Changing my wagering attack

[Capper Al]

After 5 years of being profitable, I'm going to attempt a new wagering method. My old method just drives me crazy. The old looked for minimum odds on my top 5 horses, and if a horse or two met the minimum, I keyed them. The losing streaks can be forever. I mentioned once in another thread that I would lose 290% and then recoup 300% once I had. The problem is that losing streaks are not fun. And yes, I did play 99% of all races. That's fun. But now I'm going to include accepting lower odd horses to key on and become more selective on my races, maybe dropping down to playing less than half the races.

[Ocala Mike]

If you've been beating the game for the past five years, why change? If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

[thaskalos]

Especially if you are in possession of the "one and only absolute truth in handicapping". :)

[DRIVEWAY]

Especially if you are in possession of the "one and only absolute truth in handicapping". :)


Maybe the problem here is that the "one and only absolute truth in handicapping" changes every 5 years.

Otherwise, Capper Al should stick with whatever he's doing. Tracking alternative betting methods can't hurt.

If both work establish multiple accounts and bet each one separately but profitably.

[Robert Fischer]

After 5 years of being profitable, I'm going to attempt a new wagering method. My old method just drives me crazy. The old looked for minimum odds on my top 5 horses, and if a horse or two met the minimum, I keyed them. The losing streaks can be forever. I mentioned once in another thread that I would lose 290% and then recoup 300% once I had. The problem is that losing streaks are not fun. And yes, I did play 99% of all races. That's fun. But now I'm going to include accepting lower odd horses to key on and become more selective on my races, maybe dropping down to playing less than half the races.

If you want to play 99% of the races, toss the favorites you don't like, include the favorites you don't know with your other keys, and key the favorites you love.

[Capper Al]

Maybe the problem here is that the "one and only absolute truth in handicapping" changes every 5 years.

Otherwise, Capper Al should stick with whatever he's doing. Tracking alternative betting methods can't hurt.

If both work establish multiple accounts and bet each one separately but profitably.

LOL. That's the crazy part. It works. Have you been profitable for 5 years?

[Capper Al]

If you've been beating the game for the past five years, why change? If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

That's the dialogue going on in my head. Good angel on my left shoulder saying stick with it. Bored Angel on the right shoulder saying have fun.

[Capper Al]

Especially if you are in possession of the "one and only absolute truth in handicapping". :)

I'm surprised others haven't tried it since 99% are losers anyway. What would they have to lose? Time maybe, not money. They are losing money anyway.

[Capper Al]

Maybe the problem here is that the "one and only absolute truth in handicapping" changes every 5 years.

Otherwise, Capper Al should stick with whatever he's doing. Tracking alternative betting methods can't hurt.

If both work establish multiple accounts and bet each one separately but profitably.

My record keeping sucks. I do from time to time for about 200 races on a good run.

[DRIVEWAY]

My record keeping sucks. I do from time to time for about 200 races on a good run.

I thought the "one and only absolute truth in handicapping" was accurate record keeping!:confused:

[PhantomOnTour]

My record keeping sucks. I do from time to time for about 200 races on a good run.
Then how do you know you're winning?

[Capper Al]

Then how do you know you're winning?

Twinspires keeps track for me. I know my overall profit, what tracks, and bet type that do well at.

[DJofSD]

The only absolute is there are no absolutes.

As both racing and your insights change, your approach to handicapping and wagering will need to change too.

[Capper Al]

The only absolute is there are no absolutes.

As both racing and your insights change, your approach to handicapping and wagering will need to change too.

The absolute truth works. One has to face playing through losing streaks. When one starts playing around favorites, it takes time to hit.

[thaskalos]

That's the dialogue going on in my head. Good angel on my left shoulder saying stick with it. Bored Angel on the right shoulder saying have fun.

You are making money while betting on nearly every race that you see, Al...it doesn't get any better or more exciting than that. If you are getting "bored" while betting all the races...don't you think that you'll get even more bored when you start passing more than half of them?

[DJofSD]

Absolute in what sense?

To me, handicapping is similar to physics. For 99% of the time, Newtonian physics is good enough but for the other 1% you're going to have some errors unless you use some Quantum Mechanics.

In QM, a founding principle is you can not absolutely know both the location and the momentum of a particle. It's all statics. It eliminates the idea of an absolute truth.

I think of racing in the same way. For example, how do you explain a thrown shoe, or, a horse breaking poorly, or, an injury during a race, or, the jockey riding with a hang over?

There's just too many variable which can not be accounted for and which on the rare occasion is going to turn all of the time and effort into a loss.

