Handicap The Late Money

[jay68802]

How would you go about doing this? You need the pool totals for a certain time, lets say when the first horse loads into the gate. You need the final pool total. Track the horses that had been bet at 3-1 or lower in the last dump.

What else?

[GMB@BP]

How would you go about doing this? You need the pool totals for a certain time, lets say when the first horse loads into the gate. You need the final pool total. Track the horses that had been bet at 3-1 or lower in the last dump.

What else?

how is it even possible when all the late money doesnt even hit till 2nd flash or so 30 sec to a min into the race?

[Dave Schwartz]

How would you go about doing this? You need the pool totals for a certain time, lets say when the first horse loads into the gate. You need the final pool total. Track the horses that had been bet at 3-1 or lower in the last dump.

What else?

It could certainly be done AFTER the race is over. The question is, "How could you use it BEFORE the race goes off?"

Peter Asch and Richard Quandt wrote a book back around 1986 where they studied tote movement for every race over an entire season at one track. (Of all places, it was Atlantic City. Go figure.)

Their purpose was to determine if the "late money" was "smarter" than the rest. Specifically, they defined "late money" as "money wagered in the last 5 minutes."

There hypothesis - namely that later = smarter - proved to be correct, but not enough to be profitable.

What they did (in today's equivalent) was take a snapshot of the tote at the first flash of 5 minutes to post and compute the precise odds on all the horses.

The repeated the process after the race was finished and built odds based upon the money that came down AFTER the 5-minute snapshot.

The "Whale Era" equivalent would be to take the snapshot as the 1st horse entered the gate so that (theoretically) you still had time to make a wager.

Of course, the rub is that the other information - the important part - isn't available until the horse is in the winner's circle.

Hope this helps.

Dave
PS: Were it me, the actual snapshot I would want would be the picture of the actual winner. Just sayin'.

[ccmd00d]

Hey Guys,

I've been building a script for fun to pull tote information every 30 secs from my ADW. As an example see the attached data on the Favorite (and winner) from Pompano Park R3 a few min ago. I like to play around with small pools because it is easier for me to see the money move. Now with my particular ADW, the final pool did not come in until a min or 2 after the race was off (indicated by the -1 in the MTP column.

In this case the Win pool for the #6 tripled. Sure seems like the late money was "smarter" in this case.

[JerryBoyle]

how is it even possible when all the late money doesnt even hit till 2nd flash or so 30 sec to a min into the race?

That's the whole reason we'd want to predict the late money. We can't wait until it has been bet, so we have to model what we think it'd be. From a modeling perspective it doesn't matter when it hits, you just need the prices at the time YOU would make your bet (e.g. first flash of 0 mtp), and you need the final price (the variable you're predicting at 0 mtp).

I've been toying around with trying to model the final price of each horse for a while now. As stated above, my inputs are the price at whatever time I bet + any other variables I think may be predictive of what will sway the public's perception of the horse at that point on, which is any handicapping factor one might use in his own fundamental model to make a prediction. And the variable I predict is the final probability. So far, I can do slightly better than the public's guess as of 0 mtp, but not enough to improve my roi.

The whole exercise has provoked a bit of a thought experiment for me: if you're modeling those who themselves are using models and features which are inputs to the models, can you do so without recreating a version of that model? Given how much money is bet by the CRW teams, and how smart that money is, the question stated another way is, can we model the output of the CRW teams' models without actually coming up with a version of their model? My guess is that there is probably some math proof or theorem that says you can't. This leads me to believe that if you actually had a way to successfully handicap the final price, regardless of how you got there, you'd have to be at least as good and as accurate as the CRW teams.

[jay68802]

How would you go about doing this? You need the pool totals for a certain time, lets say when the first horse loads into the gate. You need the final pool total. Track the horses that had been bet at 3-1 or lower in the last dump.

What else?

I get the feeling I was not clear enough on my idea. What I want to do is build a data set of the horses the late money falls on. Then build or create a program that will pick the horses most likely to get hit by the late money.

Why not try to use what they are doing for improving my handicapping?

Can it be done, and how?

[jay68802]

That's the whole reason we'd want to predict the late money. We can't wait until it has been bet, so we have to model what we think it'd be. From a modeling perspective it doesn't matter when it hits, you just need the prices at the time YOU would make your bet (e.g. first flash of 0 mtp), and you need the final price (the variable you're predicting at 0 mtp).

I've been toying around with trying to model the final price of each horse for a while now. As stated above, my inputs are the price at whatever time I bet + any other variables I think may be predictive of what will sway the public's perception of the horse at that point on, which is any handicapping factor one might use in his own fundamental model to make a prediction. And the variable I predict is the final probability. So far, I can do slightly better than the public's guess as of 0 mtp, but not enough to improve my roi.

The whole exercise has provoked a bit of a thought experiment for me: if you're modeling those who themselves are using models and features which are inputs to the models, can you do so without recreating a version of that model? Given how much money is bet by the CRW teams, and how smart that money is, the question stated another way is, can we model the output of the CRW teams' models without actually coming up with a version of their model? My guess is that there is probably some math proof or theorem that says you can't. This leads me to believe that if you actually had a way to successfully handicap the final price, regardless of how you got there, you'd have to be at least as good and as accurate as the CRW teams.

My question to you is why try and predict the final price, without knowing what horse or horses they are going to bet?

[JerryBoyle]

I get the feeling I was not clear enough on my idea. What I want to do is build a data set of the horses the late money falls on. Then build or create a program that will pick the horses most likely to get hit by the late money.

Why not try to use what they are doing for improving my handicapping?

Can it be done, and how?

This idea is what I was referencing with the "thought experiment" comment. I don't know the answer, but intuitively, to me, if you're doing the above, you're in effect producing a replica of the models used by the large teams. If you're not predicting the price, and just trying to predict a yes/no answer to the question, "will late money fall on this horse", it might make the problem simpler, but I'm not sure and I lean towards doubting it. Perhaps it's easier to model, "is this a race that lends itself well to being handicapped by some model"?

With regards to your other question, doesn't being able to predict the final price assume that you DO know which horses they're going to bet?

[jay68802]

With regards to your other question, doesn't being able to predict the final price assume that you DO know which horses they're going to bet?

I think we are on the same page here, I look at it as finding the horse as the handicapping part, predicting the price as a wagering decision. In other words, to me it is no use to predict the final price if I can't find the horse.

And if I can find the horse, predicting the price will be made easier. If you know that 40% of the pool is going to come in after the first horse loads, and that 50% of that money will be on 2 horses, you have a better chance of figuring the final price on those horses.

[davew]

I get the feeling I was not clear enough on my idea. What I want to do is build a data set of the horses the late money falls on. Then build or create a program that will pick the horses most likely to get hit by the late money.

Why not try to use what they are doing for improving my handicapping?

Can it be done, and how?

Some tracks have daily doubles on every race. The probable pays from the top couple favored in the previous race (doesn't matter who won) can be used to make a good estimate of final odds of race in question (second race in double).

Very late in the betting, the odds on most horses correct towards the daily double estimated probables.

Added to this are more people (relatively, since the betting population is declining) are watching warm-ups, horse condition, demeanor, and gate loading to adjust their betting/thinking on this race.


I wish you luck, but I feel many 10/1's that get late bet to 6/1, are actually 6/1's that have not been bet enough before the race.

When building a 'data set', you might find certain stables bet early / late / never on their horses which could help in determining live / dead horses in the race.

[Redboard]

Hey Guys,

I've been building a script for fun to pull tote information every 30 secs from my ADW. As an example see the attached data on the Favorite (and winner) from Pompano Park R3 a few min ago. I like to play around with small pools because it is easier for me to see the money move. Now with my particular ADW, the final pool did not come in until a min or 2 after the race was off (indicated by the -1 in the MTP column.

In this case the Win pool for the #6 tripled. Sure seems like the late money was "smarter" in this case.


