Busting out of a Slump at the windows. What do you do to bust out of it?

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/racetrackandy/status/1014181110845079552

[Andy Asaro]

I must confess I need a new slumpbuster remedy.

The one that worked for years was new shoes with new socks and baby powder in the shoes. Gotta have happy feet when you gamble.

It hasn't worked lately so I gotta come up with a new one.

Any suggestions?

[jay68802]

My slump buster is to go back and re-read some old standby handicapping books. Then remember the good days, get the mindset back to being excited about going to the track. On the way to the track I keep saying to myself I am going to do good today.

[TiffaniO]

If your bankroll is low don’t bet til it’s replenished. Most people make bad decisions of they’re playing tifht such as tossing a long shot or singling a favorite just hoping to cash... it often backfires and prolongs the slump.

[thaskalos]

Keep a written log of all your bets...and make sure that your play remains disciplined throughout the slump. Whatever "discipline" the player thinks he has will reveal itself when things are going badly. In my own play...I take solace in the fact that no gambler is immune from these downturns of fate...regardless of his skill level. For those who have trouble keeping their heads in times of turmoil...a vacation is suggested as the more inexpensive option. And if it's in the player's nature to press his bets in order to get even, then I wish him a friendly banker...and an understanding wife.

[GMB@BP]

In order to bust out of a slump, something I don't truly believe in anyways, one would need to surmise what is the cause of the slump.

Is it bad handicapping? Is it bad betting? I dont believe in bad luck that is short term.

Typically beyond just statistical regression my biggest errors come from trusting the past performances too much.

Betting races that set up for closer and watching slow to moderate paces develop. Trusting that a dominant pace horse will actually be sent to the lead. I am thinking less and less about race shape dynamics as its just proving to be poor on value. What I see is likely what everyone else sees, so when I am right, what is the point.

The bottom line is if you trust your handicapping then there really is no need for a slump buster. You are your own slump buster.

If you cant handicap in general that is a different discussion.

[groupie doll]

My slump remedy is to take a break... sit back and focus on one of my other hobbies for awhile and then return with a fresh brain.

[JerryBoyle]

I bet exclusively through signals generated via a model, so luckily, the human issues that show themselves in a slump and cause decision making that only makes things worse aren't as much of an issue.

That said, my experience over the past 2 yrs of doing this has been:

1. Improve model and backtest to see that it generates a positive roi historically

2. Go live with model

3. Make pretty good money for a few weeks leading to day dreams of retirement at an early age

4. Model starts to fail, I let it run until only a small amount of the profit earned in step 3 remains

5. Rinse & repeat


I've gone through this process 3 or 4 times now, and step 4 is my slump. Makes me think smart CRW teams have a way to work against me once I start, but different discussion for different day. So far, my only busting out move has been to improve the model, and retest over the period where it failed. However, my current effort is trying to find some signal or value about the model fit or the racing season or types of races that can indicate ahead of time if my model is starting to degrade. Surprisingly (maybe not), the pseduo r2 thrown around here often actually is the best I've got. Currently, I'm in a slump with the model turned off, but it looks like r2 is starting to creep back up, so I will hopefully begin betting again soon...

[FakeNameChanged]

Take a week or two break. Then when your brain and nerves have been recharged, start back slowly. Maybe look at the pp's as if your new and focus on fundamentals, like a baseball player in a slump. Let the game come back to you.

[elhelmete]

I play a modest $$ show parlay.

[v j stauffer]

I never believe in taking a break. The play to break me out of my slump may present itself and be missed while I'm re-grouping.

If you DON'T have some prolonged slumps you're not making the correct plays. This is not a game of cashing tickets, picking winners or even being right. It's about making money and even more importantly continually making the CORRECT bet.

Trust and remember you've been an elite player in the past. That fact is what carries you through the tough times.

Nothing wrong with putting in more hours of prep work. Double and Triple check. That will solidify the decisions you make as being sound.

Don't panic. This is a VERY long gamble. Not days or months but years.

The horses have ZERO idea you're in a slump. You're one race away from it all being turned around and forgotten.

Fire away!

[MONEY]

I don't use software.
Here's what I do.

Pick a post position number.

Use the same number every race.

I compare my horse using my favorite factors to each horse in the field.

If I find only one or two horses that have a chance of beating my horse, it's a bet.

If I think that more than two horses are tougher than mine, I skip the race.

PS
Doing the above will help you see everything that you used to see when you were winning.

[acorn54]

i know i am going through a rough patch when i miss the close calls on a regular basis. of course if i miss the photos going my way i am not picking horses on my poor judgement. games of chance ALWAYS have periods of long unsuccessful bets. if you don't have the stomach for it stay away from the betting windows. also don't forget the game of horseracing has changes at a very rapid rate lately. dominance of a few people winning the races, and much lower mutuel prices than even three years ago. the favorites win at a much higher rate and the virtual absence of casual money in the betting pools these days have made the parimutuel pools far more accurate on predicting the probabilities of the horses in a race. that being said i have found it not worth the time and effort to search for bets on weekdays and just wait for the opportunity that the weekends and holidays race cards bring with their larger race fields.

[Andy Asaro]

So far I'm the only one who tries to use magic to end a slump.

[thaskalos]

I never believe in taking a break. The play to break me out of my slump may present itself and be missed while I'm re-grouping.

If you DON'T have some prolonged slumps you're not making the correct plays. This is not a game of cashing tickets, picking winners or even being right. It's about making money and even more importantly continually making the CORRECT bet.

Trust and remember you've been an elite player in the past. That fact is what carries you through the tough times.

Nothing wrong with putting in more hours of prep work. Double and Triple check. That will solidify the decisions you make as being sound.

Don't panic. This is a VERY long gamble. Not days or months but years.

The horses have ZERO idea you're in a slump. You're one race away from it all being turned around and forgotten.

Fire away!

I LOVE this post! :ThmbUp:

Some posters here have wondered in the past why "experience" is considered such an asset in serious gambling...and the answer is stated right here. How is a serious horseplayer supposed to persevere through a "slump", if he doesn't have the confidence which comes only by having successfully overcome such slumps in the past? Of course...such confidence can't be FAKED. We can lie to everybody else...but we can't effectively lie to ourselves.

[Afleet]

I must confess I need a new slumpbuster remedy.

The one that worked for years was new shoes with new socks and baby powder in the shoes. Gotta have happy feet when you gamble.

It hasn't worked lately so I gotta come up with a new one.

Any suggestions?

always press the all button on the 3rd line of your tri wheels-if you are a trifecta player

[thaskalos]

always press the all button on the 3rd line of your tri wheels-if you are a trifecta player

Is this how you get OUT of a slump...or INTO one?

[Afleet]

Is this how you get OUT of a slump...or INTO one?

probably both:D

[classhandicapper]

I'm never confident when I'm in a downturn. As far as I'm concerned it's impossible to know whether you're going bad due to randomness or because the ground is crumbling under your feet.

Trainer patterns I exploited profitably years ago do not exist now.

There are fewer and typically less severe track biases now than there were years ago. They are also a LOT tougher to find because half the races are on turf. That means there are smaller samples for making judgments.

Everyone has speed figures, pace figures, and replays.

High IQ individuals with advanced math degrees and databases are constantly pouring through data looking for inefficiencies and betting large sums of money.

I think you have you to just keep playing until you find out where you stand now because the competition keeps getting better and the game keeps changing.

[dilanesp]

Slumps cause self reflection, which is good.

Where gamblers really screw up is in NOT engaging in self reflection while they are winning.

In any event, the answer is to just be disciplined and play the exact same way as if you were winning. If the slump isn't busted, that's life.

[v j stauffer]

always press the all button on the 3rd line of your tri wheels-if you are a trifecta player

Hello Mr. Mutual Clerk.

