Value

[karlskorner]

VALUE

From this mornings Amer. Turf Club newsletter:

"When playing this great game of ours the key to winning is not how many winners you select, but the value you get on those winners" and the writer goes on to explain what he means with an example.

For the past several months I have been watching M/L favorites, who may be listed at 9/5 or what ever, go off at 3, 4 or even 5-1, even though they were the logical horse, the public seemed to be looking elsewhere for "value". There are those who will say, great overlay Karl, but that's not my point,

I really believe that the general wagering pbulic is so bewtiched by the word "value" that they are overlooking the obvious.

Karl

[smf]

I agree.

Down here, there are some trainers (moves) that are worth a bet at 3-5. Years ago I tried to beat them. Up until last year, I'd pass them....Now I'll bet em hard (providing they fit the trainer's pattern).

A good read on "supposed value" can be had w/ Inside The Claiming Game. The author made his living betting t-breds for 25 years and will disagree w/ the value shoppers take on betting.

[Bob Harris]

I agree Karl...as more and more players realize that selection oriented play is doomed to fail long term, they are searching for what they believe is value but the formula they seem to be using is Value=Huge Price...all it takes is some over zealous wagering on one horse to create some nice opportunities among the logical contenders.

[canuck]

Whooaa!!!!
I havent bet a horse under 8-1 in months
The program I use has built in probability which is accurate enough to steer me toward "value" horses and I bet accordingly
Of course I have developed certain criteria which also points me in the right direction-and when the criteria and probability mesh-I throw the money in the pools
My hats are off to the grinders that can consistently hammer short priced horses and come out ahead-I personally do not know any-but I guess they exist somewhere
My experience is the guy from American Turf Monthly is bang on-I wish I had got this prog years ago--probably wouldnt be working anymore

[karlskorner]

Canuk;

I did not mean to imply that betting favorites was the way to go, rather I was pointing out that the "logical" horse was often overlooked by players looking for "value " elsewhere.

The users of programs that require the daily purchase of information are what I refer to as the "hunt and peck" method of handicapping, hunt over dozens of tracks for a horse that meets a certain criteria and peck out a few keys. Should the supplier of the information go "belly up", the user is "dead in the water" and the player might as well return to improving his golf game.

To practice the art of handicapping, a handicapper can walk into any track with the potential of turning $200.00 into $400.00. To practice the art of handicapping is a skill.

Karl

[Lefty]

Well, ML going 4-1 5-1 not always overlay; depends on
ML guy and most are terrible. Value is in eye of beholder and when you think you're getting value you might be wrong. I play no horse under 4-1 and try to squeeze value from my top or top two picks.
If you make money over a large no. of plays then you're getting value.
I've tried many prgms that made "lines" and gave up on all of them. I just try to get 4-1 better from prm I use now which is HSH. Canuck seems to be doing much the same thing with prgm he uses only he uses 8-1 as arbitrary odds.

[karlskorner]

Lefty;

I think you proved my point. You as a user of a subscription information service, such as HSH or HTR or any other provider of information, you are "hunting" through dozens of tracks looking for a horse that will fill you critera.

I mean no ill will towards Dave Schwartz or Ken Massa, may they live and be well and enjoy the fruits of their labor. but should they fail to provide the information for a day, a week or a month, due to a breakdown or go "belly up", your standing in left field "naked" without a mitt.

Karl

[GR1@HTR]

Nakedness is underrated...

[Tom]

On the surface, I think Lefty is right to set acceptable odds. Most of the stuff I have read about setting lines ends up with having to demand like twice the true odds before you bet, just to take care of all the unknowns and errors in the line. So why not just set what you are comfortable with?
One caveat I have is that make sure your horses actaully come in at the odds you are holdng out for. I have several nice spot plays in HTR that show a good win percentage, but absolutely none of the winners paid over $8. So If I have a minimum of 4-1 odds, I bet all losers. I think you have to factor in the odds criteria when yor do your query. At <2, a play might hit at 26%, but at >3-1, it might hit at 4%.
Makinig a line is only a guess, at best, wtih some people guessing right more often than others. If it work for you, great-it doesnt work for me so I don't do it. You never know all the factors involved with a horse. In HTR, say the #1 K ranked horse wins 25%of the time generally. But specifically, the #1 ranked K horse might only win 8% of the time if it loses 80 pounds after its last race. But you can never know that information.

