Angle players...

[thaskalos]

I have a friend whom I regularly sit with at the local OTB. He knows nothing about the "conventional" way most people use when they handicap...nor is he interested in any advice on the matter. He uses "angles" to select his horses...like blinkers off a horse...or a horse returning quickly from an effort in which he was eased and didn't finish the race.

He approached me a little while ago, and told me that the 5-horse was a strong play of his in tonight's 8th race at Woodbine. I reviewed my notes on the race...and confidently told him that this 5-horse had a slim chance of winning, and that I saw nothing in that race which interested me. He thanked me for my opinion...and walked away.

And a few minutes later, as I was walking out of the place while shaking my head...my friend was headed for the teller -- to collect a $29 mutuel.

[Overlay]

I would first be interested in his hit rate on such horses. I'd also be interested in how often this angle (assuming that it puts everybody who plays it on the same horse) has to be "tweaked" or re-invented to keep it from being bet into unprofitability. And (assuming that he plays an arsenal of such angles that may or may not apply in any given race), I would have the same questions with regard to those angles, as well.

On the positive side, for "traditional" handicappers, I think that his experience points up the importance of not losing visibility of the possible value offered by such horses by discarding them out-of-hand because they appear to have no chance, or by employing a method that narrows a race field down to a single selection through process of elimination, while giving other horses no consideration for a wager, regardless of their odds.

[thaskalos]

I would first be interested in his hit rate on such horses. I'd also be interested in how often this angle (assuming that it puts everybody who plays it on the same horse) has to be "tweaked" or re-invented to keep it from being bet into unprofitability. And (assuming that he plays an arsenal of such angles that may or may not apply in any given race), I would have the same questions with regard to those angles, as well.

On the positive side, for "traditional" handicappers, I think that his experience points up the importance of not losing visibility of the possible value offered by such horses by discarding them out-of-hand because they appear to have no chance, or by employing a method that narrows a race field down to a single selection through process of elimination, while giving other horses no consideration for a wager, regardless of their odds.
Well...I analyzed the race at length and concluded that this particular horse was a non-contender, for several reasons. He was not particularly suited to that class level, it seemed to me...and the projected pace set-up did not appear advantageous to his running style.

I don't know anything about his hit rate...and he is tight-lipped when it comes to revealing more details about his play. But I know for a fact that there is merit to this blinkers-off angle, in certain spots. I've written about this guy and this particular angle before...and I've seen too many form reversals to consider this a mere coincidence.

[thespaah]

I have a friend whom I regularly sit with at the local OTB. He knows nothing about the "conventional" way most people use when they handicap...nor is he interested in any advice on the matter. He uses "angles" to select his horses...like blinkers off a horse...or a horse returning quickly from an effort in which he was eased and didn't finish the race.

He approached me a little while ago, and told me that the 5-horse was a strong play of his in tonight's 8th race at Woodbine. I reviewed my notes on the race...and confidently told him that this 5-horse had a slim chance of winning, and that I saw nothing in that race which interested me. He thanked me for my opinion...and walked away.

And a few minutes later, as I was walking out of the place while shaking my head...my friend was headed for the teller -- to collect a $29 mutuel.
One of my angles is playing angles.
Not one for offering advice. However, I can say this. I never discount another's proven methods.
Better said....Every man is my teacher in that I can learn something from him.

[thespaah]

I would first be interested in his hit rate on such horses. I'd also be interested in how often this angle (assuming that it puts everybody who plays it on the same horse) has to be "tweaked" or re-invented to keep it from being bet into unprofitability. And (assuming that he plays an arsenal of such angles that may or may not apply in any given race), I would have the same questions with regard to those angles, as well.

On the positive side, for "traditional" handicappers, I think that his experience points up the importance of not losing visibility of the possible value offered by such horses by discarding them out-of-hand because they appear to have no chance, or by employing a method that narrows a race field down to a single selection through process of elimination, while giving other horses no consideration for a wager, regardless of their odds.
The hit rate is not a factor because the angle is not the sole factor for using the horse in the wagers. The angle is simply one factor in the overall analysis.
For example.
Let's say a horse is blinkers off today. But if the horse has been beaten in it's last 5 starts by a pole in each one, the equipment change would mean little and I would most likely toss the entrant from any consideration..
In order for blinkers on to be a legitimate angle, the horse would have to show some competitive value over its last few starts.
In this case( competitiveness) blinkers on would for me be a trigger to include the horse in my bets.
It has worked well for me.
Think of it as a pitcher's "out" pitch...
Sort of like a guy who is mainly a fastball/curveball type pitcher but every so often he'll dish up this exploding changeup that just drops off the table. He uses it only in the right situations. Same applies to these betting angles.