I'd like to knowingly but one winning and 11 losing tickets please.

Thank you.

[AJanks]

Usually to get out a slump, just put $10,000 to show on a 1/5 shot. Works every time.

[PIC6SIX]

Yes Vic, making the CORRECT BET speaks volumes to me. How many times does our handicapping prove valid and true but somehow we end up betting into the wrong pool. You have to maximize profits in this game when you can. Like they say in golf, "Drive for show and putt for dough $$$$"

[Inner Dirt]

I never believe in taking a break. The play to break me out of my slump may present itself and be missed while I'm re-grouping.

If you DON'T have some prolonged slumps you're not making the correct plays. This is not a game of cashing tickets, picking winners or even being right. It's about making money and even more importantly continually making the CORRECT bet.

Trust and remember you've been an elite player in the past. That fact is what carries you through the tough times.

Nothing wrong with putting in more hours of prep work. Double and Triple check. That will solidify the decisions you make as being sound.

Don't panic. This is a VERY long gamble. Not days or months but years.

The horses have ZERO idea you're in a slump. You're one race away from it all being turned around and forgotten.

Fire away!


Great post! Kind of like a scorer in the NBA, they keep shooting and figure those shots will start dropping in again like they did in the past.

[Afleet]

just take a poll

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

[Afleet]

this should help

https://www.tvg.com/handicapping/talent-picks?utm_medium=Display&utm_source=3157618&utm_campaign=10788996&utm_term=6304961&utm_content=217465071&utm_ad=416114743&rfr=2_002_0254

[098poi]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/images/buttons/green/viewpost.gif (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2337313#post2337313)
I never believe in taking a break. The play to break me out of my slump may present itself and be missed while I'm re-grouping.

If you DON'T have some prolonged slumps you're not making the correct plays. This is not a game of cashing tickets, picking winners or even being right. It's about making money and even more importantly continually making the CORRECT bet.

Trust and remember you've been an elite player in the past. That fact is what carries you through the tough times.

Nothing wrong with putting in more hours of prep work. Double and Triple check. That will solidify the decisions you make as being sound.

Don't panic. This is a VERY long gamble. Not days or months but years.

The horses have ZERO idea you're in a slump. You're one race away from it all being turned around and forgotten.

Fire away!




This is the most important thing. Not taking it personally. Golf and racing are similar in that respect. Once you beat yourself up about a shot or a wager it only compounds and affects future shots and wagers. It may seem like the racing Gods bat us around like mice but I don't think that's how it really works.

[Robert Fischer]

I 'live in' the process, so results don't mean much to me.

However part of that process is finding good plays before the race, and the doing a post-mortem after the race (not looking at whether I should've bet the 7 instead of the 3, - but looking at whether I did in fact have a bet that was in fact within my circle of competence and good value).

When I'm struggling it's usually because I'm suffering from man-with-a-hammer disease. Everything looks like a nail (a potential play). I'm getting away from semi-rare real value plays that jump out to me, and my brain is 'finding a way' to play virtually any race that is coming up and is somewhat interesting. A the natural human bias to act.
I've stepped out of the process and I want a result, NOW!

[Franco Santiago]

Depends on the what the definition of slump is.

If it is losing despite making optimal wagers, then as Vic says, press on.

If it is breaking down mentally and making sub-optimal wagers, stop and regroup.

Of course, the former can certainly lead to the latter, but the latter is far more ruinous, obviously, and requires serious self-reflection and possible re-training of your thought processes and state of mind when adversity hits.

Your decisions control your destiny. Your state of mind controls your decisions. Your state of mind is controlled by your physiology, your language (yes, the language you use...."i.e. this game sucks, this game can't get beat, this game is crooked, I am the unluckiest person in the world, and I am in in a slump"), and your core beliefs (i.e. if you look in the mirror and see a fat person, then, you have no chance of becoming un-fat - until you see a person that is slimming down...same with betting...if you believe you are a loser, well, you will be).


All of the above is easier said than done, and I have a very hard time applying it to myself (I am my own worst success and performance coach). But I know it works because I do coach a person (but not in the technical stuff of his game, but rather, in the mental stuff above) and he has done very well.

And lastly, just about every person that was or is great at anything had or has a coach. Perhaps someone that will simply hold you accountable will do the trick. It is my experience that most horseplayers never had a coach, so to speak. Not sure why....maybe it's the ego, who knows.

Great thread, though, and there is some fantastic info.

[Nutz and Boltz]

If my handicapping has gone sour, this happens usually when I start taking short cuts to do my figuring, I then go back and get myself back in line.
The worst is when it's not a problem with my handicapping, but pure lousy luck, such as when your longshot gets caught at the wire it seems like continuously, that's the real killer for me !:mad: Then I back off for a while because that's when the depression sets in. :pout:

[dilanesp]

I 'live in' the process, so results don't mean much to me.

However part of that process is finding good plays before the race, and the doing a post-mortem after the race (not looking at whether I should've bet the 7 instead of the 3, - but looking at whether I did in fact have a bet that was in fact within my circle of competence and good value).

When I'm struggling it's usually because I'm suffering from man-with-a-hammer disease. Everything looks like a nail (a potential play). I'm getting away from semi-rare real value plays that jump out to me, and my brain is 'finding a way' to play virtually any race that is coming up and is somewhat interesting. A the natural human bias to act.
I've stepped out of the process and I want a result, NOW!

In general, in ANY form of gambling, if you are unable to pass/fold sometimes, you are a losing player.

An acquaintance who works in a sports book says the equivalent expression there is "anyone who bets the Super Bowl is a loser".

[Lemon Drop Husker]

The horses have ZERO idea you're in a slump. You're one race away from it all being turned around and forgotten.

Fire away!


Much respect for this comment right here. :ThmbUp:

[JohnGalt1]

My slumps come when I get three horse or race exotic-happy by playing too many exotics and playing too many horses in them when I do play them.

[Poindexter]

While the horses have zero idea you are in a slump, you personally are very aware of it. You can pound your chest and yell "I am the Man or Woman" 100 times a day, but deep within you know your struggling and every loss adds to that negative frame of mind. Too much of this game is subjective. Confidence is paramount. When things are going bad and your bankroll is going down the tubes, do you really expect yourself to make the best decisions? Will it kill you to cut your bets in half until you feel you that you are back to normal. It is a long term game and many of us have one bankroll.

My opinion is that when things just don't feel right, pull back on your betting. Things will get to normal soon enough.

By the way, I can drive 100 MPH on the freeway 100's of times, but that will not bring me back to life the day I lose control and kill myself. You play with fire, you get burned.......eventually.

[thaskalos]

An acquaintance who works in a sports book says the equivalent expression there is "anyone who bets the Super Bowl is a loser".

Yes. If they work in a sportsbook...then they must know what they are talking about. :ThmbUp:

[Robert Fischer]

In general, in ANY form of gambling, if you are unable to pass/fold sometimes, you are a losing player.

An acquaintance who works in a sports book says the equivalent expression there is "anyone who bets the Super Bowl is a loser".

That's a good expression. Hadn't heard that one, but it's more true than false.

A good player can sometimes fall in love with a big race like the Belmont, and they see that Justify is a legit favorite and will be an unplayable price, and then their hamster wheel starts turning; "Well maybe I can still get value in a superfecta..."

For me, that thought process is dangerous. You win a few now and then, but you are trying to leverage value from a valueless position by 'out-smarting' the situation.

You start to see action in virtually any race you've handicapped, and you are trying to get in bets as they load into the gate to have something on that idea.

A baseball analogy would be swinging at a low-away slider, because "Well maybe I can still get a piece of the ball and hit a single".

Continuing the baseball analogy, a horseplayer wants to approach the game like Barry Bonds (the approach, not the steroids! :) ) or a Ted Williams or a Rogers Hornsby... -To patiently wait until a pitch is delivered into your 'happy zone', and then go ahead and stroke your homerun or double. Get a good ball to hit.