Tom

[canuck]

Karls Korner

Not sure that the "skill" or "art" of handicapping is any different when a guy has a software prog and buys info and KNOWS from hundreds of hours of experience that he has a solid play---or you walk into Podunk Downs with a DRF and double your money
Who the hell doubles their money EVERY time they go to the track?
And the tangent we have got on as to whether the software provider goes belly up is irrelevant
As Lefty pointed out-the ML is the estimation by the guy who sets it of how the public will bet--it in no way reflects anything close to the horses acutal chance of winning
This thread started with you saying that value is over-rated--to me value is the absolute key to profits--to think otherwise you are flying by the seat of your pants

[ranchwest]

Personally, I think the measure of value is ROI. The objective is to win money. If you can generate a positive ROI, then you are investing for value. Otherwise, you're throwing your money away. That's the bottom line. I don't care if you do it with 30-1 horses or 3-5 horses, I don't care what somebody's morning line says, if you're coming out ahead, you're doing what you set out to do. If you get a warm fuzzy because your horse paid more than somebody thought it was supposed to pay, all the better.

[GR1@HTR]

Ranchwest,

That is the best definition of value I have ever seen.

[canuck]

Hee Hee
A warm fuzzy....
"Is that a salami in your pocket or did that 30-1 just stumble in with your last $2 on his beak?"

[sq764]

I disagree.. If you think of it logically, if you went to the track and bet $20 to win on all 10 races, you would have to hit 4 8/5 shots just to gain a slight profit. If you hit 1 10/1 shot, you break even and anything else you hit is gravy.. If favorites win 1/3 of the time on average, chances are the 8/5 shot is not going to win 4 times on a 10 race card.

Of course, if you waited for one favorite that you love and loaded up on him as the only wager of the day, then you can make some good money. But few people in this game have the patience to sit through 10 races and only wager on 1. I know I don't..

[karlskorner]

Canuck;

Charles Lindburg found Paris by flying by the seat of his pants, I guess I am the only one on this board using the same method.

Let me use another analysis about value. I have 2 friends who are "heavy" into the Stock Market, they have certain guide lines, one of them being that they won't buy a stock unless it reaches a certain price, meanwhile others have bought at a higher price and are enjoying the ride. Their woulda, shoulda, coulda feelings are "had it reached my price, we too would have enjoyed the ride"

I have no qualms about wagering on an animal that I believe is a "legitimate" contender, nor amongst my peers have I lost my standing, because I went to the window and the lady gave me back twice what I gave her 10 minutes ago. Don't get me wrong I enjoy a high price winner along with everyone else (my best was a horse named Little Whitey 7 years ago, paid $143.00)but, I am not going to let price stand in my way, if the night before I pondered over the PP's and the animial I wagered on today was a "legitimate' contender.

I have been doing this for too many years, and this is all I do, I am not about to let a profit slip through my fingers because it didn't fit certain guide lines.

Karl

[canuck]

Karls Korner

More power to you-I must confess that I actually know of one person who would go to the paddock(a North American Indian)and come back to the bar upstairs and tell us which horses he FELT were not up to snuff
After I saw several overbet nags who he -in no uncertain terms-told me they had zero shot run up the track-I was a believer
Unfortunately this gentleman had some serious personal problems and disappeared...

I think if you follow one circuit and know the trainers and jocks and are privy to inside info and all that jazz then YES-absolutely-you can profit by being an "artist" and pull a Chuck Lindbergh
But for us mere mortals who like to hunt and peck and play the dizzying array of tracks on the menu--the potential for serious profit is spectacular!
So getting back to my original point--I find it would be VERY difficult to make $ at this game unless you have some idea that over the long haul the bet you are mak
ing will show either instant profit or profit somewhere down the road

[Bob Harris]

Karl,

It seems that the direction of this thread has gone astray from what I thought your original post implied. Did I misread it?

You commented that you felt the general wagering public was so concerned about finding value that they were overlooking some lower priced logical contenders.

