Pandy's New Book

[Racey]

Excited to hear about the new book when will it hit the market ? If it is anything like the longshot book It will be a great addition to everyone's arsenal.

[Racey]

Just hoping you could provide us with a release date....thanks :)

[Racey]

end of October....

[Pensacola Pete]

If it's Pandy, it's got to be good.

[infrontby1]

Makes mention on his site, he'll be pointing out examples from one of his software.

Wondering it will be needed to generate the concepts listed in the book

[jk3521]

I had a version of Pandolpho's Diamond software ,but didn't experiment with it very much because it uses BRIS multi-file data, unlike 99% of software using the single file format ,so I would have to buy both single and multifile data to handicap the races to compare with other programs. Too bad the program could not be updated .

[pandy]

Makes mention on his site, he'll be pointing out examples from one of his software.

Wondering it will be needed to generate the concepts listed in the book

The comment I made about video examples was for the Diamond System. The book does not need any software. It's pp handicapping. The book is called Speed And Class Handicapping. I just sent it to the printer today, so it should be back to me in 10 to 14 days.

Thanks for the interest.

[thaskalos]

The comment I made about video examples was for the Diamond System. The book does not need any software. It's pp handicapping. The book is called Speed And Class Handicapping. I just sent it to the printer today, so it should be back to me in 10 to 14 days.

Thanks for the interest.
Is it a harness book?

[pandy]

No, it's a thoroughbred book.

[ReplayRandall]

No, it's a thoroughbred book.


How about a little preview......just a taste..

[infrontby1]

Thanks Randy,

Will it be available from your site or amazon?

[pandy]

Thanks Randy,

Will it be available from your site or amazon?

Thanks for the interest. Both. Site is better for me since Amazon takes a pretty big %.

I just got an email from printer saying that they started printing it.

[Racey]

Can only hope this book is as good as the longshot book....Pandy do you discuss the kick rating in detail ? lets nail a few on Breeders C :) up day !!!

[pandy]

I write about the kick rating, but I show how to use the late pace ratings in the past performances, particularly the Bris late pace rating, in an longshot angle I developed which is called The Classy Closer Longshot Handicapping Angle.

Here is the Table of Contents:

Chapter 1 - Speed And Class Handicapping
Chapter 2 - The Elements Of Class
Chapter 3 - The Consistent Number System
Chapter 4 - The Consistent Number System Examples
Chapter 5 - The Consistent Number System Examples
Chapter 6 - Speed Figure Handicapping Basics
Chapter 7 - Track Bias and Common Sense Handicapping
Chapter 8 - Longshot Class Handicapping Angles for Main Track and Turf
Chapter 9 - Turf Racing
Chapter 10 - Fine Tuning The System
Chapter 11 - Common Sense Adaptability
Chapter 12 - Final Thoughts
RACE and CLASS RATINGS FAQ
RESULT CHART ARCHIVES

[SuitedAces]

I can only read an e book. And they are very easy to read on my computer. Just counted seven handicapping e books in my Kindle Library. Is this idea at all projected for the future?

Thanks
David

[pandy]

Hi David,

I don't plan on putting it in ebook form in the near future, as least not for mass distribution. With the large full page past performance examples, they are not ideal for an ebook format. For people that don't want a hard copy, I can sell it as a pdf file.

[thaskalos]

I can only read an e book. And they are very easy to read on my computer. Just counted seven handicapping e books in my Kindle Library. Is this idea at all projected for the future?

Thanks
David

If you don't mind my asking...which books are they?

[Inglewood Flamingo]

Got my copy in the mail today. Aside from a few typos it's a good read. :ThmbUp:

[Tom]

What's the website where Pandy gets the better deal?

[Krudler]

Tom:

Bob's site is handicappingwinners.com (http://www.handicappingwinners.com/index.htm). You can order the book from the [Products] page.

[pandy]

Thank you.

[Light]

Your website says (re your new book), Simple and efficient, the Consistent Number speed handicapping system for thoroughbred racing was developed specifically for using the Brisnet race summary in its Ultimate Past Performances.

Currently I also use the Brisnet race summary in the Ultimate Past Performances with very good success when I want quick plays and not too much handicapping. I also zero in on closers with an excellent show betting strategy. It has a pretty robust ROI. Do you have any ROI for using the race summary in your system or will the users land on different horses which will make tracking an ROI not possible?

[pandy]

I always run live tests on my websites when I am testing these methods (there are two in the book, one for speed, one for closers/class). The testing has to show a profit or I won't publish the method.

I had run free live tests on my website for this method as I was designing the system and it showed a substantial flat bet profit without following the odds rule of the system (which makes the ROI higher). In the book I show some of the horses that were given out free on my website including a $49 winner. However, it's possible that users could come up with different results because one of the steps is to choose the best races to use the system. This is why I didn't publish the ROI, I can't guarantee that everyone will play the same horses. There are rules that show how to find the best races to play, where you can eliminate at least half of the field. And, of course,there are so many tracks, it will probably work better at some tracks than others. I only tested a half dozen tracks. Anyone who sells a handicapping method and says that it shows a certain ROI is probably full of bull because no method can produce the same results at every single racetrack. And, of course, when gambling, there's no guarantee that past success can be continuously duplicated. I will say that I'm very confident in the methodology. Most handicapping books give you basic handicapping advice but no real plan of attack. I think that's why so many people lose. Information overload doesn't help if you don't have a sensible and consistent approach. And anyone who tells you that you can show a profit without giving you some sort of built in odds requirement is lying.

In the book, I also show how to maximize the profit with exotic wagers. Naturally, if you are getting rebates, that makes it even better.

I also had a customer use and test the system, mainly in Chicago, before anyone else had it and he has shown a profit with it from day one.

Since you're doing well with the summary, you may be doing something similar.

[GaryG]

Pandy, does this method require the BRIS data or is it compatible with Formulator?

[pandy]

All the examples are Bris, but I do show in the book how you can adapt it to any past performances. Formulator would be the easiest because it is so comprehensive.