Get a good race to hit, a clear easy opportunity that jumps off the page as a significant opinion, and then take a solid approach to get your homerun or double.

The game treats the over-eager player as LeBron or Jordan or Pistol Pete will tell over-eager defenders; "You reach, I teach".

Quite a few slumps come from winning an 'overreach', and then continuing down that path while it's working, until it doesn't.

[thaskalos]

Perhaps it would help if the original poster participated a little more in this thread...by at least telling us what he considers a "slump" to be, in the first place. All constructive debate should begin by first accurately defining the pertinent terms used in the discussion. What many call a "slump" is often nothing more than the normal variance fluctuations inherent in all the gambling games in existence. When the gambler has as low a winning percentage as the horseplayer has...then the "slump" is the natural order of things, instead of the rarity that it's often made out to be.

[Andy Asaro]

Perhaps it would help if the original poster participated a little more in this thread...by at least telling us what he considers a "slump" to be, in the first place. All constructive debate should begin by first accurately defining the pertinent terms used in the discussion. What many call a "slump" is often nothing more than the normal variance fluctuations inherent in all the gambling games in existence. When the gambler has as low a winning percentage as the horseplayer has...then the "slump" is the natural order of things, instead of the rarity that it's often made out to be.

The article speaks for itself. Other than that I've always been streaky.

[AltonKelsey]

Find an easier game.

[dilanesp]

Yes. If they work in a sportsbook...then they must know what they are talking about. :ThmbUp:

Thask, if you don't know why anyone who bets the Super Bowl is a loser, than my friend certainly knows more than you do.

To explain, the Super Bowl is the classic precisely efficient line. Tons of money in the pool, no inside information, every minute detail priced into the line.

It also hapoens to be the last pro football game of the year, and the biggest, so it is irresistible to gambling addicts.

So the basic received wisdom of the bookmaking industry is that anyone who can pass the Super Bowl could be dangerously good and anyone who bets it doesn't understand efficient pools and is a fish.

[thaskalos]

Thask, if you don't know why anyone who bets the Super Bowl is a loser, than my friend certainly knows more than you do.

To explain, the Super Bowl is the classic precisely efficient line. Tons of money in the pool, no inside information, every minute detail priced into the line.

It also hapoens to be the last pro football game of the year, and the biggest, so it is irresistible to gambling addicts.

So the basic received wisdom of the bookmaking industry is that anyone who can pass the Super Bowl could be dangerously good and anyone who bets it doesn't understand efficient pools and is a fish.

Only a gambling illiterate would assert that anyone who bets the Super Bowl is a loser. I, on the other hand, who am NOT a gambling illiterate...declared last year's Super Bowl to be one of the best sports-betting opportunities of the year. Of course...far be it for me to try and force you to comment only on the matters that you actually KNOW something about. :ThmbUp:

[thaskalos]

Thask, if you don't know why anyone who bets the Super Bowl is a loser, than my friend certainly knows more than you do.

To explain, the Super Bowl is the classic precisely efficient line. Tons of money in the pool, no inside information, every minute detail priced into the line.

It also hapoens to be the last pro football game of the year, and the biggest, so it is irresistible to gambling addicts.

So the basic received wisdom of the bookmaking industry is that anyone who can pass the Super Bowl could be dangerously good and anyone who bets it doesn't understand efficient pools and is a fish.

Another shining example of your inability to grasp the inner nuances of serious gambling. The Super Bowl line is even MORE exploitable than the other NFL lines...for the very reason that you state above. There is WAY more uninformed money wagered on the Super Bowl than there is on any other single game in existence...and the bookmaker's job is to structure the line in a way which accommodates the avalanche of "heart-felt" opinions of the masses, which often defy the logic associated with the realities of the game. Yes, there won't be a solid wager to be found in most Super Bowls...but to categorically state that "anyone who bets the Super Bowl is a loser" is to admit your ignorance of these more intricate matters...which take real knowledge to comprehend.

[AndyC]

Thask, if you don't know why anyone who bets the Super Bowl is a loser, than my friend certainly knows more than you do.

To explain, the Super Bowl is the classic precisely efficient line. Tons of money in the pool, no inside information, every minute detail priced into the line.

It also hapoens to be the last pro football game of the year, and the biggest, so it is irresistible to gambling addicts.

So the basic received wisdom of the bookmaking industry is that anyone who can pass the Super Bowl could be dangerously good and anyone who bets it doesn't understand efficient pools and is a fish.

Your friend is full of crap. The super bowl is no different from any other game. A good bettor either sees an edge or they don't. Efficiency exists in the aggregate and not necessarily in individual games. Just like horse racing.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I get banged up plenty in short periods throughout the year. I have had some nasty losing streaks in the summer that are usually 3-5 days. I hang at the pool next to the racetrack. Drink some beers. Have excessive sex for a few days. Or go play horseshoes in the country. Just take a breather. In the winter I seem to have bad days and bounce right back so I just go at it!

[dilanesp]

Your friend is full of crap. The super bowl is no different from any other game. A good bettor either sees an edge or they don't. Efficiency exists in the aggregate and not necessarily in individual games. Just like horse racing.

That's an innumerate statement.

The Super Bowl line is almost certainly fixed within the probability band of 48 to 52 percent. I.e., if any bettor bets it every year, long term they will lose.

Bear in mind EVERY sports bettor believes they have an edge on every game they bet. That's why they bet them- they believe that the Rams are more likely than not to beat the 49'ers by 3 or more points. But aggregate edge- the likelihood that you are able to identify inefficient lines and not bet efficient ones- is the only way to actually beat the game. And you get no aggregate edge playing the Super Bowl. So yeah, betting the Super Bowl is what the bookies' saying says it is.

[dilanesp]

Another shining example of your inability to grasp the inner nuances of serious gambling. The Super Bowl line is even MORE exploitable than the other NFL lines...for the very reason that you state above. There is WAY more uninformed money wagered on the Super Bowl than there is on any other single game in existence...and the bookmaker's job is to structure the line in a way which accommodates the avalanche of "heart-felt" opinions of the masses, which often defy the logic associated with the realities of the game. Yes, there won't be a solid wager to be found in most Super Bowls...but to categorically state that "anyone who bets the Super Bowl is a loser" is to admit your ignorance of these more intricate matters...which take real knowledge to comprehend.

Mathematically, this is dead wrong. While it is true that there is more recreational money in the Super Bowl pool than a regular game, that doesn't matter because the line is set nationally and not locally and plenty of reasonably informed sports bettors- all of whom are supremely confident in their expertise- bet the Super Bowl and would exploit any inefficient line.

The Efficient Markets Hypothesis isn't falsified by the fact there is a ton of dumb money in the stock market. As long as there is enough smart money to move the market should an inefficient price occurs, the dumb money doesn't matter. That is actually a key part of the theory.

[thaskalos]

So, in your honest opinion...all the bettors who wagered on the Eagles+5 in last year's Super Bowl are confirmed LOSERS...who were wildly misled in their estimations that they had found a legitimate wagering opportunity in that game...because the line was so "solid" that no meaningful edge could possibly have existed in that situation...RIGHT? And, in spite of this lunacy...you ask us to take your sports-betting assertions SERIOUSLY here?

[AndyC]

That's an innumerate statement.

The Super Bowl line is almost certainly fixed within the probability band of 48 to 52 percent. I.e., if any bettor bets it every year, long term they will lose.

Bear in mind EVERY sports bettor believes they have an edge on every game they bet. That's why they bet them- they believe that the Rams are more likely than not to beat the 49'ers by 3 or more points. But aggregate edge- the likelihood that you are able to identify inefficient lines and not bet efficient ones- is the only way to actually beat the game. And you get no aggregate edge playing the Super Bowl. So yeah, betting the Super Bowl is what the bookies' saying says it is.