While I agree that good investments can be found in all price categories, I believe that the general public has confused the term "value" with "longshot". I personally can think of three players at the Reno Hilton who handicap by looking up at the odds, take note of the horses going off at 8-1 or higher, and then look at the past performances to try and make a case for the horse.

When they do find a long priced horse with a couple of positive stats, they get all excited and think they're making a great "value" play...in reality they have selected the horse in a vacuum. In the complete context of today's race he may be a terrible wager!

It has been a topic of conversation recently at the racebook, that in races where the contention seems to be fairly solid, some bettors seem to be saying "Well, I like the 2, 4 and 7 but there isn't any value there...let me see what else I can find". When they should really be passing the race, they start putting money on other horses which of course will allow the prices on one or more of the logical contenders to drift up slightly at post time.

Was that your general thought? If so, I agree! If not, I'm completely confused !

Have a great evening,

Bob

[karlskorner]

Bob Harris;

Geeez 418 people have viewed this post so far. It seems like my posts always cause some kind of controversy. My post several months back on "drugs" and the "candystore" Vets got a lot of attention and the post on "takeout" and my defending the tracks brought them out of the woodwork. I am glad today was a "dark day" at CRC so I could get to play in the sandbox.

Bob I guess my problem is I don't wager at more than 1 track, I have made it my business to understand the business of Thoroughbred racing

Canuk made the point that the "art" of handicapping can also be used by someone who has a computer and zillions of races from which to gather data. I don't disagree with him, however, take away his computer and he is lost. The skill I referred to is the same skill enjoyed by a Master Plumber, Master Electrician, etc. it isn't something you gather from books or a computer printout.

Now that said, about "value". Andy Beyer broke the ice 20 years ago with his first book (the rest were garbage)than along came the Pace people, who wrote several books and everybody was on to it. Today all the writers (and thats all they are are writers) have jumped all over the word "value" and the public is amoured.

A couple posts back a poster said "value" is ROI and that is the truest fact presented so far. I used the example if a handicapper walked into the track with $200.00 and walked out with $400.00 he made 100% return on his investment (although couple months back several posters through mathamatics said I was wrong).

I am certain that a couple people on this board are showing a return ( a very small minority ) by buying information and putting their skills and knowledge to work by playing 12 different tracks and making numerous wagers throughout the day, but that's not for me. Tomorrow there are approxiimately 90 horses running at CRC, it's my job to sift through these dumb animals and whether I pick a bunch of 8/5's or 1 60-1 the "value" we speak of is in the Return on my Investment.

Karl

[ranchwest]

sq764,

You are right that trying to find 4 8/5 winners in one card is risky business.

You have to wait on horses that meet your expectations.

As we discussed in a previous thread, horses win, approximately, in proportion to their odds. So, no matter what odds horses you bet, you must win more than the average person does at that odds level.

It's all about ROI. You have to know what percentage of winners you are picking and the average return. When both are high enough, you're making a profit. The lower the average return, the higher the percentage must be. The higher the average return, the lower the percentage on which you can settle.

Most of us are at least starting from some sort of program or system. We have to know the return that system is giving us. If it is giving us an ROI > 1, then we are finding value.

So, back to the original premise, I agree that people are fishing for odds (both directions) instead of fishing for winners.

[Tom]

Karl,
I buy mass track-data every day (HTR) but I handicap
like I used to in the good old-1- track- a- day days.
I pick my own pacelines, cintenders, make all the calls.
But I look at certain tyes of races at many tracks.
I am pretty good at Maiden Claimers, so I look at maybe 10-15 tracks and pick my spots in these races. Out 30-40 possible races, I may find a good bet in 6 or 7.
I also like claimers for older male winners so I can scan a lot of tracks and pick good spots. Basically, I like to
get 3-1 or better, but I will paly exactas with two favorites. I think it was this board I posted a while ago that I thought I was playing underlays in exactas, but they hit so often I was willing to take $12-$14 payoffs 3-4 times a day. That was what the track was offering.
If I go back two or three pacelines, I need 5-1 to cover the risk I take by forgiving races. I prefer to spend my time on handicapping and not analyzing payoffs to any great degree. I do tis for fun and for the challenge of solving puzzles, not to make a living. God, there have to better ways to make a living. I couldn't imagine doing this every day to pay the bills. I would kill some jockeys before the first month was over with.
~G~ (NOT!)