[Light]

I always run live tests on my websites when I am testing these methods (there are two in the book, one for speed, one for closers/class). The testing has to show a profit or I won't publish the method.

I had run free live tests on my website for this method as I was designing the system and it showed a substantial flat bet profit without following the odds rule of the system (which makes the ROI higher). In the book I show some of the horses that were given out free on my website including a $49 winner. However, it's possible that users could come up with different results because one of the steps is to choose the best races to use the system. This is why I didn't publish the ROI, I can't guarantee that everyone will play the same horses. There are rules that show how to find the best races to play, where you can eliminate at least half of the field. And, of course,there are so many tracks, it will probably work better at some tracks than others. I only tested a half dozen tracks. Anyone who sells a handicapping method and says that it shows a certain ROI is probably full of bull because no method can produce the same results at every single racetrack. And, of course, when gambling, there's no guarantee that past success can be continuously duplicated. I will say that I'm very confident in the methodology. Most handicapping books give you basic handicapping advice but no real plan of attack. I think that's why so many people lose. Information overload doesn't help if you don't have a sensible and consistent approach. And anyone who tells you that you can show a profit without giving you some sort of built in odds requirement is lying.

In the book, I also show how to maximize the profit with exotic wagers. Naturally, if you are getting rebates, that makes it even better.

I also had a customer use and test the system, mainly in Chicago, before anyone else had it and he has shown a profit with it from day one.

Since you're doing well with the summary, you may be doing something similar.

Fair enough. Last questions (2).

A) How many plays per card on average do you get with the two methods you say are in the book?

B) Do your methods exclude certain races from play such as 2yo's 3yo's, maidens, uncommon distances etc?

$30 for your book is not my problem. But I wouldn't reveal my methods for $30. That's why I'm a bit skeptical. No offense.

[pandy]

A). Can't say with certainty because it varies by track and even by day. There could be 5 good plays on one card and one on another. But overall it's not hard to find plays. On big days, like during the Breeders Cup, it may not have any because you have to be able to eliminate horses.

B). The Consistent Number Method is for all main track races. Again, it depends on how wide open the races are, so most of the time contentious higher class races such as stakes or high end allowance races will not qualify. There is also a longshot angle in the book for turf races and all routes, but that is different.

It's worth more than $30 but as a publisher, I priced it for maximum profit. I'm a writer, publisher, handicapper, entrepreneur, and bettor all in one, so it makes sense for me to write about handicapping and sell my methods. I don't just do it for the money, however. I truly like helping people improve their enjoyment of the sport. Winning is a lot more fun than losing. I take pride in my out-of-the-box viewpoints.

I know some people think that by selling a method I'm hurting my ROI. Well, we have to remember that even though there are less racing fans now than there was twenty years ago, most bettors will not even know that my book is available. There are many bettors that don't even have internet access. There are many bettors who never buy or read anything about handicapping because either they think they know everything, or they're convinced that no matter what they do they'll lose. There are bettors who think that no book or system could help them. I'd bet that at least half of the bettors don't even know that sites like this exist.

[mrroyboy]

Let me comment. I have read most of Pandy's books and articles. The thing is he is always honest and straight forward. Not like many who try to sell you junk.

[thaskalos]

A). Can't say with certainty because it varies by track and even by day. There could be 5 good plays on one card and one on another. But overall it's not hard to find plays. On big days, like during the Breeders Cup, it may not have any because you have to be able to eliminate horses.

B). The Consistent Number Method is for all main track races. Again, it depends on how wide open the races are, so most of the time contentious higher class races such as stakes or high end allowance races will not qualify. There is also a longshot angle in the book for turf races and all routes, but that is different.

It's worth more than $30 but as a publisher, I priced it for maximum profit. I'm a writer, publisher, handicapper, entrepreneur, and bettor all in one, so it makes sense for me to write about handicapping and sell my methods. I don't just do it for the money, however. I truly like helping people improve their enjoyment of the sport. Winning is a lot more fun than losing. I take pride in my out-of-the-box viewpoints.

I know some people think that by selling a method I'm hurting my ROI. Well, we have to remember that even though there are less racing fans now than there was twenty years ago, most bettors will not even know that my book is available. There are many bettors that don't even have internet access. There are many bettors who never buy or read anything about handicapping because either they think they know everything, or they're convinced that no matter what they do they'll lose. There are bettors who think that no book or system could help them. I'd bet that at least half of the bettors don't even know that sites like this exist.
Yes...but with the mutual pools being what they are in harness racing...even educating a FEW of the bettors can harm you in a big way. No?

[pandy]

This is a thoroughbred book.

[foul]

What is the name of the new book?

foul

[foul]

never mine........I found it.

foul

[pandy]

What is the name of the new book?

foul

Thanks for the interest.

Speed And Class Handicapping

[upthecreek]

I got my copy on Monday-very satisfied It appears to be a sound method I've been following on paper,I've seen winners from 8/5-4/1 It just picked Joking @ 4/1 in the 3rd @ Aqu

[NormanTD]

Thanks for the interest.

Speed And Class Handicapping

Hi Bob. I'm pretty sure I'm getting Speed and Class Handicapping for my 60th birthday in a couple of weeks (thank you very much).

Which of your other products do you think would be the best complimentary publication/methodology to go along with Speed and Class Handicapping?

[pandy]

Hi Bob. I'm pretty sure I'm getting Speed and Class Handicapping for my 60th birthday in a couple of weeks (thank you very much).

Which of your other products do you think would be the best complimentary publication/methodology to go along with Speed and Class Handicapping?


Thanks for your interest. Pace Handicapping Longshots is a perfect companion to the Speed And Class Handicapping book.

[NormanTD]

Thanks for your interest. Pace Handicapping Longshots is a perfect companion to the Speed And Class Handicapping book.

Ordered!