[appistappis]

The hit rate is not a factor because the angle is not the sole factor for using the horse in the wagers. The angle is simply one factor in the overall analysis.
For example.
Let's say a horse is blinkers off today. But if the horse has been beaten in it's last 5 starts by a pole in each one, the equipment change would mean little and I would most likely toss the entrant from any consideration..
In order for blinkers on to be a legitimate angle, the horse would have to show some competitive value over its last few starts.
In this case( competitiveness) blinkers on would for me be a trigger to include the horse in my bets.
It has worked well for me.
Think of it as a pitcher's "out" pitch...
Sort of like a guy who is mainly a fastball/curveball type pitcher but every so often he'll dish up this exploding changeup that just drops off the table. He uses it only in the right situations. Same applies to these betting angles.


as an angle player and ex pitcher I'd like to say that this is the best explanation of how we play that I have ever read....kudos...

[thaskalos]

We were looking at the last race at Parx a couple of years ago...and there was a 4/5 horse in the race who figured to win all by himself. I thought that I had the rest of it figured out pretty well...so I wagered rather heavily on a few straight trifectas. As the race was about to go off...he turned to me and asked me if I was using the 9-horse in my combinations. Since the 9 was a horrible-looking 80-1 shot...I thought he was joking with me -- so I didn't even answer him. As the horses were turning for home...the 4/5 shot was all alone...and my other two selections were second and third by daylight. But my eye went to a blueish-looking horse who appeared to be making up ground on the far outside. As the horses neared the wire...the 9-horse made a late surge to finish second...rendering all my tickets worthless. When I gave him a confused look...he showed me his own ticket. He had wagered $50 to win and place on the 80-1 shot.

The rest of our conversation went something like this:

Me: "Did you bet the exacta with the 4/5 shot?

Him: "No. I only made the bet that I showed you."

Me: "If you liked the 9 that much, then the real money was in the exacta. The 4/5 looked tons the best...and that was sure to hurt your place price on the big longshot."

Him: "My system favored the big longshot over the 4/5 shot."

Me(jokingly): "What good is a system that misses a 4/5, ten-length winner?"

Him(also jokingly): "It's better than the system that misses the 80-1 place horse. You can have the 4/5 winners. I'll take the 80-1 place horses".

[Overlay]

The hit rate is not a factor because the angle is not the sole factor for using the horse in the wagers. The angle is simply one factor in the overall analysis.
For example.
Let's say a horse is blinkers off today. But if the horse has been beaten in it's last 5 starts by a pole in each one, the equipment change would mean little and I would most likely toss the entrant from any consideration..
In order for blinkers on to be a legitimate angle, the horse would have to show some competitive value over its last few starts.
In this case( competitiveness) blinkers on would for me be a trigger to include the horse in my bets.
It has worked well for me.
Think of it as a pitcher's "out" pitch...
Sort of like a guy who is mainly a fastball/curveball type pitcher but every so often he'll dish up this exploding changeup that just drops off the table. He uses it only in the right situations. Same applies to these betting angles.
I would call what you're describing a "plus factor" that might tilt the balance in favor of a wager on one "contender" over another, but would not by itself make a horse worthy of a wager. I understood the original post to be speaking of a characteristic that would call for a wager on the horse, even though its recent record as a whole might result in a "traditional" handicapper concluding that the horse was not a "contender" in today's race. (Maybe just a matter of semantics.)

[traynor]

The hit rate is not a factor because the angle is not the sole factor for using the horse in the wagers. The angle is simply one factor in the overall analysis.
For example.
Let's say a horse is blinkers off today. But if the horse has been beaten in it's last 5 starts by a pole in each one, the equipment change would mean little and I would most likely toss the entrant from any consideration..
In order for blinkers on to be a legitimate angle, the horse would have to show some competitive value over its last few starts.
In this case( competitiveness) blinkers on would for me be a trigger to include the horse in my bets.
It has worked well for me.
Think of it as a pitcher's "out" pitch...
Sort of like a guy who is mainly a fastball/curveball type pitcher but every so often he'll dish up this exploding changeup that just drops off the table. He uses it only in the right situations. Same applies to these betting angles.

