On strange formulas other people use...

[VigorsTheGrey]

I always am interested in the strange formulas other people use to find their way to a winner....One guy I know uses the track variant number located next to the speed rating in the racing form. He then takes this number and ADDS it to the final placing of the horse...meaning, if the horse won his last race, he ADDS 1, if 2nd, he adds 2, and so on. Then he adds the number that represents how large the field is, meaning if there are ten that went to post, then he adds 10....Last, this combined number he then subtracts from the horses Beyer number to arrive at his figure...He swears by this method...and I'm left wondering if this method has merit?

Have you encountered strange methods that people have told you they use?
I'd love to hear some of them....I know a guy who will box all the grey horses. And I know guys that always bet their numbers...What have you heard?

[EMD4ME]

I always am interested in the strange formulas other people use to find their way to a winner....One guy I know uses the track variant number located next to the speed rating in the racing form. He then takes this number and ADDS it to the final placing of the horse...meaning, if the horse won his last race, he ADDS 1, if 2nd, he adds 2, and so on. Then he adds the number that represents how large the field is, meaning if there are ten that went to post, then he adds 10....Last, this combined number he then subtracts from the horses Beyer number to arrive at his figure...He swears by this method...and I'm left wondering if this method has merit?

Have you encountered strange methods that people have told you they use?
I'd love to hear some of them....I know a guy who will box all the grey horses. And I know guys that always bet their numbers...What have you heard?

In short, I've seen all sorts of simple systems, looking for a magic formula of success.

Simple math calculations looking for a golden "system" are for true idiots and they are losers at the racetrack.

There are an infinite number of variables when handicapping and it is my belief that if you know as much as you can and have the human brain process better than another's human brain, you make better selections than some stupid simple formula.

Now, with that said, it is vital that a horseplayer utilize math many times. Calculations of pace figs, performance figs, how to properly maximize a wager etc. But not taking this and adding that to get to a winner.

[VigorsTheGrey]

I did all the number crunching stuff in the 90s and 00s. It treated me well for a while, but in the end, turned out to be false and eventually fools gold.

Rating systems have their advantages, but everybody can see them. You have to be different.

My advantage is 30 years of experience in reading a form and seeing what I see. At 46 years old, nothing surprises me, and I expect the unexpected. There isn't a rating system on the planet that had Melatonin yesterday. I did.

This isn't simply a numbers game. These are live animals that have good and bad days. And good or bad trainers, and good or bad jockeys. ]

In the end, I know I won't beat the computers grinding out 5/2s over 2/1s and such. But, I can win when I dig into the form and find things a computer can't find and my own intuition and creativity.

To be short, you have to be creative to win. 'Capping is one thing, but you must be creative to win.

I thought the above was a good quote from Lemon Drop Husker

[thaskalos]

This unusual method was suggested to me by the most successful horseplayer that I've ever met:

Bet any horse after it was eased and didn't finish its last race...assuming that this horse runs again within one month. And if the horse was carried away in a track ambulance after its eased race...DOUBLE your normal bet next out.

[VigorsTheGrey]

In short, I've seen all sorts of simple systems, looking for a magic formula of success.

Simple math calculations looking for a golden "system" are for true idiots and they are losers at the racetrack.

There are an infinite number of variables when handicapping and it is my belief that if you know as much as you can and have the human brain process better than another's human brain, you make better selections than some stupid simple formula.

Now, with that said, it is vital that a horseplayer utilize math many times. Calculations of pace figs, performance figs, how to properly maximize a wager etc. But not taking this and adding that to get to a winner.

I am not saying I agree with what they do, just that they are strange and often kind of amusing...you really get a feel of who you are dealing with....one guy I talked to asked me if my computer could tell me who would win the race before they showed it on TV! Kind of like the set up they used in the Sting movie...He didn't seem to believe me when I said my computer couldn't do that....

[Inner Dirt]

I knew a guy who boxed the first and third morning line choice in the exacta in every race. He also took the first and third choice in all multi-race bets. I found it strange as I met the guy at work over 20 years ago and he was older than me and had been going to the track for 20 years already. He never bought a form or racing digest, just a program and had no interest in handicapping. I think he most always lost and of course when he hit it was always small amounts, on his best day he barely cleared expenses. Odd as otherwise he seemed to be pretty intelligent and he went to the track a couple times a week, it wasn't like he was a guy who goes once a year and just picks names.

[VigorsTheGrey]

This unusual method was suggested to me by the most successful horseplayer that I've ever met:

Bet any horse after it was eased and didn't finish its last race...assuming that this horse runs again within one month. And if the horse was carried away in a track ambulance after its eased race...DOUBLE your normal bet next out.