[Light]

Pandy

From your responses to my questions I had decided NOT to get the book. Also, I really don't need a handicap book b/c I think my systems are better than anything out there. However curiosity has gotten the better of me. Mainly from this review on Amazon "All the information you need is in one place, the Ultimate PP's summary page

I know of no other book that will discuss this area. Capper Al asked me if I would participate in a discussion of the Bris Ultimate summary page. I said I would but doubted he would get much response because it is unconventional. He didn't get enough responses for me to chime in,(seven). So you can't even get regular handicappers to discuss this area.

So I'll order it and probably give it a little review afterwards. I would have liked a little more elaboration from people who say they read the book and Pandy is a good man and honest. That is irrelevant to me as a consumer. I'm not buying the book because the author is a good and honest man.

[thaskalos]

Pandy

From your responses to my questions I had decided NOT to get the book. Also, I really don't need a handicap book b/c I think my systems are better than anything out there. However curiosity has gotten the better of me. Mainly from this review on Amazon "All the information you need is in one place, the Ultimate PP's summary page

I know of no other book that will discuss this area. Capper Al asked me if I would participate in a discussion of the Bris Ultimate summary page. I said I would but doubted he would get much response because it is unconventional. He didn't get enough responses for me to chime in,(seven). So you can't even get regular handicappers to discuss this area.

So I'll order it and probably give it a little review afterwards. I would have liked a little more elaboration from people who say they read the book and Pandy is a good man and honest. That is irrelevant to me as a consumer. I'm not buying the book because the author is a good and honest man.

And why do you feel compelled to tell him this? Couldn't you reject the book in private?

[pandy]

He actually did buy the book, so it's okay. Thanks to all for all the input.

[headhawg]

And why do you feel compelled to tell him this? Couldn't you reject the book in private?It's just another in a long series of posts by a self-absorbed whack-a-doodle. We already know what his "review" will be. He's likely got it written already and he hasn't even received the book. Excuse me if I don't hold my breath in anticipation.

[Light]

And why do you feel compelled to tell him this? Couldn't you reject the book in private?

As Pandy noted, I did order the book, not reject it. I have read almost every book on handicapping and none of them can produce a flat bet profit or walk their own talk. I can, but I will not reveal it. Do you think any writer who had a system that had a flat bet profit would reveal it? We are all experienced handicappers here and we know what even a 5% edge can get you when compounded. All handicapping books today sit on shelves and gather dust. That is from Beyer to Ziemba. Nobody rushes back to them for reference. Some of the authors of noteworthy books quit the game quietly while talking about how to beat the game, when it is the game that beat them.

I don't expect anything from Pandy's book except more "ideas" which is what all these handicapping books use as a disclaimer after testing their methods which always results in a negative ROI. Of course then you are told you are using the method the wrong way. Sure. This goes for handicapping software as well.

I'm through with handicapping books except that Pandy's book talks of the Bris summary page which is relevant to the way I am handicapping now which is why I am making an exception to buy another handicapping book.

[PaceAdvantage]

I can, but I will not reveal it.How about posting some picks over a period of time? That won't reveal anything except whether or not you're living in fantasy land.

Surely, someone who can be so critical of everyone else can WALK THEIR OWN WALK...no? Yes? :lol:

[Light]

I have no interest in convincing anyone.

[PaceAdvantage]

I have no interest in convincing anyone.That doesn't fly. Not when you've been such a vocal critic of others on here for years.

What are you so afraid of?

[mrroyboy]

Very good PA

[jk3521]

Whenever "Light" gets "called out " he never replies. :p :p :p :D

[duncan04]

Whenever "Light" gets "called out " he never replies. :p :p :p :D

Boy isn't that the truth. Put up or shut up. :rolleyes:

[Speed Figure]

Boy isn't that the truth. Put up or shut up. :rolleyes:
In that case he will SHUT UP!

[duncan04]

In that case he will SHUT UP!

Hopefully. :D

[Light]

That doesn't fly. Not when you've been such a vocal critic of others on here for years.

What are you so afraid of?

It's all ego to post picks for show. Ego is one of the main reasons handicappers lose. Not going there. Besides that, many in the audience here seem to be haters from reading some of their posts. Why would I want to patronize losers like that?

[ReplayRandall]

It's all ego to post picks for show. Ego is one of the main reasons handicappers lose. Not going there. Besides that, many in the audience here seem to be haters from reading some of their posts. Why would I want to patronize losers like that?


I'm disappointed in your reply. This is a "teachable" moment for you and you're letting the opportunity slip away. Rise above any pre-conceived hostilities, make amends and show that you're worthy of the moniker "Light"........

[Greyfox]

It's all ego to post picks for show. Ego is one of the main reasons handicappers lose. Not going there. Besides that, many in the audience here seem to be haters from reading some of their posts. Why would I want to patronize losers like that?

Light - I've always enjoyed your alternative energy views that are seeded within your posts.
They offer another dimension to the conventional thinking that most of us usually display on this board.
Do I agree with them? Sometimes.

I enjoyed that response.:ThmbUp:

Greyfox

[Speed Figure]

It's all ego to post picks for show. Ego is one of the main reasons handicappers lose. Not going there. Besides that, many in the audience here seem to be haters from reading some of their posts. Why would I want to patronize losers like that?
You can't be calling me a loser! far from it buddy!!

[duncan04]

Light reminds me of someone else who posted here who always tooted his own horn. But when he posted his selections they didn't live up to his claims.

[ReplayRandall]

Light - I've always enjoyed your alternative energy views that are seeded within your posts.
They offer another dimension to the conventional thinking that most of us usually display on this board.
Do I agree with them? Sometimes.

I enjoyed that response.:ThmbUp:

Greyfox


Did you Greyfox? You enjoyed his calling of fellow posters the "Patronizing of Losers"?.........:ThmbDown:

[Greyfox]

Did you Greyfox? You enjoyed his calling of fellow posters the "Patronizing of Losers"?.........:ThmbDown:

Well....how many posters here are actually winning...breaking even....never mind.

[jk3521]

Well....how many posters here are actually winning...breaking even....never mind.
In streaks.........