Betting on all NFL games is done in an efficient market in the aggregate. There is nothing special about the Super Bowl. There have been many studies done on the efficiency of betting markets. Being efficient in the aggregate does not mean every line offers no edge to a bettor. I would concur that a bettor who makes a Super Bowl bet every year just because it is the Super Bowl is destined for a bad aggregate outcome. It is ridiculous to believe, however, that a sharp bettor making a bet because of a perceived edge in the Super bowl is
a losing bettor.

[dilanesp]

So, in your honest opinion...all the bettors who wagered on the Eagles+5 in last year's Super Bowl are confirmed LOSERS...who were wildly misled in their estimations that they had found a legitimate wagering opportunity in that game...because the line was so "solid" that no meaningful edge could possibly have existed in that situation...RIGHT? And, in spite of this lunacy...you ask us to take your sports-betting assertions SERIOUSLY here?

In my opinion:

1. Sports bettors improperly look at the specific line of a specific game rather than whether a line is efficient. In other words, as long as, over time, there was a less than 52 percent possibility that a game with the specific characteristics of the Super Bowl would have fallen on either side of the line, the line was efficient.

Your argument is like arguing that people were right to bet Justify in the Belmont because he won. But the win doesn't prove the odds were good. The question is whether a horse in that situation, over time, is worth that price.

2. Sports bettors bet the Super Bowl because it is a single game, the last game of the season, and is the most important sports event in the country. You can't pass it, and the fact that y'all bet it every year (and most sports bettors do) is indicative of the fact that y'all are not brilliant and dispassionate seekers of exploitative opportunities but rather people who are psychologically incapable of passing such a big game with no comparable wager available for months.

[Robert Fischer]

If you bet the superbowl because it's the superbowl and you want some action = bad


If you bet the superbowl because you feel the public perception is off and value exists = good

[AndyC]

In my opinion:

1. Sports bettors improperly look at the specific line of a specific game rather than whether a line is efficient. In other words, as long as, over time, there was a less than 52 percent possibility that a game with the specific characteristics of the Super Bowl would have fallen on either side of the line, the line was efficient.

Your argument is like arguing that people were right to bet Justify in the Belmont because he won. But the win doesn't prove the odds were good. The question is whether a horse in that situation, over time, is worth that price......


If bettors did what you suggest above they would never bet on anything. Lines are efficient in the aggregate but that doesn't mean you can't find bets looking at lines for a specific game.

Why do you bet horses? Horses with 50% of the win money bet on them win about 50% of the time. Ditto for 40%, 30%, 25%, etc. The lines are very efficient. By your logic you can't look at specific horses and specific lines because everything is efficient.

[PaceAdvantage]

There are some really EXCELLENT replies in this thread...especially among the first 15 or so...

Vic's is particularly excellent IMO...provided you're not a degenerate....lol

[MadVindication]

I just enjoy life as a well-cultivated pillar of vice and grab a bottle of wine and a pack of smokes to guzzle and burn through while looking over PPs.

I don't rip up losing tickets-- I keep them so I can indulge in an apathetic shrug as I look them over again.

[thaskalos]

I just enjoy life as a well-cultivated pillar of vice and grab a bottle of wine and a pack of smokes to guzzle and burn through while looking over PPs.

I don't rip up losing tickets-- I keep them so I can indulge in an apathetic shrug as I look them over again.

Me too. But when I am handicapping the Southern California races...I switch to a champagne spritzer. :ThmbUp:

[Redboard]

If I’m getting my ass kicked for an extended period, I dumb down my bets and regroup with this method. Instead of playing exactas, tris, pick 3s, & pick 4s, I just make two simple win bets per race: one bet on who I think is most likely to win the race, and the other win bet on who I think gives the best value. OK, so you are going to lose one of these bets each race, but by playing value you don’t get into the rut of eating chalk, which can drive you insane when you lose.

[Valuist]

Read a book on card counting. It will fully explain the wild swings known as variance, and you will get a better understanding of how variance effects all kinds of gambling. We tend to overestimate our abilities during good times, and believe the world is ending when we are in a slump. In blackjack, variance is more black and white. In horse racing, it isn't always crystal clear whether its variance, or just poor decision making on our part. It could be a bit of both. But we tend to underestimate variance in racing and sports betting.

[PaceAdvantage]

Read a book on card counting. It will fully explain the wild swings known as variance, and you will get a better understanding of how variance effects all kinds of gambling.So true.

http://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/value-betting-academy/learning-centre/science-calculating-winning-losing-streaks/

https://www.sportsbookreview.com/picks/tools/streak-calculator/

[dilanesp]

So true.

http://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/value-betting-academy/learning-centre/science-calculating-winning-losing-streaks/

https://www.sportsbookreview.com/picks/tools/streak-calculator/

Here's an even easier way to learn about it.

Next time you are in Vegas or any casino with roulette, go around to the roulette tables at the casino. Look at the displays that show the last 25 spins. You will see plenty of patterns. You will see wheels that hit the same number 4 or 5 times. You will see wheels that hit black 12 out of the last 15 spins.

Random variance all.

[MadVindication]

Me too. But when I am handicapping the Southern California races...I switch to a champagne spritzer. :ThmbUp:

The juice of kings :ThmbUp:

[groupie doll]

I never believe in taking a break.



My ROI is higher annually when I take breaks in a slump and I am selective about what I play. If a race doesn't draw a field in line with where my strengths lie then I pass the race. If I "Lukas" myself into running through a slump I generally lose way more than I would otherwise. I'm a low-roller. This is how I play for value and I've been funding an IRA with my winnings.

[PaceAdvantage]

If a race doesn't draw a field in line with where my strengths lie then I pass the race.THIS! THIS! THIS!

I am a massive believer in not only handicapping the horses, but HANDICAPPING THE RACE before you ever get to the horses.

Finding races that fit what you are trying to accomplish is probably the BIGGEST KEY to profit IMO.

[groupie doll]

THIS! THIS! THIS!

I am a massive believer in not only handicapping the horses, but HANDICAPPING THE RACE before you ever get to the horses.

Finding races that fit what you are trying to accomplish is probably the BIGGEST KEY to profit IMO.


right on :ThmbUp:

[Hapman]

Yes Vic, making the CORRECT BET speaks volumes to me. How many times does our handicapping prove valid and true but somehow we end up betting into the wrong pool. You have to maximize profits in this game when you can. Like they say in golf, "Drive for show and putt for dough $$$$"

Coming from someone still relatively new to the game (few years) how do you guys learn to make better bets?

My biggest frustration is that I often seem to have handicapped fairly well and have a good sense of who will be there but then end up messing up my betting in the end.

[dilanesp]

Coming from someone still relatively new to the game (few years) how do you guys learn to make better bets?

My biggest frustration is that I often seem to have handicapped fairly well and have a good sense of who will be there but then end up messing up my betting in the end.

Bet your actual opinion.

For instance, if you have a good idea who the winner is but have no earthly idea who will finish 2nd, you shouldn't be in the exacta pool, at least absent some major overlay.

If you think a favorite is going to win but is too short a price, don't start looking for longshots just because you don't want to pass the race.

Don't click the all box in a vertical.

Etc.

[Hapman]

If you think a favorite is going to win but is too short a price, don't start looking for longshots just because you don't want to pass the race.

.

Thanks, you're so right, especially here is where I think I always get myself into trouble.

[coachv30]

Bass Fishing works for me;)

[chiguy]

Bet the #1 horse at half-mile harness tracks for a week.

[v j stauffer]

My ROI is higher annually when I take breaks in a slump and I am selective about what I play. If a race doesn't draw a field in line with where my strengths lie then I pass the race. If I "Lukas" myself into running through a slump I generally lose way more than I would otherwise. I'm a low-roller. This is how I play for value and I've been funding an IRA with my winnings.