Hmmm.....I wonder if any of the folks down in Information Retrieval have run anything on that one...?

[no breathalyzer]

This unusual method was suggested to me by the most successful horseplayer that I've ever met:

Bet any horse after it was eased and didn't finish its last race...assuming that this horse runs again within one month. And if the horse was carried away in a track ambulance after its eased race...DOUBLE your normal bet next out.

This reminds me of a horse that ran at Hawthorne 10 yrs ago or so ... 3 separate times the race after being vanned off the horse had came back to win its next race

[VigorsTheGrey]

Another guy I knew would take the jockey's weight figure and subtract from it the morning line odds...then bet the horses with the highest numbers... :)

[VigorsTheGrey]

There's one guy also that selects the best 2 of the last three Beyers and adds them together....then he ranks the scores and bets trifectas....most of the time it seems he does ok and he insists that I must use his simple method if I want to be successful at the track! He gets angry at me if I don't use his method!

[EMD4ME]

There's one guy also that selects the best 2 of the last three Beyers and adds them together....then he ranks the scores and bets trifectas....most of the time it seems he does ok and he insists that I must use his simple method if I want to be successful at the track! He gets angry at me if I don't use his method!
Vigors, have you ever heard of "passing the smell test"?

[VigorsTheGrey]

Vigors, have you ever heard of "passing the smell test"?
If you mean the "sniff test" then yes, of course I have, but that doesn't prevent me from sniffing around anyway, does it? ;) I just think people are funny strange and weird and am amused at the crazy things they do and believe..

[VigorsTheGrey]

Vigors, have you ever heard of "passing the smell test"?

"Sniff Test" : An informal reality check of an idea or proposal, using one's common sense or sense of propriety..

[EMD4ME]

"Sniff Test" : An informal reality check of an idea or proposal, using one's common sense or sense of propriety..

Wasn't insulting you :) . Was insinuating that you obviously have and are smart enough to laugh at bozos like that.

I used to try and engage in intelligent conversations on the 3rd floor of the grandstand at AQU and BEL. I heard some outlandish things, reasoning for wagers etc.

My buddy told me. Don't HELP them.....Encourage their stupidity. It's you against them.

Find more of them :) And encourage them to wager.

[whodoyoulike]

I always am interested in the strange formulas other people use to find their way to a winner....

I know a guy who will box all the grey horses. ...

It's been stated ever since I started that blanket handicapping systems as you describe just do not consistently work.

But, interesting you mention grey horses. I've known people who would usually place a wager on grey horses when entered. Maybe others may remember a DRF article in the 90's addressing this angle. It had to do with horses were basically color blind and couldn't see a grey horse coming up behind them. I have noticed greys do win and it seems it is frequently but I have a feeling it's because of the ratio between greys to non-greys.

Now, I don't know how "they" were able to figure out color blindness in horses.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Wasn't insulting you :) . Was insinuating that you obviously have and are smart enough to laugh at bozos like that.

I used to try and engage in intelligent conversations on the 3rd floor of the grandstand at AQU and BEL. I heard some outlandish things, reasoning for wagers etc.

My buddy told me. Don't HELP them.....Encourage their stupidity. It's you against them.

Find more of them :) And encourage them to wager.

One guy down at my stand believes that by rooting for his horse it changes the horses chance of winning....every bet you'll find him 2 ft in front of the big screen yelling at the jockey, "C'mon Prat! C'mon Prat! C'mon Prat! If he wins he turns aound self-satisfied, but if he loses, starts to bad mouth the rider....EVERY TIME! Every single race it is the same....it's always the jockeys fault, not his for backing a loser!

[VigorsTheGrey]

It's been stated ever since I started that blanket handicapping systems as you describe just do not consistently work.

But, interesting you mention grey horses. I've known people who would usually place a wager on grey horses when entered. Maybe others may remember a DRF article in the 90's addressing this angle. It had to do with horses were basically color blind and couldn't see a grey horse coming up behind them. I have noticed greys do win and it seems it is frequently but I have a feeling it's because of the ratio between greys to non-greys.

Now, I don't know how "they" were able to figure out color blindness in horses.

Just because a horse is color blind doesn't make a grey horse invisible to that horse does it?

[whodoyoulike]

Just because a horse is color blind doesn't make a grey horse invisible to that horse does it?

It was a feature article not a filler piece but that was one of the conclusions of the reporter which I still remember. I was hoping someone else remembers reading the article and would be able to add to my post.

[therussmeister]

It's been stated ever since I started that blanket handicapping systems as you describe just do not consistently work.