[acorn54]

i'd like to get back on topic about pandy's book
would someone who has read the book or books that pandy has recently published give a critical review and surmise what the book(s) is about without hyping it? it seems the readers think the book(s) are worth buying buy don't give any specific reasons.

[pandy]

Just don't give away the actual method, please.

[Johnny V]

Just don't give away the actual method, please.
A general review is fine but please I just ordered the book like some others on here so I second Pandy's statement.

[upthecreek]

I'm handicapping Aqu for Wed using the method If there are any plays,I'll post here

[pandy]

I'd rather you didn't do that. No offense, but the people who paid for it should be the only ones that have access to the picks, it's not a public handicapping free program. I ran live tests on my website before I published it but that's different, it wasn't published yet. All my books come with 30 day money back guarantees (less $5 restocking). I don't want the information getting out there for free.

[pandy]

Amazon is a good place to post reviews. It's the number one book seller and that's where most people go to read reviews on books, and many other products.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1495129802

[upthecreek]

[QUOTE=pandy]I'd rather you didn't do that. No offense, but the people who paid for it should be the only ones that have access to the picks, it's not a public handicapping free program. I ran live tests on my website before I published it but that's different, it wasn't published yet. All my books come with 30 day money back guarantees (less $5 restocking). I don't want the information getting out there for free.[/QUOTE

OK NP

[jk3521]

[QUOTE=pandy]I'd rather you didn't do that. No offense, but the people who paid for it should be the only ones that have access to the picks, it's not a public handicapping free program. I ran live tests on my website before I published it but that's different, it wasn't published yet. All my books come with 30 day money back guarantees (less $5 restocking). I don't want the information getting out there for free.[/QUOTE

OK NP
'Scuse me, but I see no harm in plays being posted here. As long as the methodology is not revealed. I purchased the book also and might not have the time to try it out right at this time, but I think if the results prove fruitful it might lead to more people purchasing the system, which would be good for Pandy.
I will check the website for examples of the system in action.Now that I have the book I may be able to follow along as the picks were selected. From what I see so far, it is not a system that can be used stand-alone without some player input .Which is okay.

[PaceAdvantage]

It's all ego to post picks for show. Ego is one of the main reasons handicappers lose. Not going there. Besides that, many in the audience here seem to be haters from reading some of their posts. Why would I want to patronize losers like that?It's also all ego to go around putting others down on this message board while simultaneously stating you are better than they are with no proof in tow.

Have it your way. Just know you won't get away with your BS by continuing with your usual MO.

[Light]

What you misunderstand is that when I criticize, I am criticizing the message, not the messenger.

An analogy is if fellow scientists criticize the work of Stephen Hawking, which they have done very adamantly. You would interpret it as putting Hawking down. That interpretation would obviously be absurd. The topic Hawking discusses is debatable. Similarly, the topic discussed here is also debatable and it is absurd of you to assume criticism of someone's work means criticism of the author of the work. If criticism is not allowed on this board, you should make that clear. But when one goes public, usually criticism comes with the territory.

IMO, if you debase someone, you debase yourself because we are all one. Whether you realize it or not, it is registered. Since this is my philosophy, you are interpreting my actions incorrectly when you assume my motivation is simply to debase others. On the other hand there has been a lot of that directed towards me. But no apology necessary. I am thankful not to be on such a low level.

[headhawg]

IMO, if you debase someone, you debase yourself because we are all one. Whether you realize it or not, it is registered. Since this is my philosophy, you are interpreting my actions incorrectly when you assume my motivation is simply to debase others. On the other hand there has been a lot of that directed towards me. But no apology necessary. I am thankful not to be on such a low level.Unbelievable. I stand by my statement re: self-absorbed whack-a-doodle.

[jk3521]

What you misunderstand is that when I criticize, I am criticizing the message, not the messenger.

An analogy is if fellow scientists criticize the work of Stephen Hawking, which they have done very adamantly. You would interpret it as putting Hawking down. That interpretation would obviously be absurd. The topic Hawking discusses is debatable. Similarly, the topic discussed here is also debatable and it is absurd of you to assume criticism of someone's work means criticism of the author of the work. If criticism is not allowed on this board, you should make that clear. But when one goes public, usually criticism comes with the territory.

IMO, if you debase someone, you debase yourself because we are all one. Whether you realize it or not, it is registered. Since this is my philosophy, you are interpreting my actions incorrectly when you assume my motivation is simply to debase others. On the other hand there has been a lot of that directed towards me. But no apology necessary. I am thankful not to be on such a low level.
I wish when posters were joking around, they would put a :D or :lol: after the comment!

Oh, by the way :D

[Light]

Only read halfway through it. But that covered the entire "consistent number system" and its rules.

Find it too subjective in picking contenders. Too much left to the user. Cannot test it properly with the arbitrary way it picks contenders. Not great results with a tiny sample. Was considering returning it.

But now see some possibilities with some major tweaking while keeping the outline of the system. What the system didn't pick originally, it picked with some minor adjustments. So I've decided to keep it. A lot to talk about and this would be a really good discussion in building a better system than it is now. Unfortunately don't think it's possible to have a public discussion about it for obvious reasons.

[Greyfox]

Only read halfway through it. But that covered the entire "consistent number system" and its rules.

Find it too subjective in picking contenders. Too much left to the user. Cannot test it properly with the arbitrary way it picks contenders. Not great results with a tiny sample. Was considering returning it.

But now see some possibilities with some major tweaking while keeping the outline of the system. What the system didn't pick originally, it picked with some minor adjustments. So I've decided to keep it. A lot to talk about and this would be a really good discussion in building a better system than it is now. Unfortunately don't think it's possible to have a public discussion about it for obvious reasons.

Thank you for that honest report. :ThmbUp:

[jk3521]

Only read halfway through it. But that covered the entire "consistent number system" and its rules.

Find it too subjective in picking contenders. Too much left to the user. Cannot test it properly with the arbitrary way it picks contenders. Not great results with a tiny sample. Was considering returning it.