That is what the techies call a "confounding variable." That is, the angle affects (and sometimes strongly affects) the outcome of the race--but only when certain other criteria are met. The reason such angles are often misinterpreted or dismissed by most bettors/handicappers is that they are only looking at part of the pattern (the specific angle) while ignoring the other (necessary) elements that angle players use to qualify a race/entry as bettable.

The best angle(s) in the world can come up short when uncritically applied to every situation in which it(they) exist, without the basic qualifier of "has shown some signs of life" in recent races. How, and to what extent, those "signs of life" manifest (and are interpreted) is unique to every angle.

[1st time lasix]

***I think any player that concentrates his play on pick fours,...pick fives, ...and pick sixes has to have a very open mind in his contender selection ranking process. I have found that equipment changes, trainer angles, surface changes, distance changes, key races, lasix et al--may allow a non-contender at first glance to ultimately be considered. Not generally as stand only singles.... but as possible B or C selections that don't eliminate you as you strive to stay "alive" to the end. Many times this type of "fringe" horse is double digit odds providing you the big overlay you seek if the rest of the races come in as expected. Now having said that....no one angle seemingly works all the time in my experience. It is a constant struggle to find the handicapping angle that might prove to be important on any particular race. {ex:class, speed, breeding, connections etc} The 'chaos" element of racing luck and the errors of omission can drive a player crazy with frustration at times. It makes the takeout hurdle very hard to overcome even for the hard working experienced player.

[DeltaLover]

The most significant predictive factors can be found in pace and speed analysis, while all other handicapping factors, trainer stats etc have secondary impact to the process of contender selection.

Under special situations and assuming specific field compositions, “angles” can point us towards the right direction although it is impossible to discover any handicapping approach based exclusively on them that can even go close to pace handicapping (at least I was not able to find something similar after very long research and unless someone proves me wrong, I will refuse to accept any similar claim).

[raybo]

The most significant predictive factors can be found in pace and speed analysis, while all other handicapping factors, trainer stats etc have secondary impact to the process of contender selection.

Under special situations and assuming specific field compositions, “angles” can point us towards the right direction although it is impossible to discover any handicapping approach based exclusively on them that can even go close to pace handicapping (at least I was not able to find something similar after very long research and unless someone proves me wrong, I will refuse to accept any similar claim).

Don't you agree that, as pace handicappers, we are also playing "angles". We have "conditional factors" that affect our pace and final contender selections, so in effect, aren't we playing "angles"?

[DeltaLover]

Don't you agree that, as pace handicappers, we are also playing "angles". We have "conditional factors" that affect our pace and final contender selections, so in effect, aren't we playing "angles"?

I would make a distinction between “angles” directly affecting pace and those who are completely irrelattive.

For example a post position change, indeed has the potential to affect pace evaluations to a large extend, especially when a horse is moving from the outer post to the inner, in a track / distance combo which greatly benefits it. This “angle” yes, it can be part of pace handicapping.

In contrary though, angles like “first of the claim” or “3yo against older before June” do not really have to do much with pace handicapping.

[raybo]

I would make a distinction between “angles” directly affecting pace and those who are completely irrelattive.



Ok, that makes sense. Almost all players, regardless of their approach, are confronted with these "confounding variables", and they ignore them at their own expense.

[ReplayRandall]

I would make a distinction between “angles” directly affecting pace and those who are completely irrelattive.

For example a post position change, indeed has the potential to affect pace evaluations to a large extend, especially when a horse is moving from the outer post to the inner, in a track / distance combo which greatly benefits it. This “angle” yes, it can be part of pace handicapping.

In contrary though, angles like “first of the claim” or “3yo against older before June” do not really have to do much with pace handicapping.


Pace clearly is the #1 factor when analyzing a race, and is considered a given. Delta, what do you consider to be the #2 factor in your analysis, or is this where angles immediately become key factors?

[AndyC]

The most significant predictive factors can be found in pace and speed analysis, while all other handicapping factors, trainer stats etc have secondary impact to the process of contender selection.