But, interesting you mention grey horses. I've known people who would usually place a wager on grey horses when entered. Maybe others may remember a DRF article in the 90's addressing this angle. It had to do with horses were basically color blind and couldn't see a grey horse coming up behind them. I have noticed greys do win and it seems it is frequently but I have a feeling it's because of the ratio between greys to non-greys.

Now, I don't know how "they" were able to figure out color blindness in horses.
The way I heard it is a horse won't pass a grey because they think it's a ghost. I suspect it would be a heck of a lot easier to tell if a horse is color blind than to figure out what a horse is thinking.

My thinking is if grey horses had an advantage, all racehorses would be grey.

[whodoyoulike]

The way I heard it is a horse won't pass a grey because they think it's a ghost. I suspect it would be a heck of a lot easier to tell if a horse is color blind than to figure out what a horse is thinking.

My thinking is if grey horses had an advantage, all racehorses would be grey.

Just a reporter's thinking ???

Thanks, I think there was something about a ghost but, again I think greys appear to win more often is because of the ratio.

[Stillriledup]

The way I heard it is a horse won't pass a grey because they think it's a ghost. I suspect it would be a heck of a lot easier to tell if a horse is color blind than to figure out what a horse is thinking.

My thinking is if grey horses had an advantage, all racehorses would be grey.
but it COULD be a ghost (with the most)

Larry Lederman at the mic.

D6HdXvDWSW8

[whodoyoulike]

SRU, you do come up with some good ones!!

Btw, the winner was wearing blinkers in that race. Actually, 6 of the 8 wore blinkers.

[senortout]

Gee, yeah, grey horses win. But it can't be that they win more than their share! Or can it be? Say the grey horse is outnumbered 12 to one in a 13 horse field. He probably won't win more than his fair odds share! Oooops just recently, this weekend I saw the only 3 greys in a race finish 1-2-3. Maybe you saw that one too, forget which track it was, maybe Santa Anita.

[Stillriledup]

SRU, you do come up with some good ones!!

Btw, the winner was wearing blinkers in that race. Actually, 6 of the 8 wore blinkers.

Thanks!

Meadowlands runs the grey ghost starter hcp every Halloween, you can dig up more renewals of that race on YouTube.

[Elliott Sidewater]

This unusual method was suggested to me by the most successful horseplayer that I've ever met:

Bet any horse after it was eased and didn't finish its last race...assuming that this horse runs again within one month. And if the horse was carried away in a track ambulance after its eased race...DOUBLE your normal bet next out.
A bookmaker said this to me in 1970: "the worse they look, the better they are". It's not true, but it was always good for a quick chuckle after a tough day at the track.

[Ocala Mike]

The "Divide and Conquer" method. Divide a horse's DD or P/3 will pay by its morning line, and play the lowest result.

[Robert Fischer]

I agree with EMD4ME that these are not the way to go.


here's one for Bris PPs that I made up:

Trainer's Win%(meet)
+ Last Race E1
+ Last Race Speed
- ML Odds


example:
Fair Grounds r1 3/14/2016

Anterior 14 92 72 -4 174

Bad Behavior 21 84 67 -3 169

Buck Roy 10 92 69 -4 167

War Anthem 16 81 72 -3.5 165.5

[Johnny V]

The strangest one I may have seen was this guy used to start with pp 1 of the race and start reciting the alphabet going down the horses in the race. He would go through it over and over if necessary until he came to the horse with the first letter of the horses name matching the letter of the alphabet he was on. That was his bet.

[jasperson]

My sister used this one. Add the number of wins,places and shows together and then divide it by number of starts. She would then bet the highest number.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

This unusual method was suggested to me by the most successful horseplayer that I've ever met:

Bet any horse after it was eased and didn't finish its last race...assuming that this horse runs again within one month. And if the horse was carried away in a track ambulance after its eased race...DOUBLE your normal bet next out.
I've heard a number of players embrace that method, and it has influenced me enough that I won't excise those horses out of hand. I won't go so far as to bet them with both fists, but I've seen enough of those horses come back with a strong race to think twice about them.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

One guy down at my stand believes that by rooting for his horse it changes the horses chance of winning....every bet you'll find him 2 ft in front of the big screen yelling at the jockey, "C'mon Prat! C'mon Prat! C'mon Prat! If he wins he turns aound self-satisfied, but if he loses, starts to bad mouth the rider....EVERY TIME! Every single race it is the same....it's always the jockeys fault, not his for backing a loser!
Perhaps he should just stop betting on the horse Prat rides

[bugboy]

Many years ago at phila park. I was just looking at the program while my father in law cashed in his bet. At that time I did not have a computer and I wanted one so bad. But money held me back.

