What should I read next?

[rngrq]

Been basicaly lurking around and learning a lot from this site. I'm fairly new to this and am slowly getting confused with all the info out there. I just finished reading Brad Free's Handicapping 101, and have Davidowitz's Betting Thoroughbreds, Beyer's Picking Winners, and Scatoni/Fornatale's Six Secrets of Successful Bettors. I thought Free's book was pretty good but I'll have to read again because I'm not sure I fully understood all the concepts. I've gone through the first few chapters of both Beyer's and Davidowitz's book and just confused myself. Need some help getting pointed in the right direction. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

[headhawg]

mgrq,

You might want to read this recent thread:

http://paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20915

My recommendations are (in no particular order): Modern Pace Handicapping (Brohamer), Commonsense Handicapping and Winning Thoroughbred Strategies (Mitchell), Money Secrets at the Racetrack (Meadow), Winner's File (Kuck), Thoroughbred Cycles (Cramer), and the good handicapping threads on this board. Excellent 'cappers here. :)

I've gotten a lot out of the Blog and archived items about pace at Randy Giles' site www.paceappraiser.com.

Good luck.

HH

[AQUEBUCKS]

If you participate in this forum, I, (as would many) suggest "Modern Pace Handicapping" by Tom Brohammer.

Aquebucks

[Dave Schwartz]

Dr. William QUirin's 1979 book, WInning at the Races is a must-read in my opinion.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[JimG]

What topic do you want to read about? Pace, Class , Form, Energy, Jockey/Trainers, Computer capping, money management, figs, value, ?

I suggest using the search key here on Pace Advantage and read to your heart's content. In my opinion, some of the best ideas are right here on this board.

Jim

[rngrq]

I appreciate all the replies. Again, I'm basically a newbie, and am trying to learn as much as I can from this forum. Just getting frustrated with trying to assimilate all the info. Biggest hang-up right now (after reading Handicaping 101) is after analyzing pace, form, etc. how do you turn that information into a worthwhile bet at the window? I'm about to post another related topic in the "General Handicapping" section is about past performance charts: which one to use?

[Overlay]

Dick Mitchell's Commonsense Betting (in addition to his Commonsense Handicapping and Winning Thoroughbred Strategies, which were mentioned earlier). I also heartily second Dave Schwartz's recommendation of Quirin's Winning at the Races.

[QuarterCrack]

Any of Joe Takach's books about physicality would be a good choice, IMO.

[Achilles]

Quirin's Winning at the Races would be my first choice. You'll come back to it again and again as your handicapping skills develop. You will also be able to develop a method of analysis by using his Early Speed Points and combining them with Brohamer's E/S/P running styles.

You'll need to make a decision sometime about whether to use a computer, and to what extent. This forum is the best place to find out that kind of info. Dig into the archives. ;) Good luck.

P.S. You need to do some self-analysis too. Do you need to understand a race completely before you bet it (and bet fewer races), or do you want to use a minimal number of handicapping factors and apply yourself more more intesively to wagering decisions spread across many races? On this board you'll find 1-2 minute handicappers who bet 20 to ?? races a day and those who spend an hour on analyzing one or two races.

[Tom]

Steve Davidowitz's book Betting Thoroughbreds is a good read.

[dav4463]

Steve Fierro's "Four Quarters of Horse Investing" and Barry Meadows "Money Secrets at the Racetrack" so you will know what you are up against.

[The Judge]

Quinn's "Handicappers Condition Book". I loved the original it really gave an understanding of how certain races are written up to favor a certain type of horse. Quinn himself stated an a Handicapping Expo that he didn't feel his book was as relavent today as in the past. I say it's needed reading for any new handicapper.

[kingfin66]

You have already checked out Davidowitz and Beyer. This is good. Davidowitz's book is an excellent overview of horse racing, while Beyer's book gives the theory behind figures. Both touch on pace. To get a good handle on the fundamentals, look for a book that specializes in each. For example:

Pace - Pace Makes the Race (Schmidt, Hambleton, Pizzolla)

Speed - Beyer

Betting Theory - Money Secrets at the Racetrack

The other thing I would strongly suggest is that you study and learn how to handicap each type of race one at a time. You will find that they are not all created equal. You could start with maiden races and work for there, or maybe you like races on the grass better, so start there. You can ask questions of people. For example, I have always avoided turf sprints, but have resolved to learn how to handicap them. The natural place for me to go was Pace Advantage. So, I posted a thread called Turf Sprints and basically put out a call to the handicappers here to lend me their insights into these races. Somebody else did that for maiden races. There is truly a wealth of knowledge available right here at PA.

Good luck.

[sparkywowo]

I wouldn't read any more books for the time being, but would suggest you pick a track and follow it.