What I meant by that is I don't believe in shutting down the search for good bets. Just walking away.

One never knows, sometimes literally until a few minutes before post, when a must play will present itself.

A bet made three days after a bad run or three months after is still only the next bet you're making. It's either proper and excellent or it's not.

The horses and the situation have no idea when your last bet was.

[v j stauffer]

Coming from someone still relatively new to the game (few years) how do you guys learn to make better bets?

My biggest frustration is that I often seem to have handicapped fairly well and have a good sense of who will be there but then end up messing up my betting in the end.

Handicapping is part of it. But not the be all end all. If you feel you're seeing value with a singular horse there's nothing wrong with living in the win pool and never considering anything else.

It's the cheapest bet there is. It helps you avoid long losing streaks. And it can allow you to stick with a standard bet amount which should NEVER be more than 4% of your overall bankroll.

It's impossible to go broke making a profit.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Handicapping is part of it. But not the be all end all. If you feel you're seeing value with a singular horse there's nothing wrong with living in the win pool and never considering anything else.

It's the cheapest bet there is. It helps you avoid long losing streaks. And it can allow you to stick with a standard bet amount which should NEVER be more than 4% of your overall bankroll.

It's impossible to go broke making a profit.

Good post...Yet still puzzling...if my bankroll is $100, then my max bet will be $4....which doesn’t seem like enough dough to make any traction capital-wise.....
....so I’m thinking a bankroll of $1000 so that my max bet is $40 per bet...otherwise, what’s the point...? Because it is too little money either won or lost to amount to anything....you can’t pay any bills betting $4 a race for 3 or 4 races a card....then again, you won’t lose your shirt either...but small fry winnings amounts to chump change doesn’t it, I mean after paying out other expenses and the rake on top of it...what do you think the average bankroll of a PA poster really is, for that 4% max bet kicking in....? Like to see this made a POLL Question: What is your average bankroll/ average 4% bet in real life betting....?

[v j stauffer]

Good post...Yet still puzzling...if my bankroll is $100, then my max bet will be $4....which doesn’t seem like enough dough to make any traction capital-wise.....
....so I’m thinking a bankroll of $1000 so that my max bet is $40 per bet...otherwise, what’s the point...? Because it is too little money either won or lost to amount to anything....you can’t pay any bills betting $4 a race for 3 or 4 races a card....then again, you won’t lose your shirt either...but small fry winnings amounts to chump change doesn’t it, I mean after paying out other expenses and the rake on top of it...what do you think the average bankroll of a PA poster really is, for that 4% max bet kicking in....? Like to see this made a POLL Question: What is your average bankroll/ average 4% bet in real life betting....?

Sometimes theory and reality aren't the same thing. If your bankroll is $100 you're "ONLY" playing for fun and action. If your stack is $1000 then yes a $40 bet is correct and not at all a small wager.

You must look at the long run and not only hope but expect to increase the base and therefore the average bet.

Double up over time and now you're betting $80 a race which I guarantee puts you in the top 10% of largest players. If you're playing two circuits and betting 1/3 of the races that's 6 plays or just under $500 a day which makes you a professional horse player.

Unless it's a tournament I rarely bet more than $300 a race.

You must have the discipline to never expose yourself by chasing or tilting. And more importantly YOU MUST keep your bankroll in a position to weather long slumps and not panic during them.

[thaskalos]

When I see a player betting 4% of his bankroll on a single play...then I hope, for his sake, that his bankroll is readily replaceable in the event that it is lost. Otherwise...a much greater degree of safety is recommended...IMO. This is a game where losing streaks are the rule rather than the exception...and the 4% betting unit depletes the bankroll at a rate that can frazzle the player's nerves, to the point where it may become impossible to play the game with the confidence that it demands.

The bigger the bankroll is, the harder it is to replace it...and the more necessary it becomes to treat it with the respect that it deserves. Underbetting our bankroll may not be as "adventurous" as we would like, but it allows us to function with our sanity intact...whereas OVERBETTING our bankroll is FATAL...for bankroll and sanity alike.

[v j stauffer]

When I see a player betting 4% of his bankroll on a single play...then I hope, for his sake, that his bankroll is readily replaceable in the event that it is lost. Otherwise...a much greater degree of safety is recommended...IMO. This is a game where losing streaks are the rule rather than the exception...and the 4% betting unit depletes the bankroll at a rate that can frazzle the player's nerves, to the point where it may become impossible to play the game with the confidence that it demands.

The bigger the bankroll is, the harder it is to replace...and the more necessary it becomes to treat it with the respect that it deserves. Underbetting our bankroll may not be as "adventurous" as we would like, but it allows us to function with our sanity intact...whereas OVERBETTING our bankroll is FATAL...for bankroll and sanity alike.

I like this entire post.

Totally agree with the final sentence. That's why at 4% it's probably best to stay in the win pool.

As to sizing you're 100% correct. IT IS NOT a small bet at all.

[thaskalos]

Good post...Yet still puzzling...if my bankroll is $100, then my max bet will be $4....which doesn’t seem like enough dough to make any traction capital-wise.....
....so I’m thinking a bankroll of $1000 so that my max bet is $40 per bet...otherwise, what’s the point...? Because it is too little money either won or lost to amount to anything....you can’t pay any bills betting $4 a race for 3 or 4 races a card....then again, you won’t lose your shirt either...but small fry winnings amounts to chump change doesn’t it, I mean after paying out other expenses and the rake on top of it...what do you think the average bankroll of a PA poster really is, for that 4% max bet kicking in....? Like to see this made a POLL Question: What is your average bankroll/ average 4% bet in real life betting....?

If all you can manage is a $100 bankroll to start with, then you must initially satisfy yourself with the meager profits that such a bankroll can generate. The only universal truth that I have ever discovered in this game is this: "If you can't win with a $100 bankroll...then you won't be able to win with a $10,000 bankroll either". Start with a small bankroll, and see if you can grow it over time...while paying for your racetrack expenses out of your other pocket. And the betting unit grows in accordance with the growing bankroll. Yes, growing the bankroll in such a manner will be a slow endeavor which will grate on your nerves. But the process will infuse you with a sense of confidence which will be INDISPENSABLE when those inescapable losing streaks come around. The player has to EARN the right to make large wagers...IMO.

[v j stauffer]

If all you can manage is a $100 bankroll to start with, then you must initially satisfy yourself with the meager profits that such a bankroll can generate. The only universal truth that I have ever discovered in this game is this: "If you can't win with a $100 bankroll...then you won't be able to win with a $10,000 bankroll either". Start with a small bankroll, and see if you can grow it over time...while paying for your racetrack expenses out of your other pocket. And the betting unit grows in accordance with the growing bankroll. Yes, growing the bankroll in such a manner will be a slow endeavor which will grate on your nerves. But the process will infuse you with a sense of confidence which will be INDISPENSABLE when those inescapable losing streaks come around. The player has to EARN the right to make large wagers...IMO.

Another excellent post :ThmbUp:

[VigorsTheGrey]

If all you can manage is a $100 bankroll to start with, then you must initially satisfy yourself with the meager profits that such a bankroll can generate. The only universal truth that I have ever discovered in this game is this: "If you can't win with a $100 bankroll...then you won't be able to win with a $10,000 bankroll either". Start with a small bankroll, and see if you can grow it over time...while paying for your racetrack expenses out of your other pocket. And the betting unit grows in accordance with the growing bankroll. Yes, growing the bankroll in such a manner will be a slow endeavor which will grate on your nerves. But the process will infuse you with a sense of confidence which will be INDISPENSABLE when those inescapable losing streaks come around. The player has to EARN the right to make large wagers...IMO.
I see the truth of it...thank you Thaskalos.