Anyway, while looking at the program I noticed a horse named , Apple yum yum, While looing at the rest of the entrants I noticed a horse named Computer girl.......low and behold put those two together and I've got
"apple computer",, so what the heck, I bet a 5.00 ex. box. You know the rest of the story............They won!!!!! The ex. as I recall was somewhere just under 150.00. So often times I do look for two horse names in the same race that kinda makes some kind of sense!!!!

[Tall One]

My sister used this one. Add the number of wins,places and shows together and then divide it by number of starts. She would then bet the highest number.


Mutuel Clerk out at Keeneland used this exclusively. Did ok with it, but, iirc, it was only w/p he used.

[EMD4ME]

621


6X each win.
2X each place.
1X each show.

Add it up. For ex: 6 x 2 wins this year is 12. 2X 3 seconds, is 6. 1X 1 third this year is 1. 12+6+1 is 19.

Horse earned $38,000 this year. $38,000 divided by 19 is $2,000. Add a zero,
you get $20,000.

According to followers of this class system, this horse's overall current year class level is $20,000.

They think that this horse belongs at a purse right at $20,000 as the horse has hit the board at an average purse level of $20,000.

Although I see a smidgen of merit, I don't like this as a horse in October can be a totally different horse in January. Plus horses get 5% in most states for running 4th. Some tracks pay to 5th. Some pay for simply running. Many other reasons why I don't like this system.

I laugh when I see this done to determine where a horse belongs.

[djm1959]

my mother would play the greys in any race at any odds... hit many exactas that way... and 2$ bets that paid hundreds often,, she was just lucky.


i do play the same straight superfecta at all tracks and i won 3 times last year and at 10c a bet i won like 500 bucks on maybe 50$ bet.. so thats 10-1 profit ,, guess that works lol

:2: :1: :8: :7:

your welcome...

[VigorsTheGrey]

621


6X each win.
2X each place.
1X each show.

Add it up. For ex: 6 x 2 wins this year is 12. 2X 3 seconds, is 6. 1X 1 third this year is 1. 12+6+1 is 19.

Horse earned $38,000 this year. $38,000 divided by 19 is $2,000. Add a zero,
you get $20,000.

According to followers of this class system, this horse's overall current year class level is $20,000.

They think that this horse belongs at a purse right at $20,000 as the horse has hit the board at an average purse level of $20,000.

Although I see a smidgen of merit, I don't like this as a horse in October can be a totally different horse in January. Plus horses get 5% in most states for running 4th. Some tracks pay to 5th. Some pay for simply running. Many other reasons why I don't like this system.

I laugh when I see this done to determine where a horse belongs.

Fella uses something similar 6 2 1 and then .5 for 4th and .25 for fifth....Took that number and divided total money won by it....then divided that number by number of races as I recall...does that make sense then? Fella like to play P4 P5 P6 using his "figure" horses...said it was based on purse distribution percentages for each track...I saw the same holes you do but he ended up cashing a .50 P4 for $1200 right in front of me so....there ya go!

[HalvOnHorseracing]

My grandmother always put $2 on any horse with "prince" in it's name.

[EMD4ME]

Fella uses something similar 6 2 1 and then .5 for 4th and .25 for fifth....Took that number and divided total money won by it....then divided that number by number of races as I recall...does that make sense then? Fella like to play P4 P5 P6 using his "figure" horses...said it was based on purse distribution percentages for each track...I saw the same holes you do but he ended up cashing a .50 P4 for $1200 right in front of me so....there ya go!

Anyone doing that is probably going to be playing a lot of underlays as the supposed class horses get way overbet quite often.

About the $1200....Don't forget, even a broken clock is right twice a day :lol:

[VigorsTheGrey]

My grandmother always put $2 on any horse with "prince" in it's name.

How strange! How did granny feel about royalty? My ma always bets greys...but her favorite horse was Vigors who was really white!

[VigorsTheGrey]

Anytime a horse's name has any link to events in my life causes me "bettor's distress" ...usually the thing is a dog that normally I wouldn't shake a stick at...most times they end up costing me money. and almost always run up the track!

[big frank]

top 3 bris prime power----box ex and tri -3horse box.........lot of ticket cashing-----small prices

[HalvOnHorseracing]

How strange! How did granny feel about royalty? My ma always bets greys...but her favorite horse was Vigors who was really white!
I think at the time Majestic Prince was a leading American sire. Princequillo was also a very popular sire, especially of distance horses. Princequillo's son, Prince John, was one of the greatest broodmare sires. I think it was an artifact of being a time where a lot of sires and mares had "prince" somewhere in their line.