But now see some possibilities with some major tweaking while keeping the outline of the system. What the system didn't pick originally, it picked with some minor adjustments. So I've decided to keep it. A lot to talk about and this would be a really good discussion in building a better system than it is now. Unfortunately don't think it's possible to have a public discussion about it for obvious reasons.
I agree with you!

[acorn54]

Only read halfway through it. But that covered the entire "consistent number system" and its rules.

Find it too subjective in picking contenders. Too much left to the user. Cannot test it properly with the arbitrary way it picks contenders. Not great results with a tiny sample. Was considering returning it.

But now see some possibilities with some major tweaking while keeping the outline of the system. What the system didn't pick originally, it picked with some minor adjustments. So I've decided to keep it. A lot to talk about and this would be a really good discussion in building a better system than it is now. Unfortunately don't think it's possible to have a public discussion about it for obvious reasons.


thanks, light, for your generous surmise of the book. i will start a thread on a book i read to share with pa members. maybe the danny holmes book, or i'll try to find another that alot of people may be considering buying but would like a review,to size up whether it will compliment their collection of handicapping books.

[thaskalos]

thanks, light, for your generous surmise of the book. i will start a thread on a book i read to share with pa members. maybe the danny holmes book, or i'll try to find another that alot of people may be considering buying but would like a review,to size up whether it will compliment their collection of handicapping books.

This is a great idea! :ThmbUp:

I too have read a great number of these books that others here would probably want to buy...and I would be more than glad to contribute a book review or two, when you start this thread.

[cloud9]

pandy do you have any plans to put this method on software any time soon ?

[pandy]

We're looking into it right now. It requires testing to see if if can be accurately transferred to an automatic process.

[Speed Figure]

Is the book sold as a PDF or kindle?

[pandy]

It is not available in a kindle type of format. It is available in pdf, if you're interested you can contact me, but it is only a few dollars less. Thanks for your interest.

[cloud9]

We're looking into it right now. It requires testing to see if if can be accurately transferred to an automatic process. Let us no ? Thanks

[Racey]

for those who have do you guys like the book ?? have you put the methods to work?

[Johnny V]

I have received the book and I have a favorable opinion of it. The method as presented was not "too subjective" IMO as a couple of earlier posters suggested. Pandy makes a point that the rules can be followed exactly as presented in the basic method's rules. He gives plenty of examples and then brings in other factors that a user can implement as desired. It is basically a logical system that can be followed or modified as the handicapper desires. I have not put the system to use as of yet but I have no reason to think it would not be effective when used as presented to cut down on both handicapping time and effort.

[timtam]

I disagree with Pandy about someone using his method and post the

selections before the races are run. As Light posted this method is very

subjective and I bought the book and many times I will use one horse over

another only to have picked the wrong one. I would welcome someones opinion

while I am formulating my own so maybe two heads are better than one theory.

As long as the method isn't divulged and only purchasers of the book know

where the discussion would continue I could only find it helpful to have

two users of the system come upon either a selection or method of

constructing a ticket with valid backup on why did you use this horse in

this particular race. Just my opinion

[pandy]

Don't forget the exactas when using the system. This is a good way to protect against choosing the wrong horse when more than one is a qualified value play. Exacta play is not a requirement, but in many situations, as I explain in the book, the exacta is a logical play and too good to pass up.

[Light]

I have refrained from posting further because I did find the consistent number system disappointing. I think the reason there is hardly anyone who received the book discussing it is because it's really hard and cumbersome to put in play. Most of the time you will come up with half the field which the system says to pass. Plus you can see there is a basic premise in the system which is proved false in many races. There are also inconsistencies and contradictions in the system. I don't think Pandy is trying to rip anyone off, so maybe it can help novices who have the patience for the sake of learning. He does offer a money back guarantee, so all those curious can check it out for themselves and it will only cost you $5 restocking fee plus shipping. I can handle the money I spent so I'm not going to bother returning it. I would give the system 2 out of 5 stars.

But as I said before I didn't expect anything from the book but "ideas". Now he also has a second system in the book called the "Classy Closer angle". I find this much better than the featured one. This is a concise angle. It has only a few rules, is not subjective and is effective. There is no "gray" area in this system. The results are better too. The problem with this system is that there are not very many plays. I would give this system 3 1/2 stars out of 5. I would rank it higher if there were more plays.

The main thing I got out of the book is looking at the way Pandy uses the Bris summary which was my main interest because as I said, I also use the Bris summary for spot plays with better results than in the book. But I am also compromised with the lack of playable races as well.

[Greyfox]

Thank you Light for that more detailed review and your ratings of two of the systems in it.

[Sinner369]

Most of the readers and handicappers on PaceAdvantage are veterans of the race track and have their own systems and methods of handicapping. (And that includes myself).

All I am is looking for is that additional nugget of information that would turn one into a consistent money making player. Bob's book is on order and I look forward to reading it.

I have many dealings with Bob Pandolfo and I have found Bob to be very fair, reliable and honest person and very helpful.

[Racey]

systems have limited plays....the closer angle seems promising if you download a card where you have a play...might have to go thru several tracks to find it . I have seen it twice hit one lost one as a handicapper maybe a 3 horse box and multiple key exacta bets is the way to go, Odds come in to play as well overlays always

[marksinger]

Whenever "Light" gets "called out " he never replies. :p :p :p :D
Yeah, the Lights went out. Why does anyone listen to him? He's insulting and trying to be nice in the same paragraph.

[dkithore]

Pandy,

Will the system apply to non-us tracks? Bris does provide some data for other countries (such as UK, Aussie and japan) as you know.

Thanks

DK

[jk3521]

Yeah, the Lights went out. Why does anyone listen to him? He's insulting and trying to be nice in the same paragraph.
Except for a few remarks intimating he could do it better, I find nothing wrong with his remarks and I agree with his appraisal.

[pandy]

Pandy,

Will the system apply to non-us tracks? Bris does provide some data for other countries (such as UK, Aussie and japan) as you know.

Thanks

DK

If there are speed figures or Timeform figure available you could use it, if not, no.