Depends on whether there was an odds drop or not, but your chart doesn't show that. Since the horse ended up at 7/10, there probably was.

A chart showing the amount bet (to win only) on all of the starters over time would give a better illustration of whether the late money was "smart."

[formula_2002]

from another thread to which I posted today

here is a situation I just ran into which is not so infrequent.

race 5 at Epson, the 4/1 exacta paid $31.10, the $1 win bet returned $2.80

at 1 minuet too post the exacta pool was $3,740, the final pool was $11,071

using the 1 min to post exacta pool data I constructed a $1 payout of $4.04 on the winning combination, while the final pool data construct had a $1 payout of only $2.87 (which by the way as you can see, beat the straight pool $1 return.)

here is the 1 min to post construct indicating "your choice" as #4 over all.
the idea is, if your win bet choice is the #4, then you should bet the 4 over all, using the bet sizes indicated.Code:

"UK Epsom
Race
5

Post
11:25

MTP
1

$1 Exacta Pool
$3,704"
YOUR CHOICE OVER pgno bet size
1 13
2 3
3 21
4 0
5 27
6 11
7 20
8 4
9 0
10 0
11 0
12 0
13 0
14 0
15 0
16 0
100__________________

[AltonKelsey]

With a pool that tiny, the odds can shift wildly after you've bet.

Nothing wrong with betting the exactas if they offer better value than the win pool (used to happen more often), but this is a bad example.

[Tape Reader]

If we are talking about late money (money bet before the bell rings), IMO, it can often be anticipated by charting 20 MTP to PT.

Some of the changes that I look for are the following:

If a horse opens >ML it is a candidate.

If a number stays the same odds as other horses rise in price in a flash, it is a candidate.

If a horse moves down in odds while all the others stay the same, it is a candidate.

If a horse moves down in odds while all others stay the same or move higher, it is considered a “power bet” and should not be ignored.

Saratoga, IMO, is the best track for reading the tote.

[formula_2002]

tonight's dd r3

final ex pool $16,792 my $1 ex calculated return $6.71
1 min, $5471, my return $7.22
2 min, $4080, my return $6.91
3 min, $2735, my return $7.26
4 min $2116,, my return $7.13

actual $1 win bet returned $6.00
9/6 exacta $38.00

in this case, my return outperformed the win bet return at all listed intervals,
the best being at 3 min to post.

to get a better idea of my approach, see my recent picks in the "selection forum"


"Delta Downs
Race
3

Post
8:04

MTP
1

$1 Exacta Pool
$5,471"
9 OVER pgno bet size
1 7
2 2
3 19
4 5
5 16
6 19
7 16
8 4
9 0
10 12
11 0
12 0
13 0
14 0
15 0
16 0
100

[Franco Santiago]

... - proved to be correct, but not enough to be profitable.


I like this part of your post the most! If that ain't the truth about so many things!

[formula_2002]

evd r5 3/10 exacta
is another example where the structuring of wps and exacta pools can yield an advantage of 131%
$1 win bet returned $2.50
I structure tote board data at 4 min to post for a $1 exacta return of $3.28.
final tote board data produced a $1 return of only $2.74

"Evangeline Downs
Race
5

Post
8:43

MTP
4

$1 Exacta Pool
$8,095"
5 OVER pgno bet size
1 13
2 22
3 3
4 15
5 0
6 2
7 11
8 6
9 6
10 14
11 6
12 1
13 0
14 0
15 0
16 0
100

[Parkview_Pirate]

If you want to learn about late money and predicting final odds, play the races from Australia or Hong Kong for a while - there's plenty of late "steam" in those pools, which is not a surprise for the "North American" small pools for Australia, but is rather surprising considering the Hong Kong pools. There's some early steam too, in an attempt to drive bettors to other horses, but at least those horses don't often have the "amazing form reversals" like here in the States.

I would think the key to all this would be to find that rare horse that will win, and where the odds go UP or remain the same late in the betting. Another goal might be to identify and avoid the horses that would become underlays with the late money.

I avoid the North American tracks where late bets cut the horses' odds in half (i.e., Woodbine) as a matter of principle, though an occasional overlay is created when the steam horse fails to fire.

At the end of the day, I think tote analysis is a pretty dicey way to make a buck, especially in the U.S. where the insiders know which horse(s) is going to try, and perhaps try with a little help from the vet. It's also rather irritating to have that "slow" tote update for some pools, where the mysterious last flash often displays the winner at lower odds, even longshots lower than on-track, which is just a wee bit suspicious.

[coacht]

I was reading your post from last year and wondered if you are still using the tote board from 20 minutes to one minute to post time and if you had any modifications or updates to your post.

Thanks, coacht

[lamboguy]

i would love to know how anyone can project what the final odds will be when the last flash before the bell a horse has $8000 to win on him and crosses the wire with only $6000.

if anyone can figure that one out they will win the Nobel Prize in Economics and will outdo the Black Schoales volatility theory which did win the Nobel Prize.

[JerryBoyle]

I'm working on some analysis to eventually do exactly what the OP suggested - build a model which estimates the final price. The analysis includes the size of late changes, how "smart" the changes are, and finally if exactas and doubles can be used to help us. I'll post that analysis here when I'm done, but the punchlines are:

- the money that flows in late is smarter (we all knew this already)
- the final odds after all betting has concluded and the bets have been aggregated are the smartest you'll see (we all knew this)
- the largest increase in efficiency, where efficiency is defined as money moving generally to winning runners, is from the price you see at the start of the race to the final price. And this jump is much larger relative to going from 90 seconds out to 30s out*
- the only way to get the exact final odds would be to have a "god" model which has all inputs used by all bettors. Obviously this is impossible, so we must be comfortable with the idea that whatever model we build will not be perfect. It will be wrong, but the goal should be to reduce some measure, (squared error, r2, etc) between the price we think we're getting and the price we actually get
- there may be hope in the exacta pools for identifying where smart money is heading

This is all stuff we knew already, but I'll provide some charts/numbers later to hopefully illustrate it all.

* this is not implying that I think there is past posting. It has been covered here ad nauseam, and I'm a firm believer that there is not past posting on purpose and that any incidents of it are rare tech issues. However, if all bettors bet at the last final few seconds, it's not possible to aggregate all those bets in time for the NEXT bettor to see them and wager. Therefor, there is no bettor or team who knows the final price prior to being able to bet.

[coacht]

Thanks Jerry

I look forward to your final analysis, chart, etc.

coacht

[AskinHaskin]

- the money that flows in late is smarter (we all knew this already)
- the final odds after all betting has concluded and the bets have been aggregated are the smartest you'll see (we all knew this)
- the largest increase in efficiency, where efficiency is defined as money moving generally to winning runners, is from the price you see at the start of the race to the final price. And this jump is much larger relative to going from 90 seconds out to 30s out*
- the only way to get the exact final odds would be to have a "god" model which has all inputs used by all bettors. Obviously this is impossible, so we must be comfortable with the idea that whatever model we build will not be perfect. It will be wrong, but the goal should be to reduce some measure, (squared error, r2, etc) between the price we think we're getting and the price we actually get
- there may be hope in the exacta pools for identifying where smart money is heading





... yeah, and when horse racing pulls its head out of its ass and starts putting the public on the live horses to begin with, then this stuff will revert to the generally-irrelevant category it used to occupy.


You're the only gamble in town which can do that, so WTF wouldn't you...?

[AltonKelsey]

I'm sincerely curious.



Anyone here have a model that wins even AFTER knowing the final odds ?

[JerryBoyle]

I'm sincerely curious.



Anyone here have a model that wins even AFTER knowing the final odds ?

I have a model that WOULD win if I knew the final odds when I made a bet. Unfortunately, as we all know, the odds swings between at the gate and after start are so large that it's hard to know if it'll actually win :(.

[clicknow]

i would love to know how anyone can project what the final odds will be when the last flash before the bell a horse has $8000 to win on him and crosses the wire with only $6000. .