[VigorsTheGrey]

I think at the time Majestic Prince was a leading American sire. Princequillo was also a very popular sire, especially of distance horses. Princequillo's son, Prince John, was one of the greatest broodmare sires. I think it was an artifact of being a time where a lot of sires and mares had "prince" somewhere in their line.

How interesting! That story reminds me of a time when Wild Again was producing runners with many wins....I had a friend who said he made boatloads of dollars betting anything that had "Wild" in the name...so what you are saying is true provided the offspring maintain the name in their own names... :)

My friend was so enamored with Wild Again offspring that his whole face would brighten whenever you heard him say "anything with Wild in it"

[ReplayRandall]

I think at the time Majestic Prince was a leading American sire. Princequillo was also a very popular sire, especially of distance horses. Princequillo's son, Prince John, was one of the greatest broodmare sires. I think it was an artifact of being a time where a lot of sires and mares had "prince" somewhere in their line.

Are you a fan of Princequillo? I have a couple of Stakes programs from the '40's with Princequillo starting. I've collected horse racing memorabilia that goes back to 1919, with Derby programs of all 12 TC winners, though 1919 Derby of Sir Barton is not for sale......If interested or have questions, just PM me.

[Ocala Mike]

My friend was so enamored with Wild Again offspring that his whole face would brighten whenever you heard him say "anything with Wild in it"



I guess your friend would have liked one of the horses we bred down here -

BIEN WILD,f - WILD ESCAPADE X I BIEN READY

She won a couple of cheap claiming races at LaD after we sold her.

[VigorsTheGrey]

I guess your friend would have liked one of the horses we bred down here -

BIEN WILD,f - WILD ESCAPADE X I BIEN READY

She won a couple of cheap claiming races at LaD after we sold her.

Dang! I missed with my friends "anything with "Wild"

How could I have overlooked 35-1 "WILD 'n WILD" today at Gulfstream's 11th race....

The Racing Gods strike again...!

[VigorsTheGrey]

Dang! I missed with my friends "anything with "Wild"

How could I have overlooked 35-1 "WILD 'n WILD" today at Gulfstream's 11th race....

The Racing Gods strike again...!

Ok I'm going to bet Wild at Best at Golden Gate and wait on the fickle Racing Gods again! 35-1.


This time LAST! See how the Gods are!

[CincyHorseplayer]

I remember 1 single time,not sure if it was on here or on his old site but CJ mentioned that he had constructed ratings from his numbers that he did not share. A few years ago I started to do this as I was coming up with new ratings and doing preliminary research and sharing it on here. After getting blasted apart before I had reached any conclusions I realized it was not worth it. A year later after seeing some of the ratings perform admirably over long periods I realized it was never worth sharing for any reason! :cool:

[cj]

I remember 1 single time,not sure if it was on here or on his old site but CJ mentioned that he had constructed ratings from his numbers that he did not share. A few years ago I started to do this as I was coming up with new ratings and doing preliminary research and sharing it on here. After getting blasted apart before I had reached any conclusions I realized it was not worth it. A year later after seeing some of the ratings perform admirably over long periods I realized it was never worth sharing for any reason! :cool:

I may not always share exactly how I use some of the ratings I had, but I never withheld any ratings except during testing periods of new ideas. The things I didn't share everything, though I did some, were winning angles I found through research that anyone else could have found also.

[classhandicapper]

A few years ago I started to do this as I was coming up with new ratings and doing preliminary research and sharing it on here. After getting blasted apart before I had reached any conclusions I realized it was not worth it. A year later after seeing some of the ratings perform admirably over long periods I realized it was never worth sharing for any reason! :cool:

I have a new rule.

If "something" is available to the public, widely thought to be true, discussed by TV analysts and handicappers, in handicapping books etc... you should probably eliminate it from your game. After having tested some of these "truths", I have learned that some of it will hurt your chances of winning.

The idea is to analyze those things and figure out the flaws in everyone else's thinking and methodologies. You have to come up with new ratings, new advanced statistics, new ways of thinking about the same thing, sub categories that are exceptions to those rules etc... Then you test them privately. If they work, you have to resist the temptation to make them public or discuss them if you start doing well.

[pandy]

There's one guy also that selects the best 2 of the last three Beyers and adds them together....then he ranks the scores and bets trifectas....most of the time it seems he does ok and he insists that I must use his simple method if I want to be successful at the track! He gets angry at me if I don't use his method!


That's a pretty logical system compared to some of the others posted here.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I may not always share exactly how I use some of the ratings I had, but I never withheld any ratings except during testing periods of new ideas. The things I didn't share everything, though I did some, were winning angles I found through research that anyone else could have found also.

