Wagering wisely without toteboard watching

[mcikey01]

In an old thread (#2828) the following comments were made concerning filters that assist handicappers in pointing out probable overlays without waiting for confirmation from the tote board that a horse is an overlay:.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rick

02-21-2004, 06:21 PM

My current method is to eliminate both the morning line favorite and the horse with the highest last race speed rating. You might find that a worthwhile filter if your method doesn't depend too much on recent races.

Jeff P

02-21-2004, 07:47 PM

One good filter that I use- as it applies to my own selections- is to simply throw out horses with morning lines of 9-2 and lower. This just about always includes the morning line favorite.

Another filter that I use- again, applying it just to my own selections- is to simply throw out horses that finished 1st 2nd 3rd and sometimes 4th in their most recent starts. This just about always incudes the horse with the highest figure (Beyer or otherwise) in its most recent start.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thnaks Rick and Jeff for those suggestions

I have good confidence in my odds line but can't wait all day on weekends (or during the workweek) for the toteboard to say "Go" on my potential overlays.

Any other filters or methods that folks have used with success in their own handicapping approach that make for successful "advance" overlay wagers (i guess one could call these "Automatic or "Semi-Automatic" Overlays) without dependence on toteboard watching?

[BillW]

I'm guessing that each track should be treated seperately. I do know that M/L's vary wildly in their accuracy, and I'm not sure if one set of rules can be applied to all.This is just a gut feel on my part, but certainly something to confirm or deny.

[twindouble]

In an old thread (#2828) the following comments were made concerning filters that assist handicappers in pointing out probable overlays without waiting for confirmation from the tote board that a horse is an overlay:.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rick

02-21-2004, 06:21 PM

My current method is to eliminate both the morning line favorite and the horse with the highest last race speed rating. You might find that a worthwhile filter if your method doesn't depend too much on recent races.

Jeff P

02-21-2004, 07:47 PM

One good filter that I use- as it applies to my own selections- is to simply throw out horses with morning lines of 9-2 and lower. This just about always includes the morning line favorite.

Another filter that I use- again, applying it just to my own selections- is to simply throw out horses that finished 1st 2nd 3rd and sometimes 4th in their most recent starts. This just about always incudes the horse with the highest figure (Beyer or otherwise) in its most recent start.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thnaks Rick and Jeff for those suggestions

I have good confidence in my odds line but can't wait all day on weekends (or during the workweek) for the toteboard to say "Go" on my potential overlays.

Any other filters or methods that folks have used with success in their own handicapping approach that make for successful "advance" overlay wagers (i guess one could call these "Automatic or "Semi-Automatic" Overlays) without dependence on toteboard watching?

mciekey; Why not just read the DRF, pick your own horses and bet the suckers even if their 2 or 3-1, better yet if they are 60-1 or more. Anyone who just tosses the chalk because he's chalk isn't handicapping or weighing the potential to make money.

Then there's the sheets, computer programs to do you handicapping for you and you'll more than likely become a winner over night. Heck they even had a some magic oil durning the gold rush that you put all over your body, stand in the river and the gold would stick to you. ( just a tool.)

Good luck,

T.D.

[mcikey01]

mciekey; Why not just read the DRF, pick your own horses and bet the suckers even if their 2 or 3-1, better yet if they are 60-1 or more. Anyone who just tosses the chalk because he's chalk isn't handicapping or weighing the potential to make money.

Then there's the sheets, computer programs to do you handicapping for you and you'll more than likely become a winner over night. Heck they even had a some magic oil durning the gold rush that you put all over your body, stand in the river and the gold would stick to you. ( just a tool.)

Good luck,

T.D.

__________________________________________________ _________________________

Thanks, T.D.

I glad you u made me realize the errors of my ways.

I thought I was posting a sincere query to elicit fresh ideas on filters to narrow the field to decent percentage contenders with high likelihood of being overlays.

Now I see that all I was doing was soliciting offers from the general public to treat me like a fire hydrant stoically awaiting a canine's golden shower.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Some member on some old post gave data on typical odds lines at various tracks but I can't wait all day to find it, but you can.
Unless you can bet 5 minutes after everyone else so you can see the final odds, it is a guess; watching the toteboard just makes it a closer guess as to the degree of value your bet has.
The only way I really know around that is to build in enough profit in your system(s) so you don't have to worry about the final odds.
The only other "filter" I know of is that low odds horses get bet down more ths last few minutes, especially if the horse's last race looks good, so I assume that horse's odds will drop 10-25% within the 30 minutes.