1) Pick a track you have some interest in.
2) Learn how to use your preferred set of past performances.
3) Save the daily charts from that track and learn how to analyze them to make your own speed and pace figures.
4) Pick at least one day a week you will handicap and watch the races, make it the same day of the week each week. Pay attention to all the horse as best you can in the paddock, post parade, and race itself.**
5) Learn something about how the track plays with regards to speed horses and closers. Learn for your track which speed horses can win and which can't, and which closers can win and which can't. Learn how a fast track and sloppy track affect peformance for your track.
6) Learn which trainers and jockeys are competent and which aren't. Which trainers run a horse forever at the wrong class level? Which jockeys are punctual and bring home the chalk, which are impatient and move too wide or too soon? Which never win on closers?
7) Learn where the good shippers come from and where the weak shippers come from.
8) Learn to make a simple odds line and determine what kind of wager offers the best value and suits your temperment and bankroll in any given situation: is it one horse to win, a 2 horse exacta box, a pick 3 with two wide open legs...? Be able to read the tote board quickly and make a decision on how to play the race. Get a feeling for when a 5-2 shot at ten minutes to post is going to wind up 7-5 or 3-1.

Try to go one step at a time on the list, and use the books you already have as references. As you start to get some experience working with entire race cards, you will see which races you understand and which you don't. But, it will take some time. Once you start to see the same horses again and again you will pick up on how well a particular horse actually runs. One of the biggest problems people have is overemphasizing a horse's finish position in its last race. If the horse won it should win again, no? If the horse finished 5th how can it possibly win today? etc...

**Probably the first skill you should learn, and this is mentioned in Davidowitz's book, is how to assess the race as the horses exit the turn. Once you can see for yourself that the leader is about to cave in or draw off you will have taken a big first step.

[midnight]

I disagree with buying any more books.

Re-read and study Free's book until you fully understand it. If you try to move on to advanced or specialized topics before you understand the fundamentals, you'll only get more confused.

Once you understand Free's book, you should try to grasp the stuff in Davdiowitz's book. Once you get that down, get to understand the concepts behind "Six Secrets". After that, you might want to try "Winning at the Races" by Quirin, as Dave Schwarts suggested.

What you need to understand about learning from books is that they often have contradictory information. One book says speed is the way to go, another says pace is. A third says weight is meaningless, and a fourth says it's all important. The general strategy to reading handicapping books is to take everything with a grain of salt and learn from all the different viewpoints and perspectives, deciding for yourself what works for you.

[Overlay]

What you need to understand about learning from books is that they often have contradictory information. One book says speed is the way to go, another says pace is. A third says weight is meaningless, and a fourth says it's all important. The general strategy to reading handicapping books is to take everything with a grain of salt and learn from all the different viewpoints and perspectives, deciding for yourself what works for you.

Like you, I always filter written information through my own judgment and experience, and try to find something of value in any title, or to add my own improvised modifciations to them. But the contradiction and confusion you point out are the main reasons I prefer statistically-oriented books such as those by Quirin and Michael Nunamaker. Although it's surely possible for any author to quote isolated figures to support a given point of view, the comprehensive and largely consistent findings of these types of studies provide a firm basis for judging the validity of the general statments or claims made by other authors who don't have any supporting data for their opinions. And more importantly, in my view, they provide a means of determining the presence of value before wagering through the development of fair odds, rather than betting on individual angles that may have been profitable at one time (and which may even still be good at predicting performance, such as Beyer speed figures), but which no longer have a positive return due to overplay, or to being the only variable that many bettors look at.

[JustRalph]

The Equisim User's Guide! :eek:

[Hosshead]

... the contradiction and confusion you point out are the main reasons I prefer statistically-oriented books such as those by Quirin and Michael Nunamaker.... ... Although it's surely possible for any author to quote isolated figures to support a given point of view,.....

I like those type of books too, but they're few and far between.
And most (but not all) authors, as you say, use isolated stats to support their theory.
You can prove almost anything using just a few well selected stats.
Everybody (author) has an opinion or theory, but practically nobody can, or will, take the time to back it up with honest statistics.

If they were to do all the work (and thats a lot) to gather the right stats, they might find their view,angle, or theory just doesn't pan out. Then what? All that work for nothing ! They'd have to scrap their own ideas/angles/theorys/opinions. And worse yet...Money.... that (many) handicappers will pay for ANY Undocumented drivel .
What ? Never !! Just leave the stats (reality) to the poor buyer. And never let Truth get in the way of profits !! (Motto of RPM )

Meanwhile, we handicappers will leap to snap up anything that lands on the surface of that information river. Like hungry trout, as fall approaches.
Please pass me the salt and that bowl of worms. Thanks !!

[JackS]

You've read some of the weighty books, now might be the time for you to put pen to paper.
If you have grasped just a small amount of knowledge your early attempts at speed and pace figures that you make yourself might surprise you.
Buy the DRF and to the best of your ability, handicap all races for that day. Exclude all mdn races in which there are numerous first time starters.
You will eventually have to do this so might as well start now.
If your figures fail you miserably, re-read and make adjustments to your methods until you have the confidence to make a few bets.
Quinn or Quirin published a book named The ABC's of Thorobred habdicapping. The title sounds simplistic but contains many valuable lessons that any handicapper would appreciate. The book also contains Q&A's that will measure your comprehension of the basics and the not so basics. Good luck.