I don't think there is any rating I use that hasn't or won't be found by any other player. Thinking about the general nature of a dirt surface or a turf surface or a synthetic surface, or what exactly captures what is happening when a bias is asserting itself or the general nature of certain types of races etc. This theoretical playground we all indulge in ends up in certain estimations and end up as ratings whether theoretical or applicable. It just happens. I think because we like questions like this makes us sensitive to what is going on in races when we see something strange happen and we can alter what we are doing. None of them work at all times which will end up making them refutable in 50 page threads! Which we all have stepped into at times. But some of them work most of the time and aren't out there available for public consumption and are worth being held back. I certainly don't have the keys to the kingdom!

[CincyHorseplayer]

I have a new rule.

If "something" is available to the public, widely thought to be true, discussed by TV analysts and handicappers, in handicapping books etc... you should probably eliminate it from your game. After having tested some of these "truths", I have learned that some of it will hurt your chances of winning.

The idea is to analyze those things and figure out the flaws in everyone else's thinking and methodologies. You have to come up with new ratings, new advanced statistics, new ways of thinking about the same thing, sub categories that are exceptions to those rules etc... Then you test them privately. If they work, you have to resist the temptation to make them public or discuss them if you start doing well.

Absolutely Class.I didn't bet online til 2008. I started making schedule of what tracks raced night or day and what time of the year and it took a few years to sift through them a few times and see which ones I naturally was "good" at, which ones with a little homework I could do well at, and which ones or at which times of the year sucked, for lack of better words. In doing all this I asked myself "what is universal at every track in the country?". There were only 2:the horse and track biases/tendencies. Biases only play out in so many ways. Horses only mature and come into and out of form in so many ways. What I ended up with was essentially betting against jockey and trainer colonies wherever I went. Excepting obscure trainers or specific down to a certain type of workout pattern I have never seen the use of trainer patterns except to bet against them. This eventually evolved into the entire way I play. Any extracurricular work I developed has been based on pursuing these thoughts further. The nature of a surface and the nature of a horse within the context of that surface as it grows,develops,matures,declines. Getting lost in that theoretical sea is enjoyable. We all have yields there over time.

[VigorsTheGrey]

What I ended up with was essentially betting against jockey and trainer colonies wherever I went. Excepting obscure trainers or specific down to a certain type of workout pattern I have never seen the use of trainer patterns except to bet against them. This eventually evolved into the entire way I play. Any extracurricular work I developed has been based on pursuing these thoughts further. The nature of a surface and the nature of a horse within the context of that surface as it grows,develops,matures,declines. Getting lost in that theoretical sea is enjoyable. We all have yields there over time.

"What I ended up with was essentially betting against jockey and trainer colonies wherever I went."....This is interesting because it is counter-intuitive and counter-mainstream practice...but I get what you mean.....I just never thought on it until now that you said it. I always thought the best way was to keep up on all the top trainer's top percentages for each track and also their go-to jocks for the EVEN HIGHER BEST PERCENTAGE of the top-trainer/ top jock combo percentage....Like when Jorge Navarro puts on his go-to rider Jaramillo...I'll usually consider a bet....BUT from what I'm now gathering from your post, that is not what one ought to do because the betting public will also be all over that too and deflate the price....which leads to negative ROI....Is this what you are implying here and things similar in nature to this?

[CincyHorseplayer]

"What I ended up with was essentially betting against jockey and trainer colonies wherever I went."....This is interesting because it is counter-intuitive and counter-mainstream practice...but I get what you mean.....I just never thought on it until now that you said it. I always thought the best way was to keep up on all the top trainer's top percentages for each track and also their go-to jocks for the EVEN HIGHER BEST PERCENTAGE of the top-trainer/ top jock combo percentage....Like when Jorge Navarro puts on his go-to rider Jaramillo...I'll usually consider a bet....BUT from what I'm now gathering from your post, that is not what one ought to do because the betting public will also be all over that too and deflate the price....which leads to negative ROI....Is this what you are implying here and things similar in nature to this?

I handicap a race and make a line on it then I look at prices. Betting nearly always follows top connections. Even moreso than top figures in a race. And it's everywhere. I don't turn away from good horses just because they have solid connections but there are usually 1 or 2 horses in a race getting more play than they should from my perspective. It's usually an accumulative situation. That it happens over and over that connections are getting hammered no matter the horse it is going to create opportunities the more races you can look at, at a certain place(s). Some tracks I play I don't know anybody and I feel I have a leg up on my competition because of it!