Given that 99% of the betting population agrees with that statement wouldn't a different road be better for some looking to make a profit in a pari-mutuel setting? To paraphrase Yogi, nobody makes a profit there anymore, it's too crowded.

[DeltaLover]

Pace clearly is the #1 factor when analyzing a race, and is considered a given. Delta, what do you consider to be the #2 factor in your analysis, or is this where angles immediately become key factors?


The second most important group of factors I am considering, is not necessary bound to the “predictability” of the race, but instead it tries to answer the questions like which horse has already shown its maximum ability and is subject to “bounce” and vice versa.

For example:

- What should we expect from a horse who already improved three consecutive times, winning all three of them, is now trying the best company of his career. Is he going to reverse his form or in contrary he his going to break his personal record again? For this case, I might use factors as breeding, connections and recency as the main agents to form my opinion.

- How possible is for the obvious favorite, who recently beat most his competitors in a similar race to repeat his victory? Here, I might consider things like weight, age or track conditions to be of most interest to form a valid opinion.

- In the case of a horse who run against a rival who run earlier in the same card, I might consider the race of this second horse as an indicator. An example that is popping up, from a very recent race, is from last Saturday's JGC where Moreno had run against Its My Lucky Day, who failed miseably as the favor of a previous race during the same race; such a case worked as a strong negative signal against Moreno of course. (The opposite situation might occur as well)...


As we can see, after pace analysis (which is pretty much a straight forward process), things are becoming complicated as the depth of the possibilities is increasing.

[raybo]

Pace clearly is the #1 factor when analyzing a race, and is considered a given. Delta, what do you consider to be the #2 factor in your analysis, or is this where angles immediately become key factors?

Current form has to be at or near the top of the list, along with class analysis, distance capability, surface performance projection, surface condition, track preference, equipment changes, medication changes, etc.. I consider these other factors "conditional factors/confounding variables" for pace analysis.

[DeltaLover]

Given that 99% of the betting population agrees with that statement wouldn't a different road be better for some looking to make a profit in a pari-mutuel setting? To paraphrase Yogi, nobody makes a profit there anymore, it's too crowded.

No doubt. The main objective of “betting” is to find enough evidence to support a contrarian stance against the obvious. Still, the handicapper should always start with the “obvious”, trying to understand how the crowd is supposed to react and try to find the hidden holes that might reveal the desired “value”.

[raybo]

No doubt. The main objective of “betting” is to find enough evidence to support a contrarian stance against the obvious. Still, the handicapper should always start with the “obvious”, trying to understand how the crowd is supposed to react and try to find the hidden holes that might reveal the desired “value”.

I agree, one would be in trouble if one did not gather the "knowns" together first, before tackling the "unknowns", or making predictions of value, or lack thereof.

Yes, pace analysis is well known, but not analyzed in the same ways, and the application of it is not done the same way, thus leaving a lot of room for profit making. The same thing can be said of speed handicapping.

[TrifectaMike]

Can anyone explain to me what "they" mean when they use the term confounding variable with respect to horse racing?

Mike

[raybo]

Can anyone explain to me what "they" mean when they use the term confounding variable with respect to horse racing?

Mike

LOL - that's why I prefer "conditional factors" instead. At least I understand that term. Things that affect directly, or indirectly, the main premise.

By the way, I thought you were a math/statistics guy, and that confounding variables were well known in that world.

[lamboguy]

Given that 99% of the betting population agrees with that statement wouldn't a different road be better for some looking to make a profit in a pari-mutuel setting? To paraphrase Yogi, nobody makes a profit there anymore, it's too crowded.i couldn't agree more, but in my life i have seen the numbers rule with my own 2 eyes.

my first run in with numbers was when i had a guy that was a great ragozin sheet reader and we played house quinella's in Las Vegas in the mid 90's. we pounded the casino's and basically got shut off. we tried using the numbers playing pari mutuel and we got killed.

i came back home and got a job in a race track. i wound up getting a big player from New York. he was one of the owners of the Ragozin Sheet. we flew him in every weekend and when he cashed out on Sunday he was up big. what really amazed me was this guy didn't have a racing form or any other past performances, he bet strictly off the number's and i watched him for 4 years. there is no way after than period of time that i can call him lucky. he was flat out good. but he did know what went into making those numbers and was able to exploit the mistakes that all us handicapper's make.