[pandy]

Most of the readers and handicappers on PaceAdvantage are veterans of the race track and have their own systems and methods of handicapping. (And that includes myself).

All I am is looking for is that additional nugget of information that would turn one into a consistent money making player. Bob's book is on order and I look forward to reading it.

I have many dealings with Bob Pandolfo and I have found Bob to be very fair, reliable and honest person and very helpful.

Thank you. Personally, even though I have my own methods and angles that I use, I will still read new, or re-read old handicapping books. I've also been lucky to have had the opportunity to communicate with hundreds of handicappers over the years, including some of the best handicappers in the country. I find the study of handicapping, and that includes reading a handicapping book, to be stimulating and enlightening. I once went back and read Beyer's The Winning Horseplayer for the second time, and I immediately got into a hot streak, even though the book covers traditional handicapping stuff I already knew.

However, sometimes a handicapping slump is not caused by the universe. I think we often misread this. We get into a cold streak, and we think we have nothing to do with it, it's just coincidence.

Sometimes we get too complacent and that leads to sloppiness. Routine can dull the senses. Reading a good handicapping book can wake up the intuitive side of the mind and get us on the right path again. And, of course, sometimes when we read a good handicapping book, there is something in the book, a nugget of information, that makes us look at a race differently, and it could be something that was not the main focus of the writer's intention.

Larry Voegel, for instance, was writing about bounces before anyone else. He didn't call it a bounce, but he said that he noticed that horses that get certain types of trips, particularly a grueling stretch battle and narrow win or loss, seem to be bad bets in their next start, especially if they come back on short rest. When I read that years ago, it helped me focus more on horses that had not shot their load in their last race, and that improved my handicapping.

[DeltaLover]

... including some of the best handicappers in the country...

One question pandy:
What is that makes a handicapper one of the best in the country? Can you please describe some of the criteria?

[dkithore]

If there are speed figures or Timeform figure available you could use it, if not, no.
thanks Pandy, I will go to your website and follow up.

[pandy]

Professional bettors I know. But I've also had a lot of communications with recreational bettors who are very good. In some instances, I know this because we handicapped races together, and they came up with winning horses that the average handicapper would completely overlook.

[DeltaLover]

Professional bettors I know. But I've also had a lot of communications with recreational bettors who are very good. In some instances, I know this because we handicapped races together, and they came up with winning horses that the average handicapper would completely overlook.

I see... thx

[pandy]

I know that there are some people who seem to think that almost all horseplayers are losers, but I have met quite a few very sharp recreational handicappers and bettors.

[DeltaLover]

I know that there are some people who seem to think that almost all horseplayers are losers, but I have met quite a few very sharp recreational handicappers and bettors.

I do not think that a good handicapper is necessary a winner in this game. As an example you can use the crowd's consensus which composes the best possible handicapper but still manages to have a very negative expectation. Although they might overlap to some extend, still I view handicapping and betting expertises as distinct to each other..

[pandy]

I'll say this, in regards to your post, there are people who show a profit betting who are using computer programs to rank contenders. So they are not necessarily good handicappers, but they have learned how to interpret what the computer program spits out.

As for people using the crowd consensus to win, that may be possible but I doubt that there are many winners who use that approach. Everyone I've met who I would consider a winning horseplayer is either a good handicapper or is using a computer to handicap.

The problem with the crowd consensus, many of my best hits have been keyed by horses that were 15 to 20-1 on the morning line and in their last start they finished far back. In most cases, I liked the horse because of pace handicapping. This type of horse, which is one of the best plays in racing, is not going to look like a contender on any sort of crowd consensus. And without these longshot winners, it's much tougher to win.

[DeltaLover]

I'll say this, in regards to your post, there are people who show a profit betting who are using computer programs to rank contenders. So they are not necessarily good handicappers, but they have learned how to interpret what the computer program spits out.

As for people using the crowd consensus to win, that may be possible but I doubt that there are many winners who use that approach. Everyone I've met who I would consider a winning horseplayer is either a good handicapper or is using a computer to handicap.

The problem with the crowd consensus, many of my best hits have been keyed by horses that were 15 to 20-1 on the morning line and in their last start they finished far back. In most cases, I liked the horse because of pace handicapping. This type of horse, which is one of the best plays in racing, is not going to look like a contender on any sort of crowd consensus. And without these longshot winners, it's much tougher to win.

I believe that handicapping is overvalued when it comes to horse betting. As you correctly say, it is very tough to show a profit without betting on long(er) shots albeit this kind of betting options, usually do not fit well under the stereotypes of classical handicapping, meaning that the bettor usually needs to go against to what seems to be correct from a pure predictive scope of view, in order to land on a large price. I consider this kind of ability to deviate from well known handicapping principles to be the main quality of a bettor...

[pandy]

My book fits into this type of thinking. It uses the past performance information to rank contenders with the goal of finding good bets, as opposed to picking a winner.

Many times I get calls about my Diamond System software program and people always ask, "Hey, what is the ROI and win % of the top choice?"

My answer is, "it doesn't matter." There is and never will be a system where you can bet the top ranking choice and win. But, if you have a system that is smart enough to recognize that some 15-1 shots should be ranked first, second or third as opposed to where most people put them, near the bottom, then you have a good chance of showing a profit.

[DeltaLover]

Many times I get calls about my Diamond System software program and people always ask, "Hey, what is the ROI and win % of the top choice?"

My answer is, "it doesn't matter." There is and never will be a system where you can bet the top ranking choice and win. But, if you have a system that is smart enough to recognize that some 15-1 shots should be ranked first, second or third as opposed to where most people put them, near the bottom, then you have a good chance of showing a profit.

I completely agree.. ROI and win percentage are only secondary factors when it comes to the profitability of a betting strategy...

[thaskalos]

I believe that handicapping is overvalued when it comes to horse betting. As you correctly say, it is very tough to show a profit without betting on long(er) shots albeit this kind of betting options, usually do not fit well under the stereotypes of classical handicapping, meaning that the bettor usually needs to go against to what seems to be correct from a pure predictive scope of view, in order to land on a large price. I consider this kind of ability to deviate from well known handicapping principles to be the main quality of a bettor...