[VigorsTheGrey]

One of my friends uses a software program that somehow finds what it "thinks" is vulnerable favorites....I know that this is important but remains a real challenge for me without the software and in light of having to handicap say 5 tracks or 40 races a day...I just can't keep all the factors that make favorites (or for that matter, any horse) vulnerable in my head and still focus on positive aspects of other horses all at once...But I see what you mean about connections get hammered even against their own real chances of placing, and how this creates opportunities...with this information, I can now look at each race through that lens now to find value, so I do appreciate you disclosing this useful insight...Thank you....Vig.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Some tracks I play I don't know anybody and I feel I have a leg up on my competition because of it!

Is this because at these tracks you are not so swayed by your own tendencies to overvalue the top connections...and steer clear of them, and rely more on other more non-popular yet useful handicapping factors?

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Ok, Ok, Ok.

One of my tricks to the trade is:

2nd and 3rd favorite over 1st/4th/5th favorite in an Exacta. Crazy good how often it hits.

And with that I'll leave you...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3GKiRp333w

She knows everything.

[Southbaygent]

I have a new rule.

If "something" is available to the public, widely thought to be true, discussed by TV analysts and handicappers, in handicapping books etc... you should probably eliminate it from your game. After having tested some of these "truths", I have learned that some of it will hurt your chances of winning.

The idea is to analyze those things and figure out the flaws in everyone else's thinking and methodologies. You have to come up with new ratings, new advanced statistics, new ways of thinking about the same thing, sub categories that are exceptions to those rules etc... Then you test them privately. If they work, you have to resist the temptation to make them public or discuss them if you start doing well.

+1

[CincyHorseplayer]

One of my friends uses a software program that somehow finds what it "thinks" is vulnerable favorites....I know that this is important but remains a real challenge for me without the software and in light of having to handicap say 5 tracks or 40 races a day...I just can't keep all the factors that make favorites (or for that matter, any horse) vulnerable in my head and still focus on positive aspects of other horses all at once...But I see what you mean about connections get hammered even against their own real chances of placing, and how this creates opportunities...with this information, I can now look at each race through that lens now to find value, so I do appreciate you disclosing this useful insight...Thank you....Vig.

Vig a lot of times it's not even that a favorite is vulnerable but asking the question "what if he doesn't run his race?". Sometimes they are purely being bet on connections and/or jockey and/or a big figure. But many times it is just 1 horse out of 5 that have similar abilities that is being bet. If the other alternatives are 9/5,5/2,and 3-1 there might not be a way to win the race just because they cross the wire. Everybody has it! A consistent banger is probably legit but many of them aren't. I'll give you an example from today. 13th at GP. There were 2 horses in the 3/2 to 5/2 range(Pletcher and Weaver horses). I didn't think either was all that but I did think a 10-1 shot was at least as good as the other 2 and more importantly he should have the lead at the 2nd call which has been plenty good enough on that turf course of late and had late kick. A first time turfer at 23-1 won the race but I got 10.40 to place just because I didn't like the top 2 choices in the race. If that horse had been 7/2 or so I wouldn't have bet at all but the race seemed disproportionate to me just because of trainers. I love Christophe Clement on the grass and in maiden races where the experienced races look slow I like betting his FTS. But only if they have several slow 5f drills and a pedigree I like for turf. This doesn't happen often but they have won or placed in 6 of 8 this winter at odds of 4-1 or better. This obscure pattern is all I can muster for really wanting to bet on trainers or something like this. The rest is name recognition bet againsts. And I just ended up betting like this I didn't plan on it!

[Lemon Drop Husker]

One of my friends uses a software program that somehow finds what it "thinks" is vulnerable favorites....I know that this is important but remains a real challenge for me without the software and in light of having to handicap say 5 tracks or 40 races a day...I just can't keep all the factors that make favorites (or for that matter, any horse) vulnerable in my head and still focus on positive aspects of other horses all at once...But I see what you mean about connections get hammered even against their own real chances of placing, and how this creates opportunities...with this information, I can now look at each race through that lens now to find value, so I do appreciate you disclosing this useful insight...Thank you....Vig.

Finding vulnerable favorites is KEY, but not completely important.

There are solid favorites out there that can grind their competition down and create massive prices underneath. (Preakness last year as an example, and BC Classic)

"Beat the favorite" is a common chant. Is 9/5 the right or wrong price? Favorites are favorites for a reason. There is no shame in betting them.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Finding vulnerable favorites is KEY, but not completely important.

There are solid favorites out there that can grind their competition down and create massive prices underneath. (Preakness last year as an example, and BC Classic)

"Beat the favorite" is a common chant. Is 9/5 the right or wrong price? Favorites are favorites for a reason. There is no shame in betting them.

I don't know what it is about Pennsylvania but Penn and Parx for me is the capital of turning 3/5 shots into 5-1 shots because the place horse is whiffed so badly!