[turninforhome10]

The most significant predictive factors can be found in pace and speed analysis, while all other handicapping factors, trainer stats etc have secondary impact to the process of contender selection.

Under special situations and assuming specific field compositions, “angles” can point us towards the right direction although it is impossible to discover any handicapping approach based exclusively on them that can even go close to pace handicapping (at least I was not able to find something similar after very long research and unless someone proves me wrong, I will refuse to accept any similar claim).
Would you consider that the original horse in question :5: might have had an advantage in
1) A much better post position in today's race than when he won from the 10 hole in his maiden win.
2) Non winners of 2l races get very weak this time of year at WOD and having form
3) 2 factors that I do well with condition lifetime claimers are Weight change and the combined post time odds for the last 5 races.
In lifetime condition claimers I sometimes find that horses that are carrying the same weight as last race are indicative of properly entered horses that are usually gradually moving up the ladder for graduation to next level of conditions. I also like it when a decent jock rides back. A horse that is moving up in weight usually won recently and I personally find that only the best horses move through lifetime conditions quickly at cheaper levels. A horse dropping in weight to the lightest weight is usually indicative of horse that is either coming off a layoff or has not won in a great while or this time of year you must watch for the properly spotted apprentice ie speed and fade and loosing 7 or more pounds and having a proper running style to fit where the loss of weight will be most important (E types in sprints and EP and S types in routes). I also like to see a horse break it's maiden carrying at least 120 lbs ( WBR weight of best race)


I got the idea of using the combined odds as a vote of both barn confidence and public confidence.
So using those 2 factors with the 8th a WOD you get
For horses carrying same weight as last race- :3: :5: :7:
For horses with a combined total odds index less than 12 (proprietary thing, for the index, lowest is best-12 is my cutoff.) :2: :1: :9: :5:
Order of finish
:5: :9: :10: :3:
Did I play the race? NO. Would I have played the :5: probably not. But the method that I would first screen the race with would have nothing to do with pace to look for qualifiers. But with the method properly tuned with some other non pace factors( Weight Change from last, Class rating based on earnings, WBR, Weight of best race-todays weight, Earnings last 10 races, and Odds index) tuned against 100 7 fur claiming on poly- races at WOD the Win rate is 25 % with an ROI of 60.40 for 10 win on top pick.
The predicted order of finish in this race using the combined factors as whole is
:5: :2: :9: :11: with WBR being the highest rated factor
I originally created this method to find horses that might be worth a claim and found that it has decent predictive value for cheaper lifetime claimers.

The predicted order of My Pace predictor is
:9: :3: :11: :10:
Again, no redboard, just thinking outside the box a little.

[thaskalos]

When you are a beginning handicapper eager to learn the game, then angle play stymies your growth as a player...because the knowledge gained by such a style of play is incomplete. There is a need for the beginning player to build a solid foundation upon which to structure the rest of his game.

But when the player has advanced to a certain level of proficiency in the game...I feel the time has now come for him to take notice of certain factors which might have a "wake up" effect on the performances of these horses. Horses sometimes DO give subtle hints of a much-improved upcoming performance...and the "comprehensive" handicapping approach often misses these subtle hints. I have several of these "wake-up factors" in my arsenal...and I give them preference when they come into play. In this game...it behooves the player to read BETWEEN the lines.

IMO...the more a player advances on his gambling journey, the more "specialized" his play should become. I believe that, ultimately, the money will end up in the hands of the "specialist".

[AndyC]

i couldn't agree more, but in my life i have seen the numbers rule with my own 2 eyes.

my first run in with numbers was when i had a guy that was a great ragozin sheet reader and we played house quinella's in Las Vegas in the mid 90's. we pounded the casino's and basically got shut off. we tried using the numbers playing pari mutuel and we got killed.

i came back home and got a job in a race track. i wound up getting a big player from New York. he was one of the owners of the Ragozin Sheet. we flew him in every weekend and when he cashed out on Sunday he was up big. what really amazed me was this guy didn't have a racing form or any other past performances, he bet strictly off the number's and i watched him for 4 years. there is no way after than period of time that i can call him lucky. he was flat out good. but he did know what went into making those numbers and was able to exploit the mistakes that all us handicapper's make.