Tom

[canuck]

Bob Harris-

anybody who has such a narrow criteria as only betting 8-1 or over and making a case for such animal without solid knowledge of the probability of their winning is doomed
If you have a solid-here comes the v word again-value odds or probability line which give you the guidelines for a bet--and the program-OOPs -another dirty word for the purists-through a myriad of factors that are mundane for the average person to sift through but are given to the infidels that happen to subscribe to a data provider-IF IT SAYS THE HORSE WILL WIN 7 OUT OF 100 TIMES BUT YOU LOOK ON THE TOTE AND IT IS 18-1-lets do the math-bet $200 over 100 races on a $2 bet and return $280 for a 40% roi
The guys you happen to be talking about Mr Harris seem to have no clue--may their numbers multiply--and god bless everyone of them!!!

[sq764]

I think that handicapping is a huge part of winning at the races, but in my opinion, the 2 more important (or at least as important) aspects of winning are 1) Patience, and 2) Knowing HOW to bet.

I consider myself a pretty good handicapper, but a terrible wagerer. Sometimes I cannot decide whether i want to be a win bettor only or an exotic bettor. Belive me, a combination of both is tough. If I would focus on one or the other and stay dedicated to it, I would probably be in the black for the year. But I think I like the 'action' too much..

Maybe when I get married and have children, I will gain the patience to do this, until then....

[ranchwest]

sq764,

nPatience := wife + children

nPatience == 0

[canuck]

sq764

Try this-
On a typical card ther may be 3 or 4 overlays-some days none-some days they are jumping off the page at you in every single race
Win or exotic--or PROFIT????
Are you aware of a little factoid that 80% of all exactas contain at least one horse under 5-1?
You have several good things that are juicy odds
They may pay $15 to $40 dollars to win--but we all know that these kinds of horses PLACE twice as often as they win
And do we ever feel violated when they run their eyeballs out to come second to the chalk or a horse under 5-1
So try this--bet the good thing to win and take ANY horse under 5-1 in the win hole with your nag in second(usually to a max of 3)
I have ground out money on a day where these doggies were running second but the 1 or 2 ex's I caught put me in the black

[sq764]

Good point, and I know its against some handicapper's beliefs, but any value shot I find (7-1 or better for me), I bet to win and place. I used to only bet to win, but too many times my horse would just miss and pay $15 or $20 to place. Mountaineer is a very good example of this..

[four m]

i agree karlskorner--criteria-f1-odds lines- blah blah blah
please, everything works sometimes. who here can make an odds line--better, who can make an odds line.
imho it's all b/s. i'm kinda new in this game, but so much "criteria" makes me dizzy, and when i see all the input and results on roi is at best, at best, at best, break even, cause if it was +++ we would all be making $$$, which would dilute and again we would all be losing $$$. be creative, screw liftin, beyer, et al, i believe it's your only chance, with all due respect to all.

[GR1@HTR]

We all agree that specialization is the key. Don't matter if you specialize at:
**a track
**mdn claimers
**claims only
**layoffs
**turf
**sprints
**early speed
**trainers
**3 legged horses

What ever it is you specialize in, just master it. Could the worst capper be "Jack of all trades, master of none"?

[Dave Schwartz]

Canuck,

>>>On a typical card ther may be 3 or 4 overlays-some days none-some days they are jumping off the page at you in every single race
Win or exotic--or PROFIT???? <<<

I must respectfully disagree.

I would say that the definition of overlay would be something akin to a horse that has a win probability such that SHOULD return a long term profit.

I suggest that almost every race has overlays. After all, the public does not handicap THAT accurately. The trick is finding them.

And, of course, some of those that we THINK are overlays aren't, and some that we THINK aren't, are. (Huh?)

I will agree that FROM OUR PERSONAL VANTAGE POINT there may not be but a handful of detectable overlays on a card.

Of course, that builds a case for "multiple vantage points."


Just my opinion.

Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[ranchwest]

Ah, multiple vantage points. Do you know what you must be, Dave? You must be a genius.

[superfecta]

I think value means different things to each player,and sometimes it depends on the race.You can't set an arbertrary number and set it in stone(i.e.I won't bet on any horse at odds of less than 4-1).The best you can hope for is that after a long series of solid plays,you produce a profit.You can express the win average,or ROI but thats what it is,an average.
I would put more faith in solid money management rather than put it in "value".As in,"I think the four horse is a lock to win but he is 6-5,so I won't bet the race."
Thats looking at value.Money management would say,"what is the best way to make money on this race?"
And sometimes passing the race is the best way,if the exotic payoffs are too low,or too many unknowns.
Sometimes making that short priced horse a key horse in the trifecta is the better way,or in the pick six.
Same horse, different type of bet.

[canuck]

Dave Schwartz-

I am trying to understand what you are agreeing and disagreeing with-
You wrote
"I would say that the definition of overlay would be something akin to a horse that has a win probability such that SHOULD return a long term profit"
Absolutely-I use prob and value odds and when I see a horse that has a win prob of 15% and he is 10-1 and he is also exhibiting factors through my own research to confirm he is a good thing-I bet him
Then you go on to say that you WILL agree from our personal vantage point there may not be but a handful of detectable overlays on the card
I dont believe I ever said anything like that--I am dealing with probability and opinions do not enter into it-I bet when I perceive to have an edge-and empirical research backs me up
So exactly WHAT are you disagreeing and agreeing with?

[canuck]

Dave-forget the semantics for a moment and I will give you a real life example of what I am talking about
I'm sure you have poked around or are familiar with HTR
They have a screen called Value Odds
It lists the minimum odds required to make a bet
They have the Consensus screen where you can sort through and get the rank of horses through various factors
Through research in my quest to find true overlays I found that the longer priced horses who won and exceeded their value odds usually were found in the top 4 velocity

I use them as a starting point for my contenders
In the 4th race at Philly yesterday (uh oh redboard alert Will Robinson) I will list the top 4 velocity horses in order-the win probability-the value odds and post time odds

7 18% 4.5 4.6
4 11% 8.4 7.2
1 24% 3.2 1.2
3 17% 4.8 11.2

The 1-with a 24% win prob was hammered down to just over even money
The 3-with a 17% win prob was let go at odds of 11-1 won
and paid $24.40 to win
I usually allow for margin of error by confining my bets to 50% higher than the value odds
Multi card simulcasting points out these overlays day in and out
So this is what works for me,Dave
Karls Korner started this thread by saying that value is over-rated
Since value is the basis on how I play this game I felt compelled to reply

[GR1@HTR]

Originally posted by Dave Schwartz
Canuck,

>>>On a typical card ther may be 3 or 4 overlays-some days none-some days they are jumping off the page at you in every single race
Win or exotic--or PROFIT???? <<<

I must respectfully disagree.

I would say that the definition of overlay would be something akin to a horse that has a win probability such that SHOULD return a long term profit.

I suggest that almost every race has overlays. After all, the public does not handicap THAT accurately. The trick is finding them.

And, of course, some of those that we THINK are overlays aren't, and some that we THINK aren't, are. (Huh?)

I will agree that FROM OUR PERSONAL VANTAGE POINT there may not be but a handful of detectable overlays on a card.

Of course, that builds a case for "multiple vantage points."


Just my opinion.

Regards,
Dave Schwartz


Me agrees w/ Canuck. About 3ish potential solid value plays per card. Could be a pace angle, trainer angle, class drop, breeding play, or funny horse name play.

[hurrikane]

Well, maybe I'm a little worn out from last night...or maybe I didn't screw my head on right this morning. But, isn't every horse that wins the race an overlay. After all...if you knew at the beginning who was going to win it wouldn't matter what the odds were..you would bet the horse..and the horse would be an overlay because no matter what th odds you would win money.

So...with that twisted idea...perhaps what you need to handicap is yourself. If you..or your queries...win 25% of the races you bet then you need to get 3.5 -1 to break even..much less make money. So..if that is the level of your handicapping then you can't make money long term if you don't get those odds or better.