[Capper Al]

You are making money while betting on nearly every race that you see, Al...it doesn't get any better or more exciting than that. If you are getting "bored" while betting all the races...don't you think that you'll get even more bored when you start passing more than half of them?

This might be true. It's difficult either way. I average 3 plus top pick hits on a card. It would be fun just to cash winners and have an enjoyable day.

[Capper Al]

Absolute in what sense?

To me, handicapping is similar to physics. For 99% of the time, Newtonian physics is good enough but for the other 1% you're going to have some errors unless you use some Quantum Mechanics.

In QM, a founding principle is you can not absolutely know both the location and the momentum of a particle. It's all statics. It eliminates the idea of an absolute truth.

I think of racing in the same way. For example, how do you explain a thrown shoe, or, a horse breaking poorly, or, an injury during a race, or, the jockey riding with a hang over?

There's just too many variable which can not be accounted for and which on the rare occasion is going to turn all of the time and effort into a loss.

You are not disagreeing with the absolute truth. Matter of fact, you are building the case on how it works.

[thaskalos]

You are not disagreeing with the absolute truth. Matter of fact, you are building the case on how it works.

There is no absolute truth in horse racing, Al. Whatever opinion we might have about a horse or a race is just that -- an OPINION. It can never be called an "absolute truth".

The horse that we consider to be a "strong overlay" in a race can easily be a "total impossibility"...and we wouldn't know it until the race's end.

You can't take a bunch of guesses and opinions...and create "absolute truths" out of them.

[Capper Al]

There is no absolute truth in horse racing, Al. Whatever opinion we might have about a horse or a race is just that -- an OPINION. It can never be called an "absolute truth".

The horse that we consider to be a "strong overlay" in a race can easily be a "total impossibility"...and we wouldn't know it until the race's end.

You can't take a bunch of guesses and opinions...and create "absolute truths" out of them.

Why do guys fight the idea so much while arguing the reason for the absolute truth. (This may actually help me stay the course. Thank you.)

Let's take your argument that nothing is absolute about horse racing. This is true about handicapping, but for some reason we all act as if we are formulating exact math when we all know better. So there might be no absolute truth to handicapping. But this becomes the absolute truth for wagering. Therefore, my second choice at 7/1 might be a better play then my first choice at 3/5 just because there is no absolute truths in handicapping. It's that simple.

[Dave Schwartz]

Let's take your argument that nothing is absolute about horse racing. This is true about handicapping, but for some reason we all act as if we are formulating exact math when we all know better. So there might be no absolute truth to handicapping. But this becomes the absolute truth for wagering. Therefore, my second choice at 7/1 might be a better play then my first choice at 3/5 just because there is no absolute truths in handicapping. It's that simple.

Gotta say, this response makes lots of sense to me.

[thaskalos]

Why do guys fight the idea so much while arguing the reason for the absolute truth. (This may actually help me stay the course. Thank you.)

Let's take your argument that nothing is absolute about horse racing. This is true about handicapping, but for some reason we all act as if we are formulating exact math when we all know better. So there might be no absolute truth to handicapping. But this becomes the absolute truth for wagering. Therefore, my second choice at 7/1 might be a better play then my first choice at 3/5 just because there is no absolute truths in handicapping. It's that simple.

Our wagering theories, no mater how well-calculated or mathematically proven they might be, are still relying on our HANDICAPPING...which is nothing more than a glorified guess.

So...even wagering concepts cannot be called "absolute truths".

Odds and probabilities in horse racing are not as clearly defined as they are in other gambling games.

[Capper Al]

Our wagering theories, no mater how well-calculated or mathematically proven they might be, are still relying on our HANDICAPPING...which is nothing more than a glorified guess.

So...even wagering concepts cannot be called "absolute truths".

Odds and probabilities in horse racing are not as clearly defined as they are in other gambling games.

Again you argue the point using the logic of the absolute truth in an attempt to discredit it. Trust the force, Luke. And yes, one has to be better than a 25 percent strike rate handicapper.

Can it be put more precise: odds and probabilities in horse racing are not clearly defined as they are in other gambling games, so take advantage of it when the public offers value to you.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Absolute in what sense?

To me, handicapping is similar to physics. For 99% of the time, Newtonian physics is good enough but for the other 1% you're going to have some errors unless you use some Quantum Mechanics.

In QM, a founding principle is you can not absolutely know both the location and the momentum of a particle. It's all statics. It eliminates the idea of an absolute truth.

I think of racing in the same way. For example, how do you explain a thrown shoe, or, a horse breaking poorly, or, an injury during a race, or, the jockey riding with a hang over?

There's just too many variable which can not be accounted for and which on the rare occasion is going to turn all of the time and effort into a loss.