[NoDayJob]

You might try to develop an algorithm comparing past odds to the present morning line odds to know if your selection will be a true overlay.

NDJ

[mhrussell]

It’s essential that you ‘handicap the public’ to have a good idea how the public will bet a given race so that your overlays/value bets are expected and don’t come as a surprise. After all, the public is in essence you opponent in all of this. In theory, this is what the ML is supposed to be: an estimate of how the public will actually bet the race without any opinion given as to a horses actual chances in the race. But as we all know, the ML is often way out of whack when compared to the actual post time odds...particularly on the extreme ends of the odds range.

How can we be proactive in our handicapping and get around this and without needing to spend gobs of time watching the toteboard and endlessly re-evaluating our potential bets?

I have found a simple numerical approach based on the HM “Soft Focus” method which works very well in identifying and determining actual post time odds on favorites, mid-priced and long price horses. The method basically is as follows:

For each of the four “Soft Focus” categories ( SPEED, CLASS, FORM and CONNECTIONS) I assign a point score (0 to 8 points) to each category for each horse.
I then sum the points in all four soft focus categories for each horse and that score becomes the total soft focus score for that horse. The ratio of the soft focus scores for each horse to the sum of all of the soft focus scores for all horses in a race is used to calculate my “expected line”; in essence my own “morning line”. This is not a 100% oddsline but requires the user to enter the win pool % takeout (based on the track you are playing) and then the expected line is calculated proportionally to that (118% line or whatever…)

I have logic in my Excel VB code that assigns the point scores (0-8) based on who has the best recent speed figures in the race, class drops, close up finishes and trainer/jockey win % ( current meet or current/last years records.. whichever makes the most sense). But it doesn’t take much time to do this by hand either as part of your normal handicapping (with a spreadsheet) as you are going through your PPs.

By and large this method works much better than relying on the ML and can be used to more confidently “bet early” with much less stress. Does this work all the time? No… but more often than not and also it turns out to be a great tool to identify those “too good to be true” situations that you need to avoid like the plague… where a horse you figure the public to bet at 5-1 is now 50-1 on the board! With this soft focus method, you automatically will never find yourself betting into those ‘false overlay’ situations.

best,

[andicap]

Matt,

solid post but maybe you should explain briefly what "soft focus" is for those who haven't read Handicapping Magic.

Handicapping the public is one of the most underutilized tools you can use.

You can also see which horses are getting bet that look bad on paper. I would then corrolate the trainers of those horses with how they do.
Which ones get bet down lower than their "expected odds" and how do they do when that happens? Is that "smart" money so smart?

One problem with that method, however, is it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy with some trainers. For example, Dutrow in NY is always bet so how do take THAT into account?

[twindouble]

"Now I see that all I was doing was soliciting offers from the general public to treat me like a fire hydrant stoically awaiting a canine's golden shower."


Sorry you took it that way but I must give you credit for your responce, it did make me laugh.

Besides what the heck do I know, I've been loosing at the horses for 44 years now, I'm freaking loaded with dough and I can't wait until tomorrow to give it to those that have all the important and necessary stats to win. Just unbeatable.


Good luck,

T.D.

[kingfin66]

Don't worry about twindouble's response. I think he is much better than that response made him out to be. I agree, your response was funny.

As for your question, I think hmrussell hit it right on the nose. Handicap the public. You won't always be right, but estimating how you think the public will bet is the key. I am in the same predicament as you when it comes to making bets. Work and family commitments make it so that I sometimes have to bet early - very early. Many members here would scoff at this and tell you that it is better to not bet if you can't watch the toteboard and bet near post time. If I'm being honest, I would have to say those people are right.

[NoDayJob]

Win a high enough percentage of your races at decent odds and you could care less what the "ironman" says.

NDJ

[hurrikane]

I bet every day of he week and never see a toteboard.

as for he snyde comments. I don't know. Why don't you try it before you start firing bullets. Both of these guys are damn good at what they do and if you were smart you would look closely at what they are saying.

MHO.

[mcikey01]

.........By and large this method works much better than relying on the ML and can be used to more confidently “bet early” with much less stress. Does this work all the time? No… but more often than not and also it turns out to be a great tool to identify those “too good to be true” situations that you need to avoid like the plague… where a horse you figure the public to bet at 5-1 is now 50-1 on the board! With this soft focus method, you automatically will never find yourself betting into those ‘false overlay’ situations.

best,

Let me explain how I make a power number for each horse and then peform a probability projection (using a 125% line to account for take-out and breakge) for each horse in the field.