If you're going to bet 4-5 odds horses you damn sure better be winning 90% of your races..or your going to end up losing sooner or later. I think I would spend my money on a different race because I don't win 90% of the time.
Actually, I would probably key him in an exotic..which is a great way to make money on chalk!

[ranchwest]

hurrikane,

I think you are on the right track (no pun intended), but it isn't so much a matter of your handicapping limiting your win percentage as your style does. Unless someone is better than anyone I've heard of, much less known, there is a relationship between win percentage and average win amount. As your win percentage goes up, your average win amount goes down and vice-a-versa. The little gap that shows you're doing better than the average track goer is the profit shown in your ROI. That's how you measure that you've truly been betting for value, you've got a black ROI, over 1.0.

Because some people are sliding up for the higher average win and others are sliding down for the higher percentage, there's money going in at both ends. How can there be money to be made if there's money going in at both ends? It's dumb money, money bet on horses that have no chance at any odds.

[bedford35]

Question for Karl,

Your post earlier in this thread implies that you are a full time professional horseplayer that focuses solely on one track(circuit). Is that correct? I would be interested to know what your R.O.I. has been in recent years. I know there has been many discussions about the true level of r.o.i. that can be achieved but I don't recall getting any input from a real full time pro and would be very interested to know. Thanks.

As far as the value discussion I fall somewhere in the middle. Value is the supreme consideration in my opinion however I do believe that people such as Karl that have extensive, detailed, personal knowledge of a circuit combined with good judgement can outperform a good computer program for that circuit. Whether the difference in r.o.i. is enough too compensate for the smaller number of opportunities is a tougher question. Great discussion topic. Thanks.

bedford35

[Dave Schwartz]

Canuck,

I am saying that I agree that there may be only a handful of overlays on a card as determined by whatever program/approach that you or I use.

HTR makes a probability. So does HSH, and 47 other programs. We don't all come up with the same horses.

While one program may be right more often than another, this still shows that the definition of an overlay is from whatever standpoint you view the race from.

If you played a number of different systems/programs/approaches and added up all the overlays listed with any program I believe that you'd get more plays than you could shake a stick at.

And to say that only HSH's, or HTR's (or any other program's) overlays are "real" does not make sense.

Therefore, I conclude that there are usually more than 3-4 overlays on a card. Again, I say that the trick is to find them.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Dave Schwartz]

Ranchwest,

>>>Ah, multiple vantage points. Do you know what you must be, Dave? You must be a genius.<<<

Do I detect a note of sarcasm there, RW?

[Lefty]

Karl, I understand your point but, the prgm can let me handicap faster looking for basic things. I handicapped yrs before the PC became available and can do it again.
But the PC and good prgms ARE available so, why not make use of them. Let's not play the whatif it all stops
game.

[ranchwest]

Dave,

No, I wasn't being sarcastic. I use "multiple vantage points" as a primary part of my handicapping. I was giving two thumbs up.

[Dave Schwartz]

RanchWest,

Thanks.

I believe it is the key to profit.

Dave

[canuck]

Dave-
Now i see what you mean
In practice playing multiple tracks I can barely keep up with all the action-especially in the crunch when the afternoon and late afternoon and early evening ones are all running and you feel like a ferret on double expresso
Having multiple vantage points would confuse the hell out of me-unless I could hire an assistant!

[ranchwest]

I have a single report that shows the primary data I want to see and has notations on the multiple vantage points. I've found that my biggest problem was trying to ferret out information from the DRF format.

[karlskorner]

bedford35

Thanks for your interest, but I am not about to disccuss my ROI on an open forum such as this. But I will tell you that I walked into CRC today with $400.00 "walk-in money" and left with $724.00. Apparently there are numerous ways to figure ROI, but I come up with 81%, if you agree, we are in the same ball park. I played all 10 races with win bets of $40.00 and won 6 races, the highest mutual was $8.80.

Yes I do have a program, something I wrote on a Commodore 64 back in '85 (never again) which was what I was doing by hand prior to to that. It does not use speed ratings or variants as I believe in KISS (keep it simple etc). When I bought my first PC in '94, someone was kind enough to covert the program to PC and at that time we added to it the program in back of Charles Carroll's book "Speed Handicapping"

If you want to post your e-mail address, I will be happy to discuss my ROI, as my records go back 20 years.