You are looking at it from the outside in and hence the lack of faith.The player is the grounding principle in all this.One's performance over time nullifies the sporadic nature of external variables.That IMO is the toughest leap for most players.They don't believe in themselves and feel at the mercy of things beyond their control at all times.This and pure gambling is why nearly all lose.

[thaskalos]

How is it that the most confident handicappers of this board are also the ones who bet the least? ;)

[Capper Al]

How is it that the most confident handicappers of this board are also the ones who bet the least? ;)

I'm not one of them, I have reason not to be confident. I fear that there will be one losing streak that will tap me out. The bravest are those who face their fears and move on. The stress is a lot. That's why I'm trying to improve my ways.

[CincyHorseplayer]

How is it that the most confident handicappers of this board are also the ones who bet the least? ;)

I'm confident in my abilities but it doesn't mean I'm going to start taking my rent money and betting it.You mock my $20-60 betting amounts yet in other threads say you will never raise your ceiling above $400 no matter how much you win and recommend betting 1% or .5% or .25% or less of your bankroll.That seems as underachieving to me as my bet amounts are objects of ridicule to you.At least you aren't an advocate of the lets bet millions on a 2% ROI club! :cool:

My bets are growing with time and confidence.I'm fine with that.

[thaskalos]

I'm confident in my abilities but it doesn't mean I'm going to start taking my rent money and betting it.You mock my $20-60 betting amounts yet in other threads say you will never raise your ceiling above $400 no matter how much you win and recommend betting 1% or .5% or .25% or less of your bankroll.That seems as underachieving to me as my bet amounts are objects of ridicule to you.At least you aren't an advocate of the lets bet millions on a 2% ROI club! :cool:

My bets are growing with time and confidence.I'm fine with that.
No offense meant, Cincy...you are free to bet anything your heart desires.

But you've often pointed out to me, and others here, that we lack the self-confidence needed to properly play this game...and that you are disappointed in us for the lack of "will" that we sometimes display.

If I lack self-confidence and "will" when I bet $400 in a race...then what does that say about you, when you bet $20?

[JimG]

Hi Al,

If you have won each year for the last 5 years, I would not change a thing. However, if you are up overall but have some losing years in the mix, making a change may make sense. Continued success to you.

Jim

[CincyHorseplayer]

No offense meant, Cincy...you are free to bet anything your heart desires.

But you've often pointed out to me, and others here, that we lack the self-confidence needed to properly play this game...and that you are disappointed in us for the lack of "will" that we sometimes display.

If I lack self-confidence and "will" when I bet $400 in a race...then what does that say about you, when you bet $20?

You've acquired your bankroll over a long period of time and I'm in the process of doing the same.I'm fairly at the beginning of building a bank and you are at the end of it.That's what it says.I don't know why you have to resort to "mine is bigger than yours" everytime I say I'm confident in my game and share my opinion about it.And as I recall,in my first post in this thread I didn't mention anybody by name but shared more of a self view,why I have failed in the past is reflected in what I see in others, so I don't know how you leapt to me saying you lacked will and confidence.I take the anti-Copernican view of this game,that the game revolves around our abilities.It might be the center of it's own universe but we as bettors decide what parts of that reality we want to participate in.We play to our strengths,not just to everything that is there.Therefore it's in our orbit and we control it.It's simply the non victim mentality view.It works for me.When mine's as big as yours I'll give you a call and see what then!:)

[traynor]

You've acquired your bankroll over a long period of time and I'm in the process of doing the same.I'm fairly at the beginning of building a bank and you are at the end of it.That's what it says.I don't know why you have to resort to "mine is bigger than yours" everytime I say I'm confident in my game and share my opinion about it.And as I recall,in my first post in this thread I didn't mention anybody by name but shared more of a self view,why I have failed in the past is reflected in what I see in others, so I don't know how you leapt to me saying you lacked will and confidence.I take the anti-Copernican view of this game,that the game revolves around our abilities.It might be the center of it's own universe but we as bettors decide what parts of that reality we want to participate in.We play to our strengths,not just to everything that is there.Therefore it's in our orbit and we control it.It's simply the non victim mentality view.It works for me.When mine's as big as yours I'll give you a call and see what then!:)

Well said. Some would say that the key to real self-confidence is in self-efficacy, and that, in turn, is in an internal locus of control. Specifically, there are no victims in wagering--one can always choose what to bet, where and how to bet, how much to bet, and whether to not bet at all. The key element in all that is to avoid blaming others (track takeout, conniving trainers, inept jockeys, the cat pee'd in my hard drive--whatever else) and stop playing the victim.