Your betting style has to fit your temperament and personality. You can't go hunting for the longer prices if you are afraid of losing a race...or a string of races. I meet players all the time who get frustrated after every single race that they lose. The way they swear when they lose makes you think that they honestly believe they should win every single race. Even on this board, you find some people who consider it a "losing streak" if a player loses 4 or 5 bets in a row.

Players keep betting on these "standout" horses because they are afraid of losing races. To them...the fear of losing is greater than the desire to win.

[Greyfox]

Players keep betting on these "standout" horses because they are afraid of losing races. To them...the fear of losing is greater than the desire to win.

...and for some of them it's a fear of winning and a subconscious desire to lose.

Fear of winning can be greater than fear of losing for a lot of people.

[DeltaLover]

Your betting style has to fit your temperament and personality. You can't go hunting for the longer prices if you are afraid of losing a race...or a string of races. I meet players all the time who get frustrated after every single race that they lose. The way they swear when they lose makes you think that they honestly believe they should win every single race. Even on this board, you find some people who consider it a "losing streak" if a player loses 4 or 5 bets in a row.

Players keep betting on these "standout" horses because they are afraid of losing races. To them...the fear of losing is greater than the desire to win.

Yes, Thask, I agree with what you are saying here... Although, this kind of a behaviour, is certainly a sign of a weak gambler who does not have the qualities to improve.. I would LOL :lol: to anyone claiming that he is in a losing streak after a handful of misses.. I think that my personal record should be approaching the twenties!

[thaskalos]

...and for some of them it's a fear of winning and a subconscious desire to lose.

Fear of winning can be greater than fear of losing for a lot of people.

I read about gamblers having a subconscious desire to lose...but I don't believe it, Greyfox. Yes...there are some who are into self-punishment...but I have to believe that these tormented souls have to be relatively few. I believe that the vast majority of the gamblers WANT to win...but they underestimate what it takes to actually do it. You see this confusion even at this very site. A person says that he is in search of an "angle" or a "system" which might propel him to the ranks of the winners. The popular belief is that there are all kinds of horseplayers sitting right on the brink of being "successful"...and all they really need is just the right "angle" or two to elevate themselves to that elusive "next level".

NONSENSE...I say. The difference between the winners and the losers is chiefly psychological...and a couple of new handicapping twists won't fill the gap. You can't beat this game by learning a few new tricks...any more than you can beat Garry Kasparov by just learning a few new chess openings.

[ReplayRandall]

The "desire" to win is a given amongst the great majority of horseplayers. But the true separation factor between winners and losers is the "discipline" to win.......and only 2-3% of horseplayers ever become a "master of discipline."

[DeltaLover]

I would add to the conversation that the desire to win is usually blinded by the desire to cash a bet

[Greyfox]

I read about gamblers having a subconscious desire to lose...but I don't believe it, Greyfox..

Fine....forget I mentioned the desire to lose.

But I will stick with the idea that fear of winning is > than fear of losing for a very large number of gamblers.
If they don't "see themselves as consistent winners" the game becomes tougher.

[thaskalos]

IMO...you can't be a winning horseplayer if you are not a good "loser". If losing bothers you, then you have no shot in this game...because "losing" is EXACTLY what you are going to do the vast majority of the time. What we call "discipline" is sometimes nothing more than behaving like mature players when we are LOSING.

I read comments on these pages of players who say they they "won't tolerate" losing. I say good luck to them...because they'll need it. Having a strong desire to "win" doesn't mean not tolerating losing. It means persevering THROUGH the unavoidable losing streaks, while keeping the end result in mind.

[DeltaLover]

IMO...you can't be a winning horseplayer if you are not a good "loser". If losing bothers you, then you have no shot in this game...because "losing" is EXACTLY what you are going to do the vast majority of the time. What we call "discipline" is sometimes nothing more than behaving like mature players when we are LOSING.

I read comments on these pages of players who say they they "won't tolerate" losing. I say good luck to them...because they'll need it. Having a strong desire to "win" doesn't mean not tolerating losing. It means persevering THROUGH the unavoidable losing streaks, while keeping the end result in mind.

I think that the gambler should not be result oriented. Falling victim to what Kanhneman describes as outcome bias is one of the worst habits of the bettor

[Greyfox]

It means persevering THROUGH the unavoidable losing streaks, while keeping the end result in mind.

Yes. Winners have a goal in mind.
"Losers" simply want to win, but do they have a goal beyond that.

I have a philosophy that you haven't won anything gambling until you've spent it elsewhere.

[Greyfox]

I think that the gambler should not be result oriented. Falling victim to what Kanhneman describes as outcome bias is one of the worst habits of the bettor

Yeah, on a short term basis.
But if you don't have a goal in mind over the long term, you're just gambling for the sake of gambling or who knows what.

[Light]

My view on that line of thinking is that it's not a fear, its a belief that gamblers can't win. This is because it is conditioned into us by society from day 1 that it is "evil" "greedy" and "impossible". Even on this board, the statistics roll out how the odds are over 95% that you will not make a profit.

It is the same as anything in life, if you believe it, it will manifest, if you don't, it wont. Even if you don't believe what I just said, if you don't believe you can win, you're chances are practically zero and you shouldn't waste your time. Of course a typical player would say of course I believe I can win or I wouldn't be playing. The problem is that one's belief on this is much deeper than your conscious awareness and you need to dig a little deeper into yourself than the superficial to find what is really driving you. This is the secret to becoming a winner in gambling and in life.

[Greyfox]

It is the same as anything in life, if you believe it, it will manifest, if you don't, it wont..

I believe that.
It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy if you let negativity grow.

[DeltaLover]

Yeah, on a short term basis.


This is exactly what I mean of course.

The outcome of any specific race or betting day, has way to much embedded luck that even the most skilful bettor cannot control it...