Cancelled bets at last minute? A way to manipulate pools?

[aaron]

i would love to know how anyone can project what the final odds will be when the last flash before the bell a horse has $8000 to win on him and crosses the wire with only $6000.

if anyone can figure that one out they will win the Nobel Prize in Economics and will outdo the Black Schoales volatility theory which did win the Nobel Prize.

Interesting topic. If you write down the DD will pays, more often than not, the odds will be reflected in the final odds of the race. Not unusual, for a horse who is 9/2 with a no time on the clock to go off 9/5 if he/she was 1st or 2nd choice in the double. There are exceptions,but it does happen more often than not. Last week at Aqueduct a first time starter was bet to favorite or 2nd choice in the doubles, but paid the same win price as the double. Strange result.

[clicknow]

I was reading your post from last year and wondered if you are still using the tote board from 20 minutes to one minute to post time and if you had any modifications or updates to your post.


1 MTP is way too long. If you go back and read the Firenze Fire topic in the Dwyer the late money (over $120K) came in something like the last 28 seconds.

Not that it matters, since as a bettor with a normal internet connection, without some special help, (technology-wise) or a very good friend at the ticket counter who can press a button at 5 sec to post, you will not be able to actually *use* that information, because by the time you perceive a big odds drop due to a large bet or bets, it's way too late for you to even make a wager.

So, while I admire Jerry and others for toying w/the idea of writing some neat programs, the bottom line is that unless you are directly wired in somewhere, your wager is not going to make the cutoff. ;)


I'm sincerely curious.
Anyone here have a model that wins even AFTER knowing the final odds ?

Apparently, you dont have to even know the odds. All you have to know is that a horse is very likely to win a race that even if their M/L is 6-1, it's a sure enough bet ........only way anyone would think that is IF they knew horse had been given some kinda rocket fuel ........... because you can't tell me that even a really good honest trainer *know* their horse is going to win a race. Horses are just not that predictable, and even if they were, stuff can "happen" during the race that makes their win impossible.

But the CRW teams and whales make enough in rebates to cover their losses, so it doesn't matter in the long run. YOUR $60K wager on such a horse isn't likely to turn out as well if he does not win, since you don't have that kind of insurance

[azeri98]

I also like to see early money, for example at Gulfstream on Saturday in race 4 the:4: opened at 7 to 1 closed at 13 to 1 m/l was 20 to 1 race 9 the :6: opened at 8 to 1 closed at 13 to 1, both won and Sunday race 5 the :5: opened at 9/5 and closed at 12 to 1 and finished 2nd. It happens fairly often.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Interesting topic. If you write down the DD will pays, more often than not, the odds will be reflected in the final odds of the race. Not unusual, for a horse who is 9/2 with a no time on the clock to go off 9/5 if he/she was 1st or 2nd choice in the double. There are exceptions,but it does happen more often than not. Last week at Aqueduct a first time starter was bet to favorite or 2nd choice in the doubles, but paid the same win price as the double. Strange result.


Sharp post.


Will Pays always have to be watched. Even in the Pick 3, 4, and 5 pay outs.

[lansdale]

I have a model that WOULD win if I knew the final odds when I made a bet. Unfortunately, as we all know, the odds swings between at the gate and after start are so large that it's hard to know if it'll actually win :(.

Hi Jerry,

I may be a little confused here, but not sure why you wouldn't know if you have an edge vs. the final odds, aka 'reality.' I well understand the feeling of frustration with the sudden odds drop, but if you step back, isn't this problem (at least for a player using a model, like yourself) ultimately irrelevant? If you recall Benter's well-known article, he was comparing his own model with both the public model (pre-race known odds) and the final odds. Obviously, to have a winning model, you must be have an edge over the final odds. You talk about the final odds as being a 'god' model, but it's not. But to the extent that it's a model that it includes relevant information about the odds not contained in your model, it may be a stronger model than yours. And regardless, it should be easy enough, given your skills, to determine, as Benter did, whether you have an edge over the final odds -- the only odds that matter.

FWIW, Magister Ludi, although he rarely posts here any longer (though he appears to sometimes lurk) was using a math model as part of a syndicate and mentioned an algorithm he used to estimate (accurately enough, as he put it) final odds, to deal with this problem. Tend to doubt he would respond to a PM, but if he spots this thread, he might have some relevant comments.

[Nitro]

How would you go about doing this? You need the pool totals for a certain time, lets say when the first horse loads into the gate. You need the final pool total. Track the horses that had been bet at 3-1 or lower in the last dump.

What else?
Hi there Jay!
I’m afraid the premise of what you’re suggesting is of no real value. As others have already suggested; from a practical standpoint even if you knew what the final odds might be you couldn’t take advantage of that information. The Time factor for placing a wager is obviously over. More importantly there’s absolutely no guarantee that any of the entries getting very late action (in terms of changing odds) will win the race.

When you’re actually following the money from when the betting starts with a sophisticated tote analysis (which is monitoring much more than just the Win pool (the odds)), you’re able to get a much clearer picture of which entries are getting played in earnest. These tell-tale signs are provided by understanding specific betting patterns that allows you compare the betting on each entry in real time with the overall betting on all the entries combined.

Unfortunately, these betting patterns are not the same from track to track or even from race to race. However once they become familiar there’s no need to wait for the last minute to decide on which entries are live. By viewing these betting patterns at specific time intervals prior to post time it sometimes becomes very obvious which entries are playable. The tote analysis doesn’t discriminate by the odds. In other words a 10/1 shot could look just as promising as a 2/1 shot. The question then becomes what is the best approach to taking advantage of those entries that show promise. Fortunately, there are many types of bets that can be made.

For those who might have any doubts about what I’ve described and the method that I use, then I would suggest visiting the Selection forum once and a while. I have no problem occasionally sharing some worthwhile information.

[JerryBoyle]

Hi Jerry,

I may be a little confused here, but not sure why you wouldn't know if you have an edge vs. the final odds, aka 'reality.' I well understand the feeling of frustration with the sudden odds drop, but if you step back, isn't this problem (at least for a player using a model, like yourself) ultimately irrelevant? If you recall Benter's well-known article, he was comparing his own model with both the public model (pre-race known odds) and the final odds. Obviously, to have a winning model, you must be have an edge over the final odds. You talk about the final odds as being a 'god' model, but it's not. But to the extent that it's a model that it includes relevant information about the odds not contained in your model, it may be a stronger model than yours. And regardless, it should be easy enough, given your skills, to determine, as Benter did, whether you have an edge over the final odds -- the only odds that matter.

FWIW, Magister Ludi, although he rarely posts here any longer (though he appears to sometimes lurk) was using a math model as part of a syndicate and mentioned an algorithm he used to estimate (accurately enough, as he put it) final odds, to deal with this problem. Tend to doubt he would respond to a PM, but if he spots this thread, he might have some relevant comments.

Hey lansdale, my answer wasn't super clear before. I'm confident that I DO have an edge over the final odds, when using the final odds as an input to my model. I'm using the standard 2 step model that Benter advocates in his paper - I generate a fundamental model as step 1 that only considers things relating to the horse, track, trainer, etc. I then merge this into an ensemble model with 2 factors - the fundamental model estimate and the market estimate. The output of this is my final estimate.

The problem is that, as we know, the market estimate varies wildly up until all money is totaled after the race has started. This leads to a modeling problem and a testing problem. First, when I train that ensemble model, do I use the final market estimate or the market estimate as it'd be known when I place my bet, say 30 seconds prior to close of betting? Second, when I actually test how the model would have done via simulating betting, do I use the final price, or do I use the price I would have seen at 30 seconds to close? Let's say final estimate is option A and 30 seconds to close estimate is option B.