Karl

[sq764]

How meticulous are your records? I wish I had the discipline (and time) to keep good records. I still mix handicapping as half investment, half fun.. Bad combo.

[Bob Harris]

Originally posted by canuck
Bob Harris-

anybody who has such a narrow criteria as only betting 8-1 or over and making a case for such animal without solid knowledge of the probability of their winning is doomed
If you have a solid-here comes the v word again-value odds or probability line which give you the guidelines for a bet--and the program-OOPs -another dirty word for the purists-through a myriad of factors that are mundane for the average person to sift through but are given to the infidels that happen to subscribe to a data provider-IF IT SAYS THE HORSE WILL WIN 7 OUT OF 100 TIMES BUT YOU LOOK ON THE TOTE AND IT IS 18-1-lets do the math-bet $200 over 100 races on a $2 bet and return $280 for a 40% roi
The guys you happen to be talking about Mr Harris seem to have no clue--may their numbers multiply--and god bless everyone of them!!!


Canuck,

I wish you could see these guys in action...to say that they have no clue is a huge understatement. One of them actually will increase his bet if the horse is grey...and no I'm not making that up!

I agree, God bless everyone of them!!

Bob

[karlskorner]

sq764

I keep the charts published by BRIS (I like them better than DRF's), prior to that I kept Equibase charts and prior to that I cut them out by hand from DRF.

My "current" book keeps the past 60 days of charts and records. One of the most productive records is "key horse" as per Beyer/Davidowitz. If a horse you are looking at today came out of a race where 2 or more horses in that race went on to win their next race, this horse becomes a "key horse" and you want to look at him very carefully. The rest of the notes are my personal observations in the paddock and on the track, change of equipment, adding of front bandages,shoes, 1st time lasix, tongue ties, was the horse "alive" coming in from the receiving barn, was he "alive" in the paddock, did he do at least a 1/4 mile work out on the backstretch, did he run out after the finish line, was the change of jockey helpful and just about any other observation you want to add.

All in all it takes about 10 minutes in the evening to transfer my thoughs to that days charts, unfortunately you have to stay with it. Tomorrow when you are looking at a particular horse who ran on 11/15 you have a wealth of information in the charts.

Karl

[sq764]

What have you found to be the best way to track a key race? If a horse wins, do you go back and notate that on a previous race to see if multiple horses have won from that race?

[GR1@HTR]

Key Race vs Race with a very fast finish time.

Which is better? I dunno...

[karlskorner]

sq764

I do 2 things, one make a chart on the computer
November Key Races
as of 12/06/01
Days of the month are vertical and the races horizontal.

1. 1-1 / 4-1 / 6-2
2.
3
etc.
Each night I look at the date and race the winning horse came from and fill in that race # with a 1, if the race already has a 1, than it becomes a 2 etc. as above. When finished I print it out for tomorrow. Tomorrow I look at the horses last racing date on the chart and if it has a 2 or more indicated for that race, it becomes a "key race" I
also go to the date (11/15) in the charts and look for the race the horse came out of and I indicate on the chart he won on 12/6. Tomorrow when I find a 2 or better I go to the charts to see finishing position these 2 horses were on 11/15. If the horse that's running tomorrow beat these 2 next out winners, go to the bank. If he ran in between them take the rubber band off your roll and if he was near them, he is to be considered seriously.

Today I had 3 "key" horses at CRC. 3rd race the K2 (it becomes a K2 or K3 when it becomes a key horse) won it's last on 11/4, BUT the 2 next out winners ran 2nd and 3rd. Paid $9.40. In the 6th the horse was morning line at 5/2 paid $5.40 and in the 8th the 2 next out winners ran and 1 and 2 and he ran 5th. When the board shows double digits for the odds I split the wager win and place. He placed and paid $17.20. I had a nice day.