--First, I create an indexed score for each horse in the individual areas of speed/pace, competitiveness, performance reliability, race recency and jockey/trainer/owner statistics.
--Second, these individal scores are then weighted and combined to form the "power" number for each horse in a race.
--Third, these "power" numbers are then transformed into a "relative power" rating that falls wihtin a scale between .01 (for a horse with the lowest theoretical power rating) and .99 (for a horse with the highest theoretical power rating).
--Fourth, each horse's relative power rating for the race is then used to calculate an estimated probability based on its share of the total relative power ratings for all horses in that race.

MHR,....Is my methodolgy creating probability projections or a projected public line or both?

Also, here's where I lost you MHR..... How does the "Soft Focus" method identify potential false overlays? You mentioned a prospective 5-1 toteboard horse(based on your soft focus oddsline) and then say it goes end up at 50-1 on the toteboard final odds? How does the method specifically point out these horses to be falso overlays?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

andicap,

Like your idea of examining "underperforming" horses and would extend it to "overperforming " horse.

I am pretty keen on the using the actual vs expected win (A/E) ratio for each horse as a measure to judge underperfomance and overperformance. Limited # of PP lines compromise its effectiveness somewhat, (a 20 race history or more would be better, 30 or more races, if they exist, even better) but on the other then our general focus shoul be on the more recent form cycle to see if a horse outruns its odds or not.

Naturally, this uses posttime odds but if a probability estimate method pretty much parallels public betting, maintaining ones' own More insights please large historical data set of odds related PP's inclusive of your own projected odds for each horse is less of an issue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks again for everyone's replies.....Hope this thread keeps going for a while.

[nobeyerspls]

I handicap early in the morning after pouring coffee through my ears so my brain can work. I'll look at three or for tracks and come up with a dozen or so longshot plays, discarding about 75% of the races.
Once at the track (I don't bet over the Internet) the only thing to change my mind will be the track conditions if they have changed or the appearance of one of my selections in the paddock. The tote board is the collective wisdom of all those betting the race. They collectively find the false favorite 70% of the time. My local track is easier now because there are quite a few jockey players. I know that the top two riders will attract a lot of money so all I need to do is find the live horse that will beat them.
Insider knowledge and the betting that flows from it is over rated. When I owned and raced I knew all there was to know about my horse but nothing about the others except what is available in the form. We often beat horses that we thought would be tough and ran behind some others that looked easy.

[kingfin66]

My local track is easier now because there are quite a few jockey players. I know that the top two riders will attract a lot of money so all I need to do is find the live horse that will beat them.

Don't you just love this? Happens everywhere and creates overlays!

Insider knowledge and the betting that flows from it is over rated.

I agree with this and would add that the indicences of crooked trainers drugging horses is also overrated. Sure it is very real - it happens - but I believe that most trainers are on the up and up.

Welcome to the board. You can't go wrong with a board name like nobeyerspls.

[mcikey01]

[QUOTE=mcikey01
.....Naturally, this uses posttime odds but if a probability estimate method pretty much parallels public betting, maintaining ones' own More insights please large historical data set of odds related PP's inclusive of your own projected odds for each horse is less of an issue.
]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --

Hmmmmm.....I knew if i kept trying to transcribe my thoughts, something nonsensical was fated to emerge.

I think this is what i meant:

"Naturally, this uses posttime odds.But if a probability estimate method pretty much parallels public betting, maintaining ones' own large historical data set of odds related PP's (inclusive of your own projected odds for each horse) is less of an issue."

Now that's better....clearer,at least, even if not more convincing.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --

Doesn't "Soft Focus" by HM sound like a new line of cosmetics or contact lenses, or a dubious self-improvement strategy to subtly seduce reluctant dates.

[OverlayHunter]

MHRussell,

I can see how to approach 3 of the criteria of your "soft focus" line but, regarding the connections, that seems a much more difficult and imprecise task.

Can you share some thoughts on that?

Thanks,

OH

[JackS]

If your handicapping can produce a reasonable winning number of favorites, mid- price and longshots, try this. When you enter the track avoid the track program. Using the DRF, handicap and bet one race ahead of the race that is about to be run. Don't allow yourself to look at the DRF selections since this also has too much in common with the ML.
When the race that you bet arrives, now you start your second tier of possible bets based on tote odds or your 2nd, 3rd, 4th and even your 1st if the odds are there.
Run a ledger for a month- Did your number-one choice and automatic bet out-perform the 2nd tiers? Once you know you can go either way depending on profits and not on number of races won.