A: leads to the strongest model. I know FOR SURE that the ensemble prediction I generate, which combines the fundamental estimate and the final market estimate has an edge over the final market price. As you've said, this is easy to test in any number of ways. However, when I actually go to use the model to bet in real time, I can't combine the final odds with my fundamental estimate, because I don't know the final odds. My options are to either use odds at 30 seconds to post or some estimate of the final odds. Both lead to uncertainty with regards to knowing how the system will perform compared to my backtest. I can test how this set up would perform by using the odds at 30 seconds to post historically, but the data I have doesn't go back very far, so I can't be very confident.

B: a weaker model, but a better representation of how the system would work in real time. I train the ensemble model using the fundamental estimate and the market estimate at 30 seconds to close. Simulating betting using the 30 seconds to close price and this model generally best simulates how the model would bet in real time. It also generally results in over betting, as the final price is almost always more efficient for the bets the model would make.

In the past, I've been using option B. However, I'm starting to think the best route is option A followed by developing a model which, as you've said, estimates final price. I'm not finished researching that yet, but I'm starting to believe that it's possible to build a model which is accurate enough for estimating final price, that it can be used as a substitute for final price when betting.

[lansdale]

Hey lansdale, my answer wasn't super clear before. I'm confident that I DO have an edge over the final odds, when using the final odds as an input to my model. I'm using the standard 2 step model that Benter advocates in his paper - I generate a fundamental model as step 1 that only considers things relating to the horse, track, trainer, etc. I then merge this into an ensemble model with 2 factors - the fundamental model estimate and the market estimate. The output of this is my final estimate.

The problem is that, as we know, the market estimate varies wildly up until all money is totaled after the race has started. This leads to a modeling problem and a testing problem. First, when I train that ensemble model, do I use the final market estimate or the market estimate as it'd be known when I place my bet, say 30 seconds prior to close of betting? Second, when I actually test how the model would have done via simulating betting, do I use the final price, or do I use the price I would have seen at 30 seconds to close? Let's say final estimate is option A and 30 seconds to close estimate is option B.

A: leads to the strongest model. I know FOR SURE that the ensemble prediction I generate, which combines the fundamental estimate and the final market estimate has an edge over the final market price. As you've said, this is easy to test in any number of ways. However, when I actually go to use the model to bet in real time, I can't combine the final odds with my fundamental estimate, because I don't know the final odds. My options are to either use odds at 30 seconds to post or some estimate of the final odds. Both lead to uncertainty with regards to knowing how the system will perform compared to my backtest. I can test how this set up would perform by using the odds at 30 seconds to post historically, but the data I have doesn't go back very far, so I can't be very confident.


B: a weaker model, but a better representation of how the system would work in real time. I train the ensemble model using the fundamental estimate and the market estimate at 30 seconds to close. Simulating betting using the 30 seconds to close price and this model generally best simulates how the model would bet in real time. It also generally results in over betting, as the final price is almost always more efficient for the bets the model would make.

In the past, I've been using option B. However, I'm starting to think the best route is option A followed by developing a model which, as you've said, estimates final price. I'm not finished researching that yet, but I'm starting to believe that it's possible to build a model which is accurate enough for estimating final price, that it can be used as a substitute for final price when betting.

Okay -- this is a more complex version of the same basic problem that every handicapper has to deal with. Since your terms can get a bit confusing, I'm going to translate them into Benterese, since his article is a common reference --you can just point out where I misunderstand. By 'final market estimate' I'm assuming you mean Benter's 'combined estimate' -- your 'market odds' I understand as Benter's 'public model,' which, given the subject of this post, I'll call 'last-seen odds', and your 'final odds' I'll call, per Benter, 'actual odds.'

So, you're saying your 'combined estimate' has no edge vs. 'last-seen odds' at the 30-second threshold -- the magnitude of the odds-drops plus the number of drops erases any edge. However, had you known the 'actual odds' before betting (handicapping status quo before the previous decade or so) the 'combined estimate' would have produced an edge.

As you say, this would all seem to rule out option B and an esimated edge for option A sounds like the way to go -- I would guess that the whales must be doing the same. One speculative idea, which you might well have already discarded, is to model the 'profitable' vs. 'non-profitable' bets among horses that that the model would have bet at the 30-second threshold -- of course the results might be random, but possibly some discernible patterns that some slight shifts in parameter-weighting could exploit. Regardless, best of luck -- imho, this game has never been more difficult to beat.

[lansdale]

BTW, someone other than myself put the thumbs-down icon on my previous post. Sorry. Your posts are always among the best.

[cj]

BTW, someone other than myself put the thumbs-down icon on my previous post. Sorry. Your posts are always among the best.

Only you could have done that, obviously by accident. You post hasn't been edited by anyone but you.

I now edited it to remove it.

[lansdale]

Only you could have done that, obviously by accident. You post hasn't been edited by anyone but you.

I now edited it to remove it.

Thanks for cleaning this up, cj. This must have happened as you say -- since I never use emojis or icons, I must have hit it by accident. When I tried to re-post with 'no icon', the time for editing must have elapsed -- therefore the short explanatory post. I think anyone who read the text would have realized it contradicted the icon.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

I feel like I just went through an infomercial.


Do I get an abcruncher for free if I order?

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Hi there Jay!
I’m afraid the premise of what you’re suggesting is of no real value. As others have already suggested; from a practical standpoint even if you knew what the final odds might be you couldn’t take advantage of that information. The Time factor for placing a wager is obviously over. More importantly there’s absolutely no guarantee that any of the entries getting very late action (in terms of changing odds) will win the race.

When you’re actually following the money from when the betting starts with a sophisticated tote analysis (which is monitoring much more than just the Win pool (the odds)), you’re able to get a much clearer picture of which entries are getting played in earnest. These tell-tale signs are provided by understanding specific betting patterns that allows you compare the betting on each entry in real time with the overall betting on all the entries combined.

Unfortunately, these betting patterns are not the same from track to track or even from race to race. However once they become familiar there’s no need to wait for the last minute to decide on which entries are live. By viewing these betting patterns at specific time intervals prior to post time it sometimes becomes very obvious which entries are playable. The tote analysis doesn’t discriminate by the odds. In other words a 10/1 shot could look just as promising as a 2/1 shot. The question then becomes what is the best approach to taking advantage of those entries that show promise. Fortunately, there are many types of bets that can be made.

For those who might have any doubts about what I’ve described and the method that I use, then I would suggest visiting the Selection forum once and a while. I have no problem occasionally sharing some worthwhile information.


Hi Nitro.

Can you post your actual win/loss results of actual wagers for us all to see?

I mean, if they are as good as you say, there should be something other than 5 to 7 horse non-descriptive wagers of who knows what as actual results, amirite?

I can box entire fields and show amazing $2 Super and $2 Trifectas, but I do need to see receipts of said results as proof if you don't mind the trouble.

[Nitro]

Hi Nitro.

Can you post your actual win/loss results of actual wagers for us all to see?

I mean, if they are as good as you say, there should be something other than 5 to 7 horse non-descriptive wagers of who knows what as actual results, amirite?

I can box entire fields and show amazing $2 Super and $2 Trifectas, but I do need to see receipts of said results as proof if you don't mind the trouble.

Hey friend since when does anyone around here post that sort of information? I don’t even let my wife see it and I’m going to make it public? So don’t hold your breath!

Why not just take my word for it and perhaps examine the Hong Kong selections for this morning’s card.
Posts 364 thru 390
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=154102&page=25
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=154102&page=26
If you think I stay up all night for my health you’re greatly mistaken.
While you're at it you can also view my O.A. profit margin on the Dutch Win betting for the entire HK meet on the same thread.

I know it may hard for the so-called handicappers to swallow the fact that I don’t handicap at all. But as I’ve mentioned before I have no problem sharing my information in the Selection forum occasionally.

Let’s call an ace an ace. What I don’t see is same thing being offered by many of those who claim to know more about the game than everyone else. You may not agree but I've always believed that Actions speak louder Words.

[FakeNameChanged]

I feel like I just went through an infomercial.