GR1

As the saying goes (time is for jail) I have had numerous e-mail with Jim LeHane (Calibration Handicapping) who wrote about "key races" He is still trying to find a way to calibrate times of the race. My attitude is that time is not the answer, it's the quality and conditon of the animals in that "key race"

Karl

[ranchwest]

Karl,

Are you monitoring only Calder for key races?

[karlskorner]

ranchwest

Yes. Never could pat my head and rub my stomach at the same time.

Karl

[smf]

Karl,

Thanks for sharing that. Question: does your key race method work better for maidens (as opposed to older runner's races)?

[karlskorner]

SMF

Never bothered to check it. Saw no need. My thoughts, which are different from others who are trying to solve key race puzzle with time is that. it is the condition and quality of the horses in that particular race, not the time of the race. A horse has to run just fast enough to win.

If you make a chart like I suggested you would be surprised at how many "blank" races you get on any given day. If I get 5 races out of 10 of 1's and 2's for a day thats about average. Which means to me that the other 5 races on that given date were filled with garbage and they will probably never win a race.

Like trainers at any given track, only a small percentage are winners, the rest are just grabbing "day money" same with horses, just taking up stall space. I would be interested if somebody ran a query as to how many horses come and go and never hit the board.

Karl

[Schlagman]

Bob,

In the days when I would purchase every system and angle in sight, there was actually one published saying to bet only on grey nags. Maybe the light color keeps the sun from affecting them so much...

They're also easier to spot from the grandstand :-)

[sq764]

Karlskorner,

Do you find that wagering on horses out of key races produces a healthy profit? Do you keep any stats on your key races (or moreso, the hroses coming out of them)?


Scott

[Lefty]

Schlag... And Joe Conte actually sold a highpriced system where he said bet only certain Chestnut horses.
Greys, Chestnuts, Gawd...

[Dave Schwartz]

Lefty,

I recall a guy that once told me he only bet horses with two names that started with the same letter. Like Rapid Rooster or Fast Freddy. Horse had to be 40-1 or more.

Claimed he had been making money with it for years.

Yeah, right.

Dave

[takeout]

Well… at least he had some price going for him. :D

[FortuneHunter]

You guys forgot half the equation!!

I was taught "Bet the Greys on Rainy days" :)

[karlskorner]

Dave Schwartz;

I knew a couple people who only bet "double letters" in the Double. They hit some fantastic prices. The are all dead now, but I know they died happy.

Fortunehunter;

There is one more line "only bet grey's on rainy days if they dump on the track"

Karl

[karlskorner]

sq764

Scott:

I dont' know what you consider profitable. It's paid for year end cruises on the Grand Princess for the past couple of years and then some.

I don't do "stats" but I have a daily work sheet with a seperate column for Key races, as this is the only side wager I make.

Today I went with 4 "key races", 2 horses were scratched in the 9th and 10th and the race came off the grass because of rain in the 4th (no play) which left me with the 3rd race, horse was morning line at 3/1, unfortunately there was a dead heat and it paid $3.80.
Which to me is still a 80% return.

Has it been profitable ? To me it has, but most people won't put the work required to keep up. Remember it's only a side wager.

This is the last page, so I guess that ends that.

Karl

[PaceAdvantage]

Actually, Last Page is not meant in the literal finite sense. It simply means the last page in the current series. I don't know if there is a limit to pages on a particular thread. I don't think there is....


==PA

[karlskorner]

PA

I am done. 1367 viewers ! Is that some kind of record ?
We sure beat the hell out of VALUE. I hope users of programs and purchased information took no offense, I meant none.

Gotta think up something for next week.

Karl

[sq764]

Karlskorner,

Yes, that fits my idea of 'profitable'.. Actually, my exact idea of profitable is going to my local track (Delaware Park) and wagering all night, covering my beers, and my fiancee's slots, and breaking even.

Beats the hell out of dinner and a movie!

Scott

[Joe Conte]

BOARD DIRECTORS: The "Value" click has been dormant since 2001...so have none of you deadheads been able to offer anything useful or cogent under this rubric in all this time? :D

[Lasix1]

Joe,

A lot of the comment on and analysis of value shifted to the odds line threads. I did re-read this thread recently though and sure did profit from its contents. I think the consensus is that value is the key to making money at this game if anyone can just figure out what it is and when you've got it!