.

And, have ice in your veins.

[raybo]

All I can say is that if you have a long term profitable method, you have to stick with it. If that profitable method includes last minute subjective decisions and is still profitable, then continue making those subjective decisions. But, keep in mind, if you make subjective decisions, especially at the last minute, you can expect some of those decisions will jump up and bite you. That's going to happen.

If, on the other hand, the only last minute decision you make is due to your minimum odds requirement not being met, and that minimum odds requirement is included in your method, then it's a no-brainer, keep using that minimum odds requirement, regardless of the winners you pass. In the long run, you'll come out ahead if you stick to your guns.

Random subjectivity is a killer, any subjectivity you use must be structured and defined. You must have rules, even in subjective decision making. I know that sounds weird, but if you don't have some controls on your subjective decisions, then you are exposing yourself to randomness, and decisions will be affected by current attitude and feelings, when you're doing and feeling well, you make good decisions, but when you not doing or feeling so well, you'll make more bad decisions.

Confidence in a long term profitable method is the best medicine for keeping yourself calm and objective, being able to consistently make good decisions.

[porchy44]

Why not make a $2 "action" bet on those races that your tempted to play and a bigger bet on those races you have the patience to wait for.

[Stillriledup]

Why not make a $2 "action" bet on those races that your tempted to play and a bigger bet on those races you have the patience to wait for.

Because those 'action' 2 dollar bets turn into 20 dollar bets and for some, 200 dollar bets. if you normally bet 50 bucks a race (for example) and stick 2 bucks on a horse and it WINS, you're going to be kicking yourself for betting 48 bucks less than you normally bet.

I've found that if i'm not going to make a large play on a race, its not worth my time screwing around with small money on fringe picks.

[raybo]

Agree, action bets are for losers. At least, if you're going to make action bets, have 2 bankrolls, 1 for your good bets, and 1 for your action bets (money you can afford to throw away). Watch which bankroll goes bust first!

[pondman]

Had a conversation with a friend that has fallen into a bad habit (for him). He is a very selective sharp handicapper that seeks higher probability spots that offer value spreading his money with win and exactas with occasional doubles/pick 3's.



Knowing when to bring out the wallet and knowing when to pass are the most important characteristics of great players. He sounds as if he knows what he is doing-- either through record keeping or intuition. Let those low price horses win without your money on them. In the long run, you'll be further ahead by passing on races until you've got a horse with value. There always going to be another race to bet on. Do something else until you see something worth betting.