Do I get an abcruncher for free if I order?
Nah, just start wearing bigger shirts.

[CheckMark]

I feel like I just went through an infomercial.


Do I get an abcruncher for free if I order?

Just pay the extra shipping and handling, and we will give you 2!

[Frost king]

Hey friend since when does anyone around here post that sort of information? I don’t even let my wife see it and I’m going to make it public? So don’t hold your breath!

Why not just take my word for it and perhaps examine the Hong Kong selections for this morning’s card.
Posts 364 thru 390
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=154102&page=25
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=154102&page=26
If you think I stay up all night for my health you’re greatly mistaken.
While you're at it you can also view my O.A. profit margin on the Dutch Win betting for the entire HK meet on the same thread.

I know it may hard for the so-called handicappers to swallow the fact that I don’t handicap at all. But as I’ve mentioned before I have no problem sharing my information in the Selection forum occasionally.

Let’s call an ace an ace. What I don’t see is same thing being offered by many of those who claim to know more about the game than everyone else. You may not agree but I've always believed that Actions speak louder Words.

Hey Nitro, I know if I won as often as you do, my wife would be by my side, with her hand out, like the Hong Kong product would be my personal ATM machine. Who would have to work? With all the money you are making with your Dutching method, and all the exotics you are hitting, you would be able to make a living doing this. So staying up once a week on a Fri/ Sat, and getting up early on a Wed morning, would be the perfect job. I think, I could handle this twice a week, and have the rest of the week to spend with my wife. If this is not the case, the we know what the real truth is.

[Nitro]

Hey Nitro, I know if I won as often as you do, my wife would be by my side, with her hand out, like the Hong Kong product would be my personal ATM machine. Who would have to work? With all the money you are making with your Dutching method, and all the exotics you are hitting, you would be able to make a living doing this. So staying up once a week on a Fri/ Sat, and getting up early on a Wed morning, would be the perfect job. I think, I could handle this twice a week, and have the rest of the week to spend with my wife. If this is not the case, the we know what the real truth is.

Where do come up with this stuff? Just because I don’t give my wife details of my betting doesn’t mean I don’t share the positive results. She’s very supportive and knows that I take the game seriously and is very considerate when it comes to not presenting me with any distractions. BTW aside from SSI and a retirement account my only other source of income is playing this game particularly at HK twice a week.

My free time is also very important to me. Not only is it related to the days I’m not playing but to the way I play. My method is very efficient and the time it takes for making final selections for any race only requires the length of time for a typical betting cycle. If I had to handicap the way I used to I would have quit this game a long time ago. As far as I’m concerned, the time involved to thoroughly examine the data and prepare for successful betting is just too tedious and not worth the effort.

[AltonKelsey]

Interesting that Nitro posts such gory detail before and after the race, but never an actual bet structure or ticket. How hard is that ? He seems to be good at cut & paste.



Maybe we know why

[Nitro]

Interesting that Nitro posts such gory detail before and after the race, but never an actual bet structure or ticket. How hard is that ? He seems to be good at cut & paste.

Maybe we know why

Maybe you know NOTHING at all! In fact, perhaps the only thing you know how to do is troll along with your repulsive and irrelevant comments in attempts to antagonize others.

Have you ever made an actual written positive contribution to this site.
Have you ever offered to even share a selection of your own?

My god man how hard is it to recognize a 3-entry Dutch Win bet? After all of the information I’ve posted about structuring Exotic bets and you still don’t get it! Maybe I should take my selections and bet them for you. :lol:

You strike me as the epitome of an envious long time looser.

[castaway01]

If I could only bet on Nitro derailing another thread with his hot garbage posts, I wouldn't have to worry about the early money or the late money. It's as certain as the sun rising in the morning. I'd place my bet on "yes" and just have that cartoon bag with a dollar sign on the side brought to my house every day.

[Nitro]

If I could only bet on Nitro derailing another thread with his hot garbage posts, I wouldn't have to worry about the early money or the late money. It's as certain as the sun rising in the morning. I'd place my bet on "yes" and just have that cartoon bag with a dollar sign on the side brought to my house every day.

“Derailing”? You’ve got some pair buddy! Perhaps you ought to read (or try to comprehend) the entire thread!

I can’t help it if other’s pose unrelated questions. I realize that it might be difficult for you to recognize, but very often one man’s garbage may be another man’s gold.

BTW we’re not interested in your superfluous betting tendencies. But while you’re at it - instead of commenting about my posts why not stay on topic yourself.

[jay68802]

I for one find what Nitro has to say educating. Nitro and I have what might be described as contradicting styles of handicapping. And reading opposing views is what this forum is about. I am always trying to learn and incorporate new things.

The late money can be very telling, it can also be confusing. I found that the late money seems come for three different reasons. Meaning that the reason it is bet, has three different causes.

1 is to correct the market. theses horses are pretty easy to find cause they usually have a speed figure in one of there last three starts that figure in the race.

The second is the confusing one and is probably inside money. The only way to figure this out is to guess, and that is not a way I want to handicap a race.

The third is probably more back up money on the pick em bets. covering a couple possibilitys just in case.

[FakeNameChanged]

I for one find what Nitro has to say educating. Nitro and I have what might be described as contradicting styles of handicapping. And reading opposing views is what this forum is about. I am always trying to learn and incorporate new things.

The late money can be very telling, it can also be confusing. I found that the late money seems come for three different reasons. Meaning that the reason it is bet, has three different causes.

1 is to correct the market. theses horses are pretty easy to find cause they usually have a speed figure in one of there last three starts that figure in the race.

The second is the confusing one and is probably inside money. The only way to figure this out is to guess, and that is not a way I want to handicap a race.

The third is probably more back up money on the pick em bets. covering a couple possibilitys just in case.
Agree on all points, but I might add one category. What about the dumb money? It's often the category that I fall into. Late money in my case is difficult to gage and have time to react in order to make a late bet. When late money puts me into a quandary, do I get onboard and cancel my other bets? Or just include it my exactas, if I already haven't?

I can't speak for Nitro, but 2 to 3MTP is about as late as I can logically make a change to my betting strategy and get it done. It always gives me a feeling unrest when it counters my previous plan. While I hate to see odds drop on horses already bet, it does reinforce my bets if I see the late money stream in on my picks. I started trying to react to late money, back when we still had somewhat long lines at the ticket counters, while watching the monitors overhead, making changes as I got closer to the teller, and then just walking away when I finally arrived. That convinced me to just go with my earlier picks; which gave me peace of mind.

[46zilzal]

how is it even possible when all the late money doesnt even hit till 2nd flash or so 30 sec to a min into the race?\

Up on the roof, in the TV studio, big racks of decoders are all humming away only to stop their lights flashing when ZERO activity is going through them. This is data coming in from other courses on the local races.

I never, once, ever saw then turn off as the race started...How can you glean information locally, that is behind the race running?

Can't be done.

[ultracapper]

You guys are aware that Nitro has posted enough plays over the years to lend credence to his claims? Right?

Seriously, as hard a time as he's been given by many, including myself, he has shown that what he's doing is legitimate.

It's not my "style of play", but I have to admit when I see something working.

[FakeNameChanged]

\

Up on the roof, in the TV studio, big racks of decoders are all humming away only to stop their lights flashing when ZERO activity is going through them. This is data coming in from other courses on the local races.

I never, once, ever saw then turn off as the race started...How can you glean information locally, that is behind the race running?

Can't be done.

I sometimes read these posts out loud with a mental picture of the poster, or in this case, to the tune of Up on the Rooftop.


Up on the rooftop, horsies prance,
Racks of decoders humming askance.

Lights a-flashin until they stop,
Data down to Zero, plop, plop, plop.

Ho-ho-ho, who wouldn’t go,
Ho-ho-ho, who wouldn’t go.

Up on the rooftop, horses round da track,
Bets R’ all in, ya’ ain’t gettin it back.