I do this plenty but favorites most times there is a reason they are favorites and that's because of the people who own, train, and ride them not because they have such a towering ability over their field. The lower odds bracket is important because it has it's opportunities but because of their failure rate and low scale range that opportunity is limited and it should be clear after even a few years of playing. I don't set out to beat favorites. I was just criticizing that the other day. I just see many beatable favorites. Or ones that aren't special.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Ok, Ok, Ok.

One of my tricks to the trade is:

2nd and 3rd favorite over 1st/4th/5th favorite in an Exacta. Crazy good how often it hits.

And with that I'll leave you...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3GKiRp333w

She knows everything.

And "I Know Nothing" third! That's hilarious!

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Vig: I had a good day at Gulfstream

I'll go through my wagering/logic:

R1: :8::9: Exacta with :8: to WP. Not good enough. That was flat out a shit 'capping effort.

R2: Played the :2::5::6: . Loser. 2nd, 3rd, 4th. Beat the chalk? Yeah, I tried.

R3: :5: WPS, :5:/ALL Monster ticket and winner. Crap horse off of nothing with a nothing trainer, yet ran a recent bullet. 30/1. I took my shot.

R4: Can't even remember, but it was a bunch of losing tickets:ThmbDown: and bet way too much after the 30/1 bomb.

R5: :2::4:/:2::4:/All and then :2: WP. Didn't cash a ticket

R6: :12: WP, :1::2::4::10::12: Super box. Massive hit. Complete daymaker. Why? Luis Saez on the :12: in what I saw was a "jump" he could get and "maybe" wire the field. He did. And at 18/1, was well worth the investment.

R7: Only wager was :7: WP. Dead honest. $46 Winner. Can't recall particularly what it was, but it was from read that I can't explain other than reading forms for nearly 30 years. One of those "off the page" moments that are hard to explain. (Oh yeah, it was that the dam was 5 for 6 with winners, I love that angle in Maidens).

R8: Bet a ton, and had the :10:. Painful and expensive race.

R9: Huge wager on nothing that even hit the board


We cut out after that.

So how do I explain a day like that when my biggest winnings come not from crunching numbers, but intuition, experience, and creativity?

[VigorsTheGrey]

I love Christophe Clement on the grass and in maiden races where the experienced races look slow I like betting his FTS. But only if they have several slow 5f drills and a pedigree I like for turf. This doesn't happen often but they have won or placed in 6 of 8 this winter at odds of 4-1 or better. This obscure pattern is all I can muster for really wanting to bet on trainers or something like this. The rest is name recognition bet againsts. And I just ended up betting like this I didn't plan on it!

Thanks for sharing that! A little "ah Hah!" went off in my brain and I understood what you meant...I love it when that happens...it means I am still capable of learning new things! What you say makes perfect sense in light of finding and playing value....we simply must beat, those on the bandwagon, to the windows, don't we...in order to survive and hopefully ...thrive. :)

[VigorsTheGrey]

Vig: I had a good day at Gulfstream....
.....So how do I explain a day like that when my biggest winnings come not from crunching numbers, but intuition, experience, and creativity?

I had a decent day too today, considering I am a real small fry bettor...was able to connect on (2) .50 tri that each paid around $240. Think I had that same 7 horse you did also and a few other decent exacta boxes....I know what you mean about that intuition thing finding it's way around....and it seems like I'm pulling all sorts of info from various new avenues so its very exciting for me right now, using various picks from alwaysonpoint, dartman51, yourself, and others, plus the bris prime-power-rating-variable website, just to name a few is helping me, plus spotting the kind of workout patterns I like...all is helping me now...I'm getting better,winning more, and having a lot more fun too! I'm just taking it all in like a sponge and using bits and pieces from here and there as I see fit for now...so thank you!

[Viruss]

I was told by the old timers bet the grays when its an off track.

Earl J

[VigorsTheGrey]

I was told by the old timers bet the grays when its an off track.

Earl J
Should get plenty of chances to bet grays this year....There were 6 of them in the Rebel Stakes alone! And one of them won, Cupid...And with Tapit being a gray and America's leading sire we should have many more to come in the future...Grays Rule!

[shouldacoulda]

Vig: I had a good day at Gulfstream



So how do I explain a day like that when my biggest winnings come not from crunching numbers, but intuition, experience, and creativity?
I have been playing like that for about 7 years now. I don't play as often as I used to. Played today for the first time today in about 2 years and managed to do well in spite of playing too many races (too much overtime at work). The itch has been gnawing at me. Felt good to play too. I started playing like this when I hit a $1023 triple. I don't play as much as I find it too time consuming, so sporadically here and there works for me. When I retire I will devote more time to it.