I used the Rags and TG for quite awhile. I also had great success with house Qs in LV and Reno but primarily in Tijuana. What I always found amusing is how 4 different handicappers could look at the same sheets and each come away with a different opinion. The instrument can only make great sounds if the musician is good.

[castaway01]

When you are a beginning handicapper eager to learn the game, then angle play stymies your growth as a player...because the knowledge gained by such a style of play is incomplete. There is a need for the beginning player to build a solid foundation upon which to structure the rest of his game.

But when the player has advanced to a certain level of proficiency in the game...I feel the time has now come for him to take notice of certain factors which might have a "wake up" effect on the performances of these horses. Horses sometimes DO give subtle hints of a much-improved upcoming performance...and the "comprehensive" handicapping approach often misses these subtle hints. I have several of these "wake-up factors" in my arsenal...and I give them preference when they come into play. In this game...it behooves the player to read BETWEEN the lines.

IMO...the more a player advances on his gambling journey, the more "specialized" his play should become. I believe that, ultimately, the money will end up in the hands of the "specialist".

Great post, agree 100%. You need to develop the base, and then you can start to specialize, in whatever way works for you ("angles", or something else).

[Stillriledup]

An "Angle" won't make a horse who's otherwise not fast enough to win, win.

You have to be talented enough to win the race....and even if it appears that an "angle" was the reason the horse won, the reason was really that the horse was fast enough in the first place. Maybe the "Angle" made him slightly faster, but for the most part, he was good enough to win.

[thaskalos]

An "Angle" won't make a horse who's otherwise not fast enough to win, win.

You have to be talented enough to win the race....and even if it appears that an "angle" was the reason the horse won, the reason was really that the horse was fast enough in the first place. Maybe the "Angle" made him slightly faster, but for the most part, he was good enough to win.

You are missing the point. MANY horses are capable of running fast enough to win a given race...but their recent performances indicate that they are not in the proper "form" to deliver one of their better efforts. These "angles" don't make the horses "run faster"...but they hint of a greatly improved upcoming effort. And sometimes, that's all it takes.

[Stillriledup]

You are missing the point. MANY horses are capable of running fast enough to win a given race...but their recent performances indicate that they are not in the proper "form" to deliver one of their better efforts. These "angles" don't make the horses "run faster"...but they hint of a greatly improved upcoming effort. And sometimes, that's all it takes.

No, i understand, its a form reversal on a horse who was inherently good enough to win if his form reversed. I just wanted to point out that people think the angle won them the race when in reality, they were fast enough in the first place.

[Robert Goren]

No, i understand, its a form reversal on a horse who was inherently good enough to win if his form reversed. I just wanted to point out that people think the angle won them the race when in reality, they were fast enough in the first place.That is true. It is the angle that points to upcoming reversal in form. It probably doesn't cause it. It is clue that says things are not what they appear to be. Most angles like blinkers off, but not all, are trainer specific. And most don't move very well from track to track or circuit to circuit.
They are guys out there who have a good feel for these things. Many times they will go unnoticed because they lose big time on the rest of their bets. It is my opinion that going to the track or simulcast center should be a learning experience. It can be if you don't become to self-absorbed.

[AndyC]

An "Angle" won't make a horse who's otherwise not fast enough to win, win.

You have to be talented enough to win the race....and even if it appears that an "angle" was the reason the horse won, the reason was really that the horse was fast enough in the first place. Maybe the "Angle" made him slightly faster, but for the most part, he was good enough to win.

True, but there are way too many races where you don't know how fast a horse really is. Maidens, new surface, new distance, shippers, maturation, injury or health problem solved, etc., etc. Good luck trying to neatly place those types of horses in a pace and/or speed model.

[thespaah]

as an angle player and ex pitcher I'd like to say that this is the best explanation of how we play that I have ever read....kudos...
Thanks!!!!