[AltonKelsey]

You guys are aware that Nitro has posted enough plays over the years to lend credence to his claims? Right?

Seriously, as hard a time as he's been given by many, including myself, he has shown that what he's doing is legitimate.

It's not my "style of play", but I have to admit when I see something working.


Can't really tell. Only way to tell if there's anything REALLY there is to see actual bet structure before the race.



How hard is that ?




He doesn't have to post it in time for anyone else to bet, just before the gates open.

He obviously has plenty of time, as he posts recaps after the races . ALL OF THAT!!!

How hard is that ?


This would prove his prowess. Or not . If he refuses to do it, then there must be a reason.



Your move

[Lemon Drop Husker]

I for one find what Nitro has to say educating. Nitro and I have what might be described as contradicting styles of handicapping. And reading opposing views is what this forum is about. I am always trying to learn and incorporate new things.

The late money can be very telling, it can also be confusing. I found that the late money seems come for three different reasons. Meaning that the reason it is bet, has three different causes.

1 is to correct the market. theses horses are pretty easy to find cause they usually have a speed figure in one of there last three starts that figure in the race.

The second is the confusing one and is probably inside money. The only way to figure this out is to guess, and that is not a way I want to handicap a race.

The third is probably more back up money on the pick em bets. covering a couple possibilitys just in case.

I agree to a point.

If you are an at home player like many of us are on here, having a computer program like Nitro has gauging late money odds can be very helpful. And I agree with a lot of what his thoughts are on the subject. However, there has to come a cutoff point be it 1 or 2 'legitimate' MTPs before you have to take the information at hand and make your wagers or risk being shut out. Keying in Dutch Win bets and multiple Tri/Super bets isn't easy to crank out in a minute, but I'm sure most of us have mastered the craft of quick-fire wagering on-line.

However, wagering $2Tri and $2Super wagers like it is nobodies business becomes very expensive. Whether you are boxing 5 to 7 horses or keying 2 horses over 4 to 5 others, the Tri and Super bets alone reach up to $1k per race.., or <gasp> even more. Unless you are a serious whale or a conglomerate, you simply aren't making those wagers race in and race out on ANY card much less then posting them on PA.

I don't have a problem with the theory, and why to play it.

I do have a problem with the claims of massive winning wagers in $2 exotic denominations without betting slips as proof of said wagers and a ledger to show profit/loss. I also don't see any reason why to call out "your" method as the one and only real method to win and that the rest are simply a bunch of mindless chumps. While that may not be what Nitro is saying, it sure does come off that way a lot of the time.

[FakeNameChanged]

I agree to a point.

If you are an at home player like many of us are on here, having a computer program like Nitro has gauging late money odds can be very helpful. And I agree with a lot of what his thoughts are on the subject. However, there has to come a cutoff point be it 1 or 2 'legitimate' MTPs before you have to take the information at hand and make your wagers or risk being shut out. Keying in Dutch Win bets and multiple Tri/Super bets isn't easy to crank out in a minute, but I'm sure most of us have mastered the craft of quick-fire wagering on-line.

However, wagering $2Tri and $2Super wagers like it is nobodies business becomes very expensive. Whether you are boxing 5 to 7 horses or keying 2 horses over 4 to 5 others, the Tri and Super bets alone reach up to $1k per race.., or <gasp> even more. Unless you are a serious whale or a conglomerate, you simply aren't making those wagers race in and race out on ANY card much less then posting them on PA.

I don't have a problem with the theory, and why to play it.

I do have a problem with the claims of massive winning wagers in $2 exotic denominations without betting slips as proof of said wagers and a ledger to show profit/loss. I also don't see any reason why to call out "your" method as the one and only real method to win and that the rest are simply a bunch of mindless chumps. While that may not be what Nitro is saying, it sure does come off that way a lot of the time.
Didn't the last person who was always posting pics of her winners get banned? LOL. As to posting all your bets for your picks, try doing that for several races, making a decision on your bets, getting them in, and then typing how you structured all your bets on PA at 1 Mtp. If you handicap a stakes race using whatever method , there's a lot more time to show how you "might" structure bets.

[ultracapper]

I agree to a point.

If you are an at home player like many of us are on here, having a computer program like Nitro has gauging late money odds can be very helpful. And I agree with a lot of what his thoughts are on the subject. However, there has to come a cutoff point be it 1 or 2 'legitimate' MTPs before you have to take the information at hand and make your wagers or risk being shut out. Keying in Dutch Win bets and multiple Tri/Super bets isn't easy to crank out in a minute, but I'm sure most of us have mastered the craft of quick-fire wagering on-line.

However, wagering $2Tri and $2Super wagers like it is nobodies business becomes very expensive. Whether you are boxing 5 to 7 horses or keying 2 horses over 4 to 5 others, the Tri and Super bets alone reach up to $1k per race.., or <gasp> even more. Unless you are a serious whale or a conglomerate, you simply aren't making those wagers race in and race out on ANY card much less then posting them on PA.

I don't have a problem with the theory, and why to play it.

I do have a problem with the claims of massive winning wagers in $2 exotic denominations without betting slips as proof of said wagers and a ledger to show profit/loss. I also don't see any reason why to call out "your" method as the one and only real method to win and that the rest are simply a bunch of mindless chumps. While that may not be what Nitro is saying, it sure does come off that way a lot of the time.

Good post

[Nitro]

I’m getting the impression that my methodology is too rich for the blood of some of members here.
I guess I didn’t realize that there were so many $2 bettors.
I personally haven’t been at that level since 1974.

So regarding HK racing, I recently posted my recommendations for betting structures of various bets that could be made using the selections I post. (Something I've posted many times over the years) I'm assuming it hasn't been seen or read by those making idiotic complaints is because they don't play HK anyway!

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2543325
For those of you that have the resources to bet more than $2 per race you might want to consider the following in terms of betting:
1) Win Dutching 3 entries means betting each of the 3 entries so that no matter which one wins the return is the same. (Recommend waiting until 4 mins to post for final odds calculations).

2) For Quinellas there are many options:
a) Using all 3 of the top Keys with all the others = 12 bets
b) Boxing all 6 selections = 15 bets

3) Triples there also many options:
a) Using any Key in the top position w/All others = 20 bets
b) Using all 3 Keys in the top position w/All others = 60 bets
c) Using Top 4 selections in the top position w/All others = 80 bets
d) Boxing all 6 selections = 120 bets
(Warning: The odds of the selected entries @ 7 mins to post should determine playability by comparing the combined value of each group of 3 that may complete the triple with the amount to be bet).
.
Sorry if you don’t have the capital to take advantage, but as the saying goes, “Its TAKES money to MAKE money”.

BTW I don’t have the time to go beyond finalizing my selections, make a bet, and post any updates on PA by 4 mins to post.

Let me know if you can find anyone who posts:
1) Their preliminary selections (well before post time)
2) Updates those selections (in real time), and
3) Then posts a betting structure as to how to make the best play. (You’ve got to be kidding!!!!). :lol:

As far as I’m concerned, anyone who needs item #3 to be handed out for them shouldn’t be playing. Period!
Or at best be paying a handsome fee for that type of service.
.
.

[NorCalGreg]

If I could only bet on Nitro derailing another thread with his hot garbage posts, I wouldn't have to worry about the early money or the late money. It's as certain as the sun rising in the morning. I'd place my bet on "yes" and just have that cartoon bag with a dollar sign on the side brought to my house every day.

https://i.postimg.cc/QCRjNG8b/money-bag.png


This is the guy that comes to my house :D

[Tom]

I’m getting the impression that my methodology is too rich for the blood of some of members here.
I guess I didn’t realize that there were so many $2 bettors.
I personally haven’t been at that level since 1974.


Don't your knuckles hurt when you pound your chest so long? :rolleyes:

[Nitro]

Don't your knuckles hurt when you pound your chest so long? :rolleyes:

Not really, but I will admit that it’s been quite a while since the early 70’s. Although I didn’t make as much then, I would argue that it was the best overall decade for horse racing that players and enthusiasts ever experienced.