[groupie doll]

What I meant by that is I don't believe in shutting down the search for good bets. Just walking away.

One never knows, sometimes literally until a few minutes before post, when a must play will present itself.

A bet made three days after a bad run or three months after is still only the next bet you're making. It's either proper and excellent or it's not.

The horses and the situation have no idea when your last bet was.
Can you expound on the bolded? Not sure quite what you mean by that...and you've said it twice now, so it must be important. ;)
The break (if I take one) clears my psyche... and it does work for me.
Regarding this: A bet made three days after a bad run or three months after is still only the next bet you're making. It's either proper and excellent or it's not.

When I take a break in a "slump"... my next bet is more typically proper (and possibly excellent) vs. not. That's why I take the break to begin with. It's akin to mediating when you feel your mind is cluttered and busy and I usually have more clarity and focus post-break. And by break I mean anything from a couple of days to a couple of weeks. My breaks usually don't go much longer than that unless I'm away, swamped at work with no time, dealing with some unexpected family issue, etc.

[PaceAdvantage]

Last few posts by Vic & Thaskalos should be framed and mounted on every player's wall.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with starting small. In fact, it's absolutely required. In fact, you shouldn't even start out betting real money.

When first starting out in this game, it should be paper bets only.

You need to be brutally honest with yourself if you want to play this game with any seriousness. And that means knowing that you are a loser, until you are not.

And you don't want to be betting real money when you are a loser.

[Robert Fischer]

Winners don't go through slumps. Very rarely. You have to go by memory to think about a real slump.

It's not a slump if you lose 10, 15 in a row. All you can do is wait for the next fastball to come down the middle of your happy zone, and put a good swing on the ball. Sometimes the ball moves, or you foul it off, or you get caught. Doesn't matter. You know over the season that you will get your 30 homeruns, and your 30 doubles, maybe more.

A slump is when you aren't seeing the ball. You are making bad bets. Burning through a bankroll in a matter of days. Trying to get it all back in one play. Losing it all again in the process. Extrapolating on a long shot opinion until you are betting a mirage. Dead broke and you are making mind bets and losing incentive to keep putting in the daily work. Playing for action where you throw a few bucks on your house number or birthday just to have something going...

When you put all that behind you, it seems foreign to take a break. You know eventually you will get another fastball down the middle of your happy zone. When your game hasn't matured to that stage, you need to stop at the first sign of falling apart, take a break, come back renewed with a simplistic approach.

The $2 win game is a good learning process. If you are a competent player and you are selective with passing most races and betting your best opinions, you can last quite a while. Good way to develop discipline and patience.

[ReplayRandall]

Winners don't go through slumps. Very rarely. You have to go by memory to think about a real slump.

It's not a slump if you lose 10, 15 in a row. All you can do is wait for the next fastball to come down the middle of your happy zone, and put a good swing on the ball. Sometimes the ball moves, or you foul it off, or you get caught. Doesn't matter. You know over the season that you will get your 30 homeruns, and your 30 doubles, maybe more.

A slump is when you aren't seeing the ball. You are making bad bets. Burning through a bankroll in a matter of days. Trying to get it all back in one play. Losing it all again in the process. Extrapolating on a long shot opinion until you are betting a mirage. Dead broke and you are making mind bets and losing incentive to keep putting in the daily work. Playing for action where you throw a few bucks on your house number or birthday just to have something going...

When you put all that behind you, it seems foreign to take a break. You know eventually you will get another fastball down the middle of your happy zone. When your game hasn't matured to that stage, you need to stop at the first sign of falling apart, take a break, come back renewed with a simplistic approach.

The $2 win game is a good learning process. If you are a competent player and you are selective with passing most races and betting your best opinions, you can last quite a while. Good way to develop discipline and patience.

Realistic interpretation of what a slump looks like, destruction of bankroll by going on tilt in a relative short amount of time is the end result.

Always remember that variance is a normal part of the game, never to be confused with being in a slump, which RF addressed in first 2 paragraphs of his post.



Good opinion, RF....

[dilanesp]

Handicapping is part of it. But not the be all end all. If you feel you're seeing value with a singular horse there's nothing wrong with living in the win pool and never considering anything else.

It's the cheapest bet there is. It helps you avoid long losing streaks. And it can allow you to stick with a standard bet amount which should NEVER be more than 4% of your overall bankroll.

It's impossible to go broke making a profit.

For most players, the win pool is highly underrated. You can't make the big lifechanging score, but the takeout is usually lower and the variance is far lower.

Indeed, I disagree with that portion of Robert Fischer's post. If you play a lot of exotics, you could very well "slump" for months, because the model is long draughts punctuated by occasional huge scores.

Most players have no idea how to bet for value in the exotics anyway. You have to focus on combinations likely to be overlays.

[thaskalos]

Do the .300 hitters in baseball maintain this average during all the months of the season...or does their average fluctuate (sometimes wildly) from month to month? The concept of "averaging" is an artificial construct, created so we can make more sense of the world in which we live. We put 100 people in a room, and we say that the "average income" of the gathered crowd is $60,000 a year. And then we look closer...and we discover that NO ONE in the group makes exactly $60,000.

Likewise...the horseplayer says that his long-term winning "average" is 30%. But he forgets that this means he will score at a 15% rate during some stretches...and at a 45% clip during others. The only sure thing to be said about the world of gambling/investing, is that things will FLUCTUATE.

[thaskalos]

For most players, the win pool is highly underrated. You can't make the big lifechanging score, but the takeout is usually lower and the variance is far lower.

Indeed, I disagree with that portion of Robert Fischer's post. If you play a lot of exotics, you could very well "slump" for months, because the model is long draughts punctuated by occasional huge scores.

Most players have no idea how to bet for value in the exotics anyway. You have to focus on combinations likely to be overlays.

IMO...the exotics wagers are as popular as they are NOT because the betting crowd is in search of the "life-changing score"...but because most horseplayers lack the knowledge/conviction that it takes to reduce one's betting opinion to a single horse. People bet the exotics because that's where they find the "safety" that they think their lack of knowledge/conviction requires. If all the bettors were somehow forced to make only win-bets...then they would pass on at least 50% of the races that they normally bet on.

[ReplayRandall]

For most players, the win pool is highly underrated. You can't make the big lifechanging score, but the takeout is usually lower and the variance is far lower.

Indeed, I disagree with that portion of Robert Fischer's post. If you play a lot of exotics, you could very well "slump" for months, because the model is long draughts punctuated by occasional huge scores.

Most players have no idea how to bet for value in the exotics anyway. You have to focus on combinations likely to be overlays.


The thread topic is "Busting out of a Slump at the windows. What do you do to bust out of it?


Playing exotics for long-term profitability has a higher variance of volatility than any straight pool variance, especially pick-5-6 players. A player does not "slump" for months in this endeavor, it's simple variance of a low strike rate, and your use of "slump" doesn't answer the thread topic question anyway.....Alas, you are always entitled to your opinion, even if it's way off base.

Just stick to poker, where you actually have expertise, will ya Dilan?

[dilanesp]

The thread topic is "Busting out of a Slump at the windows. What do you do to bust out of it?


Playing exotics for long-term profitability has a higher variance of volatility than any straight pool variance, especially pick-5-6 players. A player does not "slump" for months in this endeavor, it's simple variance of a low strike rate, and your use of "slump" doesn't answer the thread topic question anyway.....Alas, you are always entitled to your opinion, even if it's way off base.

Just stick to poker, where you actually have expertise, will ya Dilan?

I think you are just using a very ideosyncratic definition of "slump" and then gratuitously insulting me for using the more common definition.

Heck, I even put "slump" in quotation marks.

[ReplayRandall]

I think you are just using a very ideosyncratic definition of "slump" and then gratuitously insulting me for using the more common definition.