[thespaah]

***I think any player that concentrates his play on pick fours,...pick fives, ...and pick sixes has to have a very open mind in his contender selection ranking process. I have found that equipment changes, trainer angles, surface changes, distance changes, key races, lasix et al--may allow a non-contender at first glance to ultimately be considered. Not generally as stand only singles.... but as possible B or C selections that don't eliminate you as you strive to stay "alive" to the end. Many times this type of "fringe" horse is double digit odds providing you the big overlay you seek if the rest of the races come in as expected. Now having said that....no one angle seemingly works all the time in my experience. It is a constant struggle to find the handicapping angle that might prove to be important on any particular race. {ex:class, speed, breeding, connections etc} The 'chaos" element of racing luck and the errors of omission can drive a player crazy with frustration at times. It makes the takeout hurdle very hard to overcome even for the hard working experienced player.
"..no one angle seemingly works all the time in my experience."
And there is an example of how I use these angles. At times I use them as a "tipping factor". Bot only if the horse has other attributes( I know $5 word right there) that make the entry a viable candidate to be included in my wagers.

[Cratos]

I have a friend whom I regularly sit with at the local OTB. He knows nothing about the "conventional" way most people use when they handicap...nor is he interested in any advice on the matter. He uses "angles" to select his horses...like blinkers off a horse...or a horse returning quickly from an effort in which he was eased and didn't finish the race.

He approached me a little while ago, and told me that the 5-horse was a strong play of his in tonight's 8th race at Woodbine. I reviewed my notes on the race...and confidently told him that this 5-horse had a slim chance of winning, and that I saw nothing in that race which interested me. He thanked me for my opinion...and walked away.

And a few minutes later, as I was walking out of the place while shaking my head...my friend was headed for the teller -- to collect a $29 mutuel.


You have raised an interesting discussion about the two set of variables which I identify as factor-variables and angle-variables and which I believe drives both the handicapping and wagering decisions in horserace betting.

I think most factor-variables (class, distance, speed, etc.) can generally be identified by most horseplayers, but angle-variables are very complex and can be almost anything that influences a horse’s chance to win.

The peculiarity about “angle-variables” is that there are an infinite amount of them and they might only occur once in a horse’s racing career to influence its performance; in other words they are hard to detect and even harder to believe.

[thespaah]

When you are a beginning handicapper eager to learn the game, then angle play stymies your growth as a player...because the knowledge gained by such a style of play is incomplete. There is a need for the beginning player to build a solid foundation upon which to structure the rest of his game.

But when the player has advanced to a certain level of proficiency in the game...I feel the time has now come for him to take notice of certain factors which might have a "wake up" effect on the performances of these horses. Horses sometimes DO give subtle hints of a much-improved upcoming performance...and the "comprehensive" handicapping approach often misses these subtle hints. I have several of these "wake-up factors" in my arsenal...and I give them preference when they come into play. In this game...it behooves the player to read BETWEEN the lines.

IMO...the more a player advances on his gambling journey, the more "specialized" his play should become. I believe that, ultimately, the money will end up in the hands of the "specialist".
I agree that beginning handicappers should not use these angles.
Their knowledge is limited. Additional information that is difficult to disseminate makes for brain overload.

[jk3521]

I remember what a guy told me when I first started betting the horses. He said if the horse did it once , he could do it again. Of course there were the guys who kept betting Onion ,even when he was relegated to cheap claiming races because he beat Secretariat ! :D

[lamboguy]

I used the Rags and TG for quite awhile. I also had great success with house Qs in LV and Reno but primarily in Tijuana. What I always found amusing is how 4 different handicappers could look at the same sheets and each come away with a different opinion. The instrument can only make great sounds if the musician is good.the house Q's were more of a mathematical deal than handicapping. i am not taking credit for being smart, but what i have learned in life is that all good things come to an end sooner or later.

[cutchemist42]

I have a friend whom I regularly sit with at the local OTB. He knows nothing about the "conventional" way most people use when they handicap...nor is he interested in any advice on the matter. He uses "angles" to select his horses...like blinkers off a horse...or a horse returning quickly from an effort in which he was eased and didn't finish the race.

He approached me a little while ago, and told me that the 5-horse was a strong play of his in tonight's 8th race at Woodbine. I reviewed my notes on the race...and confidently told him that this 5-horse had a slim chance of winning, and that I saw nothing in that race which interested me. He thanked me for my opinion...and walked away.

And a few minutes later, as I was walking out of the place while shaking my head...my friend was headed for the teller -- to collect a $29 mutuel.

Sorry to redboard but I actually hit that horse, was in the horseplayernow live WO chat and there were 2 others who had him too who were WO cappers. The 9 was coming off a decent layoff and the 5 had a decent looking maiden win recently.

I'd be curious to know what angle he used.