Why would I even bother to do that? There are much better ways to enjoy and share success.

I’m sorry to hear that you have that sentiment. Apparently, you’d rather hang out and sympathize with those who are chronic complainers who share nothing but negativity around here. It’s sort of telling as to how much success they’re having too. But when it comes to the challenges presented by this game it’s no surprise since the overwhelming majority of players are having difficulties.

BTW that’s one of the reasons why I enjoy sharing a lot of positive information related to HK racing. In spite of that, I also realize that many players have that “I’ll do it my way” attitude and heaven forbid humble themselves to use someone else’s selections. But if my success continues to bother those who can’t even structure a bet on their own, then perhaps after 5 years it time to curtail the HK information altogether.
.
.

[jameegray1]

It's pretty easy to accurately estimate the final payoffs. Race 5 at Woodbine below, due off in 9 mins.

First the latest displayed track odds, second my estimated final odds
1) 5 2
2) 3 7
3) 6 20
4) 5 5
5) 6 18
6) 5 6
7) 20 25
8) 5 3

[jameegray1]

It's pretty easy to accurately estimate the final payoffs. Race 5 at Woodbine below, due off in 9 mins.

First the latest displayed track odds, second my estimated final odds
1) 5 2
2) 3 7
3) 6 20
4) 5 5
5) 6 18
6) 5 6
7) 20 25
8) 5 3

Final odds added below. Not bad!

1) 5 2 5/2
2) 3 7 7
3) 6 20 10
4) 5 5 7/2
5) 6 18 10
6) 5 6 4
7) 20 25 24
8) 5 3 9/2

[jameegray1]

Here's the 1st at Delta downs. 6 mtp.
1 13 16
2 9 4
4 2 5/2
5 3 5/2
6 7/5 3
8 20 28

*NOTE*
Late scratches in this race so forget it.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Not really, but I will admit that it’s been quite a while since the early 70’s. Although I didn’t make as much then, I would argue that it was the best overall decade for horse racing that players and enthusiasts ever experienced.

Why would I even bother to do that? There are much better ways to enjoy and share success.

I’m sorry to hear that you have that sentiment. Apparently, you’d rather hang out and sympathize with those who are chronic complainers who share nothing but negativity around here. It’s sort of telling as to how much success they’re having too. But when it comes to the challenges presented by this game it’s no surprise since the overwhelming majority of players are having difficulties.

BTW that’s one of the reasons why I enjoy sharing a lot of positive information related to HK racing. In spite of that, I also realize that many players have that “I’ll do it my way” attitude and heaven forbid humble themselves to use someone else’s selections. But if my success continues to bother those who can’t even structure a bet on their own, then perhaps after 5 years it time to curtail the HK information altogether.
.
.

I have no problem with your HK wagers Nitro.
Just need an "investment" per race tally.

As a big whale like yourself that is wagering at least $1k per race, you could at least let us small minds know of your $s wagered and how you make such great profits.

Big races this weekend right. No way an incredible system and lucid mind like yourself could lose.

[Nitro]

I have no problem with your HK wagers Nitro.
Just need an "investment" per race tally.

As a big whale like yourself that is wagering at least $1k per race, you could at least let us small minds know of your $s wagered and how you make such great profits

Big races this weekend right. No way an incredible system and lucid mind like yourself could lose.
Apparently you do have a problem and it’s about comprehension because my wagers for HK are never posted. (Perhaps you missed post #58 – hint read toward the bottom)

If your mind can’t register the value of the potential results of what I’ve been posting, your problem is bigger than you might think, because it involves a conflict between your personal envy regarding the HK selections posted and the results of those posts. Take it for whatever its worth, but unlike yourself, I don’t have any intention of losing.

So why not do something different this weekend and satisfy your obvious curiosity and stay up during wee hours of Sunday morning. First race post time is Sat 11:15 PM and last race post time is Sun 4:00 AM EST. Unfortunately, this Sunday’s card may not be as lucrative as last weekend because the majority of the races offer lower class animals. But I’ve dealt with that scenario before, and my "lucid mind" should be able to handle it. :lol:
.
.

[thaskalos]

Apparently you do have a problem and it’s about comprehension because my wagers for HK are never posted. (Perhaps you missed post #58 – hint read toward the bottom)

If your mind can’t register the value of the potential results of what I’ve been posting, your problem is bigger than you might think, because it involves a conflict between your personal envy regarding the HK selections posted and the results of those posts. Take it for whatever its worth, but unlike yourself, I don’t have any intention of losing.

So why not do something different this weekend and satisfy your obvious curiosity and stay up during wee hours of Sunday morning. First race post time is Sat 11:15 PM and last race post time is Sun 4:00 AM EST. Unfortunately, this Sunday’s card may not be as lucrative as last weekend because the majority of the races offer lower class animals. But I’ve dealt with that scenario before, and my "lucid mind" should be able to handle it. :lol:
.
.

I stay up during the wee hours on an everyday basis...and I try to follow along on your HK adventure. I can't say that I know what you are doing...but I find it interesting nonetheless. And I'd like to see you continue your reportage on your foreign escapade...regardless of whether I can tell if you are winning or not. As far as I am concerned...your financial affairs are none of my business. :ThmbUp:

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Apparently you do have a problem and it’s about comprehension because my wagers for HK are never posted. (Perhaps you missed post #58 – hint read toward the bottom)

If your mind can’t register the value of the potential results of what I’ve been posting, your problem is bigger than you might think, because it involves a conflict between your personal envy regarding the HK selections posted and the results of those posts. Take it for whatever its worth, but unlike yourself, I don’t have any intention of losing.

So why not do something different this weekend and satisfy your obvious curiosity and stay up during wee hours of Sunday morning. First race post time is Sat 11:15 PM and last race post time is Sun 4:00 AM EST. Unfortunately, this Sunday’s card may not be as lucrative as last weekend because the majority of the races offer lower class animals. But I’ve dealt with that scenario before, and my "lucid mind" should be able to handle it. :lol:
.
.


Sounds like a plan.


I say we make it a Main Board event and track wagers.

[AltonKelsey]

Theoretically , what nitro claims he does can be done.



Thing is, what has he actually taught anyone ?


Very little, even if you assume his 6 horse out of 14 numbers mean anything.



What has anyone learned ?


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2WERn6VEAI8HK5?format=jpg&name=900x900

[Nitro]

I stay up during the wee hours on an everyday basis...and I try to follow along on your HK adventure. I can't say that I know what you are doing...but I find it interesting nonetheless. And I'd like to see you continue your reportage on your foreign escapade...regardless of whether I can tell if you are winning or not. As far as I am concerned...your financial affairs are none of my business. :ThmbUp:
Very well stated!
It can sometimes become very frustrating trying to get valid points across. I personally find it very curious as to how some people (like yourself) know exactly to rationalize the objective of comments made while others just don’t get it at all.

I assume that this sort of mentality can also be correlated with how people interpret the data they’re using in an attempt to uncover hidden gems among the entries on a typical race card.

Be it early money or late there are ways to distinguish solid insider betting versus the general crowd. It involves understanding the combination of the money being bet, its flow into all of the viewable betting pools together and then the disparities among them (the pools) during a typical betting cycle. The betting side of this game is based entirely on human psychology.

[thaskalos]

Very well stated!
It can sometimes become very frustrating trying to get valid points across. I personally find it very curious as to how some people (like yourself) know exactly to rationalize the objective of comments made while others just don’t get it at all.

I assume that this sort of mentality can also be correlated with how people interpret the data they’re using in an attempt to uncover hidden gems among the entries on a typical race card.

Be it early money or late there are ways to distinguish solid insider betting versus the general crowd. It involves understanding the combination of the money being bet, its flow into all of the viewable betting pools together and then the disparities among them (the pools) during a typical betting cycle. The betting side of this game is based entirely on human psychology.