[ReplayRandall]

IMO...you can't be a winning horseplayer if you are not a good "loser". If losing bothers you, then you have no shot in this game...because "losing" is EXACTLY what you are going to do the vast majority of the time. What we call "discipline" is sometimes nothing more than behaving like mature players when we are LOSING.

I read comments on these pages of players who say they they "won't tolerate" losing. I say good luck to them...because they'll need it. Having a strong desire to "win" doesn't mean not tolerating losing. It means persevering THROUGH the unavoidable losing streaks, while keeping the end result in mind.


It's funny Thask, your post has strong parallels to a hall-of-fame baseball player. A hitter comes to the plate 10 times, takes his swings and if he manages to be successful 30% of the time over the length of his career, he's a great bet to be a HOF. Through slumps and injuries, he manages to endure, staying disciplined and focused on nothing but giving his team the best chance to win..........If a horseplayer has the same discipline and posts similar stats, he/she is horse racings' version of a HOF'er......

[thaskalos]

I think that the gambler should not be result oriented. Falling victim to what Kanhneman describes as outcome bias is one of the worst habits of the bettor

Well...if you are unconcerned about the results...then how do you grade your performance?

[DeltaLover]

Well...if you are unconcerned about the results...then how do you grade your performance?

I am referring to the short run, meaning in a per race basis... Of course you should be concerned about the outcome but in a longer basis, like a full meet, or something similar

[pandy]

IMO...you can't be a winning horseplayer if you are not a good "loser". If losing bothers you, then you have no shot in this game...because "losing" is EXACTLY what you are going to do the vast majority of the time. What we call "discipline" is sometimes nothing more than behaving like mature players when we are LOSING.

I read comments on these pages of players who say they they "won't tolerate" losing. I say good luck to them...because they'll need it. Having a strong desire to "win" doesn't mean not tolerating losing. It means persevering THROUGH the unavoidable losing streaks, while keeping the end result in mind.


I've written about this in my column a few times, that is, you have to be a good loser to be a winner. Some of the pros I've known seem to have that cockiness about them. But, let's be honest, it has a lot of do with the amount of money you have. It's a lot easier to shrug off a few losing days if you have a lot of money.

[pandy]

I do not think that a good handicapper is necessary a winner in this game. As an example you can use the crowd's consensus which composes the best possible handicapper but still manages to have a very negative expectation. Although they might overlap to some extend, still I view handicapping and betting expertises as distinct to each other..


Delta, just for clarification, can you explain what you mean by crowd's consensus?

[DeltaLover]

Delta, just for clarification, can you explain what you mean by crowd's consensus?

The ranking as it is dictated by the odds

[pandy]

That's what I thought you meant. But how do you know what's a good bet off that?

[headhawg]

I started to write replies to some posts made here and then realized that I would just be contributing to the problem. Why does it seem that an inordinate amount of threads get taken way off topic lately with posts that are either inane or pseudointellectual?

Anyway, thanks for shipping out my order so quickly Pandy. The information in your books always add to my handicapping knowledge.

[pandy]

Thank you!

[DeltaLover]

That's what I thought you meant. But how do you know what's a good bet off that?
I do not imply that the ranking can reveal a good bet. Just that it makes it obvious to see where the value can be coming from and what kind of factors might be miscalculated in the specific race

[upthecreek]

Method #1 had a 8-1 winner(top pick)
Method #2 had a 6-1 winner- Method 2 there is only a single qualifier
So far results have been promising I noticed Im seeing the races/contenders more clearly

[Boulder]

what two races at AQU did this work?

[Fingal]

I started to write replies to some posts made here and then realized that I would just be contributing to the problem. Why does it seem that an inordinate amount of threads get taken way off topic lately with posts that are either inane or pseudointellectual?

Anyway, thanks for shipping out my order so quickly Pandy. The information in your books always add to my handicapping knowledge.

Because of reading the pages here & then the info on Pandy's website, I ordered the book & have been going over it since earlier this month. I've been working with his method, it's is very easy to follow & has resulted in some hmm..... moments.

I'm purposely being vague because since it's his idea he can choose to do with it what he will, it's not for anyone else to decide or give out any info on it. But I will say with the nominal charge it's what I call a worthy price of admission to see an idea one might be able to expand upon.

[pandy]

As some of you know, in the book I use the Bris Race Summary, and I explain how you could adapt the methods to other past performances, such as the Daily Racing Form's. This week I looked at the Timeform US condensed pps sheet and realized this it is very good to use with my book.

[Clocker]

I started to write replies to some posts made here and then realized that I would just be contributing to the problem. Why does it seem that an inordinate amount of threads get taken way off topic lately with posts that are either inane or pseudointellectual?


Not interested in yet another group therapy session on the Psychology and Philosophy of Handicapping? :rolleyes:

Some appear to be using this as a spot play system, but I have found it to be a useful addition to my general handicapping methods. I don't use spot plays as a rule, but this method has been a good tool to identify a contender that I might have overlooked or to eliminate border line contenders. It has also helped me to identify an occasional false favorite.

[jimmac]

Pandy:

Purchased your book - good read.

??? Wouldn't it be quicker to chart a race if use R1 before calculating speed
since one eliminates horses if R1 is too low - but could have good speed.
Comments.

Thank you.

[pandy]

Thank you. You could do that. If you've found a way to streamline it, that works. I will occasionally bend the R1 rule a bit if the odds are right, especially if I'm just looking for good priced contenders to use in multiple race exotics. I do like looking over the speed figures first to make sure I have a good feel for the race from that perspective, but obviously you can tweak it to your own personal preferences.

[biggestal99]

I did the deed and bought the book for christmas.

I use both bris and drf pp's.

I always read a new handicapping book with an open mind

Here's to your new book,

Allan

[pandy]

Thanks Allan.

[tlinetrader]

Hey Pandy. How do I go about purchasing the pdf version of your new book? Didn't see it as an option on your website.

[pandy]

Please send me an email, pandy@sharphorses.com...thank you.