[joeyspicks]

GOOD THREAD. Made me think. I handicap and know my plays hours before
I actually bet. Very seldom do the odds change my mind and yet I feel almost

"undressed".....IF......... I dont see the odds before I play.......weird really:lol:

[kenwoodallpromos]

"I agree with this and would add that the indicences of crooked trainers drugging horses is also overrated."
Besides, if all the trainers in a race were crooked you would be back to square 1 and would still have to handicapp!LOL!! :bang:

[mhrussell]

--Fourth, each horse's relative power rating for the race is then used to calculate an estimated probability based on its share of the total relative power ratings for all horses in that race.

MHR,....Is my methodolgy creating probability projections or a projected public line or both?

Also, here's where I lost you MHR..... How does the "Soft Focus" method identify potential false overlays? You mentioned a prospective 5-1 toteboard horse(based on your soft focus oddsline) and then say it goes end up at 50-1 on the toteboard final odds? How does the method specifically point out these horses to be falso overlays

Mcikey01-

I think you are trying to do both... and I think you want to separate the two. Your power ratings should be based on a 100% oddsline as that is final result of your handicapping. It's got nothing to do with the ML... this is your estimate of a horses chances in the race and should be based on a 100% line. You can then construct something related to this, even using some of your same parameters to estimate how the public will bet the race; then take some kind of ratio between the two oddslines to determine value. This you would use in your betting decisions.

As far as the soft focus question; if you expect the public to bet a horse at 5-1 based on the information the public uses to bet... (the pps' form, speed class connections) and for some reason the horse is 50-1 you have to ask yourself why? Did you miss something about one of the other horses that the public would just love... or else is there a reason this horse is 50-1 and not 5-1? Usually there is and we need not know exactly why because the price tells the story. There is something wrong with the horse!

As far as overlays go, Eric L. always used to pose this question: "Why am I the lucky one?". Why is this horse so wonderful AND it's 50-1 on the board? If you can answer that question... then great! You have a wonderful bet. If not, then run, do not walk away from the betting window!

[twindouble]

mhrussell;

With all due respect, I just don't get it. For the life of me, I can't understand how all these mathematical probabilities have anything to do with handicapping a race or wagering. I'm not talking just what you posted here, I'm also including all the other extreme formulas that are touted in the form of handicapping software.

I settled in my mind many years ago the public including the odds makers, touts, along with the wise guys ultimately have nothing to do with my success at the track. When it comes to value, I just hope that the majority including the above don't see what I see in a given race or horse, if they do there's nothing I can do about it. I'll still weigh the potential to make money be it in the picks, flat bets, exacta's or the other gimmicks. One can't assume that everyone out there is dummy and just there to throw their money in your direction, after all just look at the percentage the chalks are in the money. I wouldn't waste one minute of my time on the morning line or tring to determin what the final odds will be, esp today. I just take what's in front of me and go from there.

I'll give you two examples of how the public including the odds makers and two handicappers standing alone can be so far apart. I got to OTB one day for the last race race at Belmont, had a full day of work and no time to handicap. When I walked in my brother in-law came up to me and asked if had anything good because he was having a bad day, good handicapper but on a loosing streak. I said no but lets go outside and look at the 9th, after about 10 min or so kicking the race around I said to him, " I got the winner but we'll be lucky to get 2-1 on the horse and here's the others I would put with him in the gimmicks and he quickly agreed with the others. With 4 or 5 min to go we walked back in, he looked at the board turned and said, "your winner is 19-1." I made some strong wagers and he emptied his pockets. After the race he danced around for about 5 min, can't count the number of times he slapped me on the back and pushed my head around. I know this isn't any fantastic feat, it's just one day playing the horses and most people can have good days and bad days at the track, some even better. The war room handicappers here have come up better horses but I sense they didn't capitalize on them as we did that day.

Then there's the other extreme, you think you've come up with something good, your excited and can't wait for the race to come up. Loaded for bear, what you thought would be a $10 or $12 horse is 3-2 and dropping as they load in the gate. Spirit somewhat dampended because your big play for the day is exorobed by the public, they aren't as dumb as you might think. So you roll with it and get on to the next race or next day.

In spite of that, I'm not going to analyze what the public or odds makers next move is going to be from race to race day after day. I just don't care what they think. There's to many other more important handicapping factors to concider and they effect the bottom line more than the movement of tote board.

I wouldn't discount the idea that one could make some money by consensus but there's not a handicapper out there worth his or her salt that wouldn't pefer to do it on their own. No different than letting others manage your money.

Good Luck,

T.D.