I am not nearly as fanatical about the betting action as you seem to be...but even I notice cases where the flow of money flatly contradicts what the past performance data seem to indicate. And painful experience has taught me that this conspicuous contradiction of handicapping "logic" can be ignored only to the financial detriment of the studious bettor. This is indeed an "insiders' game"...and the value-seeking bettor walks a fine line between "real value" and 'fool's gold', when he assesses his wagering opportunities. The pursuit of "value" in this game isn't as clear-cut as we sometimes make it out to be.

[jay68802]

Theoretically , what nitro claims he does can be done.



Thing is, what has he actually taught anyone ?


Very little, even if you assume his 6 horse out of 14 numbers mean anything.



What has anyone learned ?


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2WERn6VEAI8HK5?format=jpg&name=900x900

Forgot something here. Have a opinion. And bet it. If you have not learned from this forum, you are slow. The "slow" comment is not directed at you. So join in and post your opinion, educate us.

[cj]

I am not nearly as fanatical about the betting action as you seem to be...but even I notice cases where the flow of money flatly contradicts what the past performance data seem to indicate. And painful experience has taught me that this conspicuous contradiction of handicapping "logic" can be ignored only to the financial detriment of the studious bettor. This is indeed an "insiders' game"...and the value-seeking bettor walks a fine line between "real value" and 'fool's gold', when he assesses his wagering opportunities. The pursuit of "value" in this game isn't as clear-cut as we sometimes make it out to be.

Hard learned lesson. If you think your horse looks 10-1 on paper, is 10-1, but you think should be 4-1, bet away. If you think your horse looks 4-1 on paper, should be 4-1, goes off 10-1...RUN!!!

[pandy]

I don't like certain types of bet downs. Let's say that a track has a good or even decent morning line maker and a horse is 12-1 on the morning line and goes off at 3-1. Generally speaking, it's a bad bet over the long run. Sure, occasionally it's smart money and the horse wins, but overall, it's an underlay.

Let's put it this way, horses that are 3-1 on the morning line and go off at 3-1, are better bets over the long run than horses that are 6-1 or higher on the morning line and go off at 3-1.

I have no stats to prove this but when I do testing, this is what I've noticed. My theory on this is simple. If a horse is, say, 10-1 on the morning line, the handicapper who made the line obviously didn't think the horse had a strong chance of winning. If the horse goes off as the favorite at 2-1 odds, you're essentially betting on a 2-1 shot that doesn't look good on paper, which doesn't make sense. If you're betting a 2-1 shot that is 2-1 on the morning line, the horse looks good on paper, has a better chance of winning, and will return a higher ROI in the long run because it will win more often than the bet down horses.

Bet downs make more sense when there's a mystery around the horse, like if a horse is a first or second time starter, so there's not much history there, or a horse that ships in from Europe, something like that.

[cj]

Most morning lines away from a few of the top circuits stink and I don't use them at all to determine if a horse is being bet down or is cold on the board. I trust experience of knowing what a horse should be within reason based on his PPs.

[thaskalos]

Most morning lines away from a few of the top circuits stink and I don't use them at all to determine if a horse is being bet down or is cold on the board. I trust experience of knowing what a horse should be within reason based on his PPs.

Ditto. :ThmbUp:

[AltonKelsey]

I don't like certain types of bet downs. Let's say that a track has a good or even decent morning line maker and a horse is 12-1 on the morning line and goes off at 3-1. Generally speaking, it's a bad bet over the long run. Sure, occasionally it's smart money and the horse wins, but overall, it's an underlay.
....



Also noticed this long long ago. Old Florida racing , 20-1 ml's off at 2-1 .



Rarely win, pay nothing when they do .


Hard to make a profit with those.

[Bennie]

I remember maybe a month ago I had played the late pick-4 at Gulfstream and in two of the races I used the 9 horse. One race it was 12-1 ML and the other race was 20-1 ML. I swear that the 12-1 went off at 6/5 and the 20-1 went off at 5/2. The 6/5 ran third and the 5/2 won and paid $7 and change. I loved them at 12-1 and 20-1 but would never had bet them at those final odds.

[pandy]

Overlays are way better than bet downs. Good example in the 8th at Aqueduct today. A Freud Of Mama was 8-1 on the morning line. I picked the horse to win, David Aragona picked it to win, Mike Beer and Andy Serling both picked it third. Obviously, the horse was a prime contender. It won and paid $48.20. A bad morning line maker may have made the horse 15-1 but NYRA's line is one of the best, so 8-1 was a good line and about what the horse should have been.

[Speed Figure]

Overlays are way better than bet downs. Good example in the 8th at Aqueduct today. A Freud Of Mama was 8-1 on the morning line. I picked the horse to win, David Aragona picked it to win, Mike Beer and Andy Serling both picked it third. Obviously, the horse was a prime contender. It won and paid $48.20. A bad morning line maker may have made the horse 15-1 but NYRA's line is one of the best, so 8-1 was a good line and about what the horse should have been.
I scored a contest off her today! she was a highlighted value play on my software! ML favorite was labeled as a "possible bounce" and finished off the board!. I guess the whales missed this one!

[pandy]

I scored a contest off her today! she was a highlighted value play on my software! ML favorite was labeled as a "possible bounce" and finished off the board!. I guess the whales missed this one!

I wonder if the fact that she had no dirt races threw the computer whales off? I thought the favorite was a legit bounce prospect there, too. I bet A Freud Of Mama pretty good. Aqueduct has had very good cards all fall. She had a good dirt and off track pedigree.

[castaway01]

I wonder if the fact that she had no dirt races threw the computer whales off? I thought the favorite was a legit bounce prospect there, too. I bet A Freud Of Mama pretty good. Aqueduct has had very good cards all fall. She had a good dirt and off track pedigree.

I think you're on to something because an 8-1 ML horse in NY that gets picked by the analysts and is showing up as a choice in software very rarely goes up from the ML odds. I mean, it happens but it doesn't happen much.

[pandy]

I think you're on to something because an 8-1 ML horse in NY that gets picked by the analysts and is showing up as a choice in software very rarely goes up from the ML odds. I mean, it happens but it doesn't happen much.

That's true, this was an exceptionally good overlay. But, there were a lot of excellent overlay winners at the Aqueduct fall meet this year.

[Nitro]

Hard learned lesson. If you think your horse looks 10-1 on paper, is 10-1, but you think should be 4-1, bet away. If you think your horse looks 4-1 on paper, should be 4-1, goes off 10-1...RUN!!!

Sure, its nice to think that you might have found an overlay, and this argument may sound appropriate to the average handicapper. However, logically from a betting perspective I’m sorry to say that its completely illogical. Why?

Well first off you shouldn’t compare totally Subjective information interpreted from whatever data you’re using (the “on paper” stuff) with completely Objective information gathered from the live tote board activities. It’s like mixing oil and water.

I’ve also listed a few situations that can often contradict this argument:

1) The entry is 10/1 on the M/L and is currently 10/1 on the board (not much action), but you think it should be 4/1. Why? When the majority of players betting see the same (on paper) information. Maybe the horse is in the race for other reasons than trying to win.

2) The entry has say a 20/1 M/L and looks good on paper (say 4/1) and goes off @ 10/1. Why shy away from this bet?

3) The entry had a 20/1 M/L and looks marginal on paper yet opens at 4/1 and later drifts up to 10/1.
Early money should be very often be respected, especially at the tracks with the larger betting pools.

4) The entry was originally part of a coupled entry (Say a M/L of 3/1) and the better looking half (on paper) scratched. Very often the one left in the race is left there for a reason, and yes may go off at much higher odds and yes: Win

5) The entry’s odds value may have been impacted by the scratch of another horse which could enhance its chances of winning.

6) The entry’s odds value may be affected by a change in the current track conditions. This could both enhance or lessen its chances of running well.

7) Etc., etc.