Heck, I even put "slump" in quotation marks.


Crushing reply Sport, as usual....Heck, you just don't know.

[v j stauffer]

IMO...the exotics wagers are as popular as they are NOT because the betting crowd is in search of the "life-changing score"...but because most horseplayers lack the knowledge/conviction that it takes to reduce one's betting opinion to a single horse. People bet the exotics because that's where they find the "safety" that they think their lack of knowledge/conviction requires. If all the bettors were somehow forced to make only win-bets...then they would pass on at least 50% of the races that they normally bet on.

That "safety" blanket might be made of silk because it's very expensive.

[Hapman]

I like this entire post.

Totally agree with the final sentence. That's why at 4% it's probably best to stay in the win pool.

As to sizing you're 100% correct. IT IS NOT a small bet at all.

I agree, if there is one thing I've learned through this and previously playing poker is that you have to learn how to keep your bet amount lower in relation to your bankroll than you think. Especially with this game you're often going to go on longer losing streaks so even $5 bets with a $100 bankroll you'll soon start getting nervous.

What I found was say increasing to $500 bankroll but keeping your bets the same amount allows more freedom so you aren't suddenly getting nervous when you're down $75

[AndyC]

IMO...the exotics wagers are as popular as they are NOT because the betting crowd is in search of the "life-changing score"...but because most horseplayers lack the knowledge/conviction that it takes to reduce one's betting opinion to a single horse. People bet the exotics because that's where they find the "safety" that they think their lack of knowledge/conviction requires. If all the bettors were somehow forced to make only win-bets...then they would pass on at least 50% of the races that they normally bet on.

Has little to do with lack of knowledge/conviction. It's more like not wanting to wait 30 minutes between races to bet $10 on a 2-1 horse to win. Call it the excitement factor.

If a bettor is skilled/lucky enough to find an overlay they should look to exotics to get maximum leverage.

[thaskalos]

Has little to do with lack of knowledge/conviction. It's more like not wanting to wait 30 minutes between races to bet $10 on a 2-1 horse to win. Call it the excitement factor.

If a bettor is skilled/lucky enough to find an overlay they should look to exotics to get maximum leverage.

I think you are wrong. There have been many cases here when a poster will start a thread by asking the group to handicap a particular race in advance. Whenever this happens...the majority of the responders will offer an exacta or a trifecta combination as their selection...instead of a win-bet. Is this because of the "excitement factor" too?

[v j stauffer]

Has little to do with lack of knowledge/conviction. It's more like not wanting to wait 30 minutes between races to bet $10 on a 2-1 horse to win. Call it the excitement factor.

If a bettor is skilled/lucky enough to find an overlay they should look to exotics to get maximum leverage.

It better be VERY VERY MAXIMUM leverage. Because those pools cost 7% more.

If you're skilled/lucky enough to find a true overlay I see absolutely no reason to complicate the matter by adding extra horses to the equation and paying an exorbitant price to do so.

Regarding the "excitement" factor. If not wanting to wait 30 minutes is a decision making factor. Please provide the addresses of those people. I'm happy to send a stretch limo for them to come to the races.

[thaskalos]

It better be VERY VERY MAXIMUM leverage. Because those pools cost 7% more.

If you're skilled/lucky enough to find a true overlay I see absolutely no reason to complicate the matter by adding extra horses to the equation and paying an exorbitant price to do so.

Regarding the "excitement" factor. If not wanting to wait 30 minutes is a decision making factor. Please provide the addresses of those people. I'm happy to send a stretch limo for them to come to the races.

Not so fast. These players don't bet much...and won't stick around for long. Send them a bus-pass instead. :ThmbUp:

[GMB@BP]

When I see a player betting 4% of his bankroll on a single play...then I hope, for his sake, that his bankroll is readily replaceable in the event that it is lost. Otherwise...a much greater degree of safety is recommended...IMO. This is a game where losing streaks are the rule rather than the exception...and the 4% betting unit depletes the bankroll at a rate that can frazzle the player's nerves, to the point where it may become impossible to play the game with the confidence that it demands.

The bigger the bankroll is, the harder it is to replace it...and the more necessary it becomes to treat it with the respect that it deserves. Underbetting our bankroll may not be as "adventurous" as we would like, but it allows us to function with our sanity intact...whereas OVERBETTING our bankroll is FATAL...for bankroll and sanity alike.

I play in the win place pools and usually, unless I really like something, bet about 3% per wager.

I started with a small amount but have built that up.

[v j stauffer]

Not so fast. These players don't bet much...and won't stick around for long. Send them a bus-pass instead. :ThmbUp:

Maybe one of those Airport Express vans that make multiple stops. Probably most cost effective! :cool:

[v j stauffer]

I play in the win place pools and usually, unless I really like something, bet about 3% per wager.

I started with a small amount but have built that up.

Good for you. You're on the right track. You might want to consider staying strictly in the win pool.

While some bets may pay $9.00 to place. There's a lot more that come back $14.80 & $3.40.

I think you'll find that putting the entire bet into the win pool will bring a better return over time.

Takes some stones and promotes longer droughts but will ultimately serve you well.

[dilanesp]

Crushing reply Sport, as usual....Heck, you just don't know.

At least I make substantive replies. You, on the other hand, are just flinging insults.

[dilanesp]

Has little to do with lack of knowledge/conviction. It's more like not wanting to wait 30 minutes between races to bet $10 on a 2-1 horse to win. Call it the excitement factor.

If a bettor is skilled/lucky enough to find an overlay they should look to exotics to get maximum leverage.

I have seen many circumstances where a complicated exacta or trifecta bet ends up paying lower odds against the money invested than a simple win bet.

[v j stauffer]

At least I make substantive replies. You, on the other hand, are just flinging insults.

7 pages of so many good thoughts and sentiments. Please avoid the temptation of this thread going "PA" and getting closed.

[Afleet]

Last few posts by Vic & Thaskalos should be framed and mounted on every player's wall.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with starting small. In fact, it's absolutely required. In fact, you shouldn't even start out betting real money.

When first starting out in this game, it should be paper bets only.

You need to be brutally honest with yourself if you want to play this game with any seriousness. And that means knowing that you are a loser, until you are not.

And you don't want to be betting real money when you are a loser.

I agree w/this and look at the charts and replays of your paper bets and adjust accordingly

[dilanesp]

7 pages of so many good thoughts and sentiments. Please avoid the temptation of this thread going "PA" and getting closed.

Point taken Vic.

[groupie doll]

Can you expound on the bolded? Not sure quite what you mean by that...and you've said it twice now, so it must be important. ;)
The break (if I take one) clears my psyche... and it does work for me.
Regarding this: A bet made three days after a bad run or three months after is still only the next bet you're making. It's either proper and excellent or it's not.

When I take a break in a "slump"... my next bet is more typically proper (and possibly excellent) vs. not. That's why I take the break to begin with. It's akin to mediating when you feel your mind is cluttered and busy and I usually have more clarity and focus post-break. And by break I mean anything from a couple of days to a couple of weeks. My breaks usually don't go much longer than that unless I'm away, swamped at work with no time, dealing with some unexpected family issue, etc.

Hm. I was looking forward to expanding my knowledge base via a response... looks like that may not happen.

[AndyC]

I think you are wrong. There have been many cases here when a poster will start a thread by asking the group to handicap a particular race in advance. Whenever this happens...the majority of the responders will offer an exacta or a trifecta combination as their selection...instead of a win-bet. Is this because of the "excitement factor" too?

I don't read the selection threads so really can't respond to the motivations of the respondents who want to offer exacta or trifecta selections. I can only guess that picking a winner is not viewed with the same admiration as picking an exacta or trifecta. There are many people who get a bigger thrill from the admiration of others than they do cashing a ticket.