That is the hard part. And it sounds like you are already past that stage. Congratulations. The rest just keeps getting easier and easier.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Well said. Some would say that the key to real self-confidence is in self-efficacy, and that, in turn, is in an internal locus of control. Specifically, there are no victims in wagering--one can always choose what to bet, where and how to bet, how much to bet, and whether to not bet at all. The key element in all that is to avoid blaming others (track takeout, conniving trainers, inept jockeys, the cat pee'd in my hard drive--whatever else) and stop playing the victim.

That is the hard part. And it sounds like you are already past that stage. Congratulations. The rest just keeps getting easier and easier.

Thanks Traynor.I simply don't see how it could be any other way as a point of departure,to have the patience and werewithal to find the goal.I take a lot of energy from this game and can't help but think and know due diligence is rewarded.It is.That wellspring of expectation is what keeps me coming back for more!

[baconswitchfarm]

I'm confident in my abilities but it doesn't mean I'm going to start taking my rent money and betting it.You mock my $20-60 betting amounts yet in other threads say you will never raise your ceiling above $400 no matter how much you win and recommend betting 1% or .5% or .25% or less of your bankroll.That seems as underachieving to me as my bet amounts are objects of ridicule to you.At least you aren't an advocate of the lets bet millions on a 2% ROI club! :cool: .


What a great post. In the first sentence you won't bet your rent money. While the last sentence is used as a dig towards professional bettors who are millionaires. Well rounded.

[Capper Al]

Hi Al,

If you have won each year for the last 5 years, I would not change a thing. However, if you are up overall but have some losing years in the mix, making a change may make sense. Continued success to you.

Jim

Thanks. No losing years in the mix. What happens is that I wager more with the track's money. More wagering make me more vulnerable to a losing streak tapping me out and forcing me to start over.

[Capper Al]

What a great post. In the first sentence you won't bet your rent money. While the last sentence is used as a dig towards professional bettors who are millionaires. Well rounded.

Are you sure these people exist?

[baconswitchfarm]

Are you sure these people exist?


Yes. But, I always see threads that are derogatory towards people betting large volumes with small roi. I assure you the guys I know could do better than they currently do , after rebate, if they bet far more selectively. There seems to be a misconception here that big players are inferior players who just happen to have large bankrolls. It seems like how the theater people look down on movie stars as not real actors. The bottom line here is net. I don't know a single player with a super high roi that makes six figures a year.I know guys with high roi that make a supplement to a living. I am not saying they are not out there. But I know six guys that all make six figures yearly betting horses and all are under 8% roi after rebate.They could all have a roi to crow about if they wanted to make less and brag more.

[traynor]

Yes. But, I always see threads that are derogatory towards people betting large volumes with small roi. I assure you the guys I know could do better than they currently do , after rebate, if they bet far more selectively. There seems to be a misconception here that big players are inferior players who just happen to have large bankrolls. It seems like how the theater people look down on movie stars as not real actors. The bottom line here is net. I don't know a single player with a super high roi that makes six figures a year.I know guys with high roi that make a supplement to a living. I am not saying they are not out there. But I know six guys that all make six figures yearly betting horses and all are under 8% roi after rebate.They could all have a roi to crow about if they wanted to make less and brag more.

It is a lot like other kinds of business--a balancing act. If one's ROI is too high, one is leaving money on the table. Meaning increase the amount of the wagers until the ROI drops into a "reasonable" range--still well worth betting, but not enough to attract predators. A consistent (but relatively low) ROI is far preferable to the wild ups and downs and mood swings that the more emotional bettors seem to find so attractive.

Leave too much on the table, and anyone with a bit of data analysis skill and a computer will notice the "opportunities" and those opportunities will quickly disappear.

[Capper Al]

The one and only absolute truth has been supplemented with tote-board watching. The improvements have been incorporated into my sheets, passed a dry run, and is ready to hit the real world.

[pondman]

I applaud anyone who is trying to make more money with less effort. That's efficiency. I'm someone who would always recommend betting fewer, but with more money.

I'd worry about the technology of keying favorites. It's not something I have-- the ability to bet last, and therefore I spend all of my effort on the other end of the game.

Plunging favorites is something that probably will get worse as all players move towards adws and mobile betting devices. And it's gotten to the point that cool features 5 years ago, such as conditional betting, are useless today.

How do you control your break even values?

[Capper Al]

Keying favorites is scary stuff. I'll need to gain some experience with it from trial and error and , hope, not to get beaten up too badly. The premise is the same as it was with value horses. I just didn't play horse because it had odds. I had to like it and have it on my radar. The same will apply to low odd favorites.