[dilanesp]

I don't read the selection threads so really can't respond to the motivations of the respondents who want to offer exacta or trifecta selections. I can only guess that picking a winner is not viewed with the same admiration as picking an exacta or trifecta. There are many people who get a bigger thrill from the admiration of others than they do cashing a ticket.

There's definitely a ton of that psychology..Let's say you identified a dead bang 3 to 5 shot whose post time odds are even money. So you chunk it in and double your money. That's an excellent pick- consistently identifying those situations will net you plenty of money. But it won't net you a lot of credit. :)

[AndyC]

It better be VERY VERY MAXIMUM leverage. Because those pools cost 7% more.

If you're skilled/lucky enough to find a true overlay I see absolutely no reason to complicate the matter by adding extra horses to the equation and paying an exorbitant price to do so.

Regarding the "excitement" factor. If not wanting to wait 30 minutes is a decision making factor. Please provide the addresses of those people. I'm happy to send a stretch limo for them to come to the races.

If you know how to leverage correctly the cost should not be a problem.

While you might not see a reason others might see a reason. It doesn't fit your style so it is perfectly logical that you would avoid the "complication". Can I assume by your "exorbitant price" comment that you have not done any research into the risk-reward of leveraging? Personally I never implemented betting strategies based on feelings or assumptions.

Grinding out win bets is not the only way to play the races successfully. Especially today when you have no idea what the odds will be until after the race has run.

[AndyC]

I have seen many circumstances where a complicated exacta or trifecta bet ends up paying lower odds against the money invested than a simple win bet.

No doubt. Leverage is not something you add blindly, there is a skill to the proper application.

[v j stauffer]

Hm. I was looking forward to expanding my knowledge base via a response... looks like that may not happen.

I'm not quite sure what you're looking for. Your previous post implies you can lose focus when on a losing streak. And that re-grouping at a later date when you gain clarity works for you.

I think that's terrific and you should follow your heart.

The genesis of this thread was busting out of a slump and practices and protocols of how to handle it.

With due respect it's about horse playing philosophy not life psychology.

[v j stauffer]

If you know how to leverage correctly the cost should not be a problem.

While you might not see a reason others might see a reason. It doesn't fit your style so it is perfectly logical that you would avoid the "complication". Can I assume by your "exorbitant price" comment that you have not done any research into the risk-reward of leveraging? Personally I never implemented betting strategies based on feelings or assumptions.

Grinding out win bets is not the only way to play the races successfully. Especially today when you have no idea what the odds will be until after the race has run.

We all must do what works best for us. I'm not that smart so any chance at simplicity is welcomed.

[Robert Fischer]

Looked over this year's plays, and I'm surprised to see how poorly my exactas are performing. Awful. Loss.

Win and Double wagers are doing about as well as I can hope for, with no real outliers. Doubles are obviously more complex than win, but I happen to use them to attack pretty much the same angles, depending on how they suit the situation.

P3's are pretty bad other than stakes days, and I had an outlier score in that situation making a poor everyday wager for me look better than it has been.

Most of my trifectas are doing terrible, with the majority of hits coming within a certain angle. Going to focus only on that angle with my trifectas for a while.

Superfectas were surprisingly bad. I don't play a ton of superfectas, but I think the 30cents I had on the Belmont Super (Just/Gronk/?/Vino) was my ONLY hit of the year. That actually put me up maybe $10 for the year total on the wager's stats, but it shows me that I actually suck at superfectas.


Pick-6? comical, I've only played 3 of them. Couple were lotto style totaling $2.20, and the 3rd P6 was a $537.00 investment that won and paid $41.04! (Preakness day chalk fest to axman and Justify...). I had better stick to extending my doubles into Pick-3s before leapfrogging into the Pick-6 pools...

[Dave Schwartz]

With due respect it's about horse playing philosophy not life psychology.

What he said!

I'm usually very consistent such that losing weeks are rare. (Playing a large number of races helps that consistency.)

My experience is that when I show a net loss over a week or more it is usually because something has changed in the game that has a direct impact on how my system works.

That causes me to to question whether or not my approach is still working as it did. (So, I stopped playing.)

Such was the case this year. I experienced some early losers and stepped back to verify how well my own approach was working. The answer was, that it wasn't.

Interestingly, the individual factor/object hit rates had not changed very much - not much more than the normal downward slide of return for the better horses.

But something has changed this year.

Whales retool in the winter and, assuming it works out (for them), the game may see a change during February.

Such appears to be the case this year. I've found that my winners are being bet down more than ever relative to my projected odds. This just killed my profitability.

Fortunately, I pulled the plug very early on.

So, I've spent the last 4 months working on retooling my own system. It is finally coming together, but not without some very drastic changes to my game.

About the original poster's question...
I think most players do not expect to win long term and so the definition is really not about a "losing streak" as much as it is "getting slaughtered."

For the record, that is what happened to me: I got slaughtered for slightly over a week. That simply doesn't happen to me. I mean, I may lose, but when my hit rate drops by 20 points over 150-200 races , I know that something isn't right. It just doesn't "feel right."

I think that the logical question to ask when facing a protracted losing streak is, "Is my approach still valid today?"

If you're playing 10-20 races a week, you won't know for 2 months.

BTW, my experience in the "Age of Whales" is that it never changes back.


Dave

[sjk]

I have seen my results degrade seasonally for the last 5 or 6 years at least. The first quarter has been very strong and the second quarter has had negative returns.

I don't see that it would be the whales retooling if it happens year after year. It could be something seasonal that goes completely over my head or the selection of tracks available.

When I haven't cashed a decent winner in a month I certainly play on fewer days and it doesn't take much for me to lose interest early in the day.

Having faith in what I am doing and enjoying the time spent all I can do is hang in there and wait for things to turn around. It is certainly more fun when it is going well.

[Maximillion]

I have seen my results degrade seasonally for the last 5 or 6 years at least. The first quarter has been very strong and the second quarter has had negative returns.

I don't see that it would be the whales retooling if it happens year after year. It could be something seasonal that goes completely over my head or the selection of tracks available.

When I haven't cashed a decent winner in a month I certainly play on fewer days and it doesn't take much for me to lose interest early in the day.

Having faith in what I am doing and enjoying the time spent all I can do is hang in there and wait for things to turn around. It is certainly more fun when it is going well.

sjk,could more turf racing in that period have anything to do with it?

[groupie doll]

With due respect it's about horse playing philosophy not life psychology.
The two are intertwined, as with most other things in life... imho.
Fair enough though, thanks. If we disagree on that general conceptualization, then I can see why you didn't respond previously.

[sjk]

I have always passed on turf races since I have never tried to understand them. That definitely makes the playable races fewer and farther between during the warmer months and makes the down cycles drag out over time.

[martini]

This is an interesting thread. I'm a small player; I play mostly weekends except the summer, and I started playing in 2010. I've had more losing years than winning ones. A couple of my losing years would have been winning ones if takeout was closer to 12% than 20+%. I play exactas and dime supers, with win bets if I'm using contenders on those tickets at a nice price.

I don't bet much per year. The most I pushed through the tote in a year was $7K, which I know some of you guys do in a day (or race) easily. I still take handicapping and ticket construction very seriously. My contender selection has gotten better with a couple of Dave Schwartz's seminars that I've bought, and I've been able to tighten up my game a bit after I could see how I was doing in that regard. I still revisit those tools.

Here's the thing: in the the years that I've been profitable, including this year so far ($1 ROI of +0.38) it has always been a handful of good scores that account for a fairly large percentage of my winnings. I've had long droughts playing superfectas, but I still play them because even though they are typically low-strike bets for me, they tend to be high ROI bets for me. I seldom think much about losing streaks.

I'll just throw this out: are any of you less concerned about losing streaks, because you tend to make most of your profits annually on a handful of good scores? Does anyone here grind daily, making small collective gains, and end up having a good year?