[Tote Master]

There have been a few threads that I might have commented on since I last posted on PA, but this one I just couldn’t resist!

As I’ve mentioned before, I no longer use the DRF or any other PP source. In fact I’ve given up on the traditional handicapping approach entirely. I think that using some of those methods can certainly provide some analytical and mental exercises that can be self-fulfilling and even boost one’s ego from time to time. It does not necessarily provide the consistent monetary rewards that you would expect for the amount time and effort spent. In fact, more often then not, most players using the traditional methods (derived from all that literature) do not reap any long-term benefits at all!

I know my next statement will probably seem like blasphemy to most (especially on this forum), but I’ve come to the overwhelming conclusion that ALL of the handicapping books and literature written over the years by the likes of Beyers, Brohammer, Quirnin, and all the others alike have basically brainwashed generations of the majority of horseplayers. (Myself nearly included)

So you’re saying to yourself, “Where does this guy get off talking like that about those so-called great handicapping gurus?” Well, I opened my first DRF or “tele” as they used to call it back in 1971 (the DRF was once named the Morning Telegraph). That was the year Canonero II shocked the racing world winning both the Derby and Preakness. It was during one of my 2 hour gaps between college classes, that a fellow student introduced me to the world of horse racing. He interpreted everything the Form had to offer based upon the lessons taught him by a seasoned player, his uncle. Since then and until a few years ago, I had read and used every type of seemingly valid approach to this game in order to reap "greater" rewards for all my efforts. I even wrote my first handicapping program in Basic back in the early 80’s on an Atari computer. Sure, I could make educated guesses with the best of them, but in the end that’s they really were.

There’s an awful lot of time and effort that goes into learning how to properly decipher the PP’s and becoming an astute handicapper, but even the best don’t know when they’re really trying. If they did they’d all be rich. Based on what I know now, I would have given up on the traditional handicapping a long time ago. But that’s what works for me.

I’ve come to understand and respect the fact that the foundation to this entire game is based on money, and money alone. The racetracks and their staff provide the facilities and the purses (from their takeout), the connections (owners, trainers and jockeys) put on the show, and the bettors pay for it all. Unfortunately the majority of players believe that they’re just betting against one another. Most of the sharp players know that those with the best, most current information will certainly have an edge. Little do they realize that very often they’re also betting against those who are putting on the show! So who really has the edge? Just picture yourself playing a serious game of poker. How would you feel knowing that one of the players knew everyone else’s hand? (their interpretations of the PP’s based on all that literature). In the meantime, this player knows exactly when to bet, because the intended results are already in place and literally put into motion. Its not “race fixing” by any means, its simply who’s trying to win today and who’s not. Ask any guru if they know that answer? No, they’ll typically tell you after the race, that the reason the fastest horse in the best condition didn’t win today was because it “bounced”. Now there’s one for the books!

Please don’t think that the “people putting on the show” are surviving in this game by winning just the purse monies! When the “sport of kings” first started, it was all about the connections (the royalty) betting against one another. Of course there must have been lots of side betting going on too.

So what’s changed? Well, today I believe there are basically ( 3 ) types of racing stables. I categorize these owners into the following “W” groups: the Wealthy, the Write-off and the Wagering.
The “Wealthy” run their expensively bred animals in all of the major stakes races as ego fulfilling social events. (Of course they enjoy the winning and prestige, but they may not even wager at all).
The “Write-off’s” are usually groups or syndicates that use their involvement in horse racing as just that: A tax write-off. Keep in mind that owning horses is considered farming by the government tax standards. So they could care less about whether or not they win or lose.
The “Wagering” are those that make up the majority of owners, who fill most of the race cards at every track. These people bet on their charges (and others) in order to survive in this game, and it’s no surprise considering the costs of keeping an animal in proper training and care.

Ever wonder why that long shot that looked so horrible on paper (and probably shouldn’t even be in the race according to the guru’s standards) beats out the supposedly best animals in the race? Well, I believe it all comes down to one thing: Intentions. How do we measure those intentions? In this game it’s with money, of course. My philosophy is now, that if those who are really in the know aren’t betting, then why should I?

So what do I use? You got it! The only up to the minute source of the actual betting information, the tote board. It speaks volumes, but much like the DRF it must be interpreted well beyond looking at just the odds. By the way, you won’t find much information about the tote board or its activities in any of that handicapping literature either. (I always wondered why?) So I say, let the books, the software, the databases and everything else related to the traditional approach to this game continue to flourish.

There is so-o-o-o much literature out there covering the horseracing game (that’s dedicated to the traditional handicapping approach) it’s just incredible. When your finished reading and absorbing even a portion of it, you’ll have covered every system under the sun and every angle for trying to select a winning horse. Unfortunately, there are times when the results of those methods will actually conflict with each other in the same race.

What I find really ironic is the fact that the tote board information is “free” and basically public domain. Yet the vast majority of players (who may or may not even look at the odds) are completely oblivious to its real worth. The problem is that the majority of players can’t differentiate between the connection’s money and everything else that’s being wagered, because if anything all they seeing are the odds. How convenient for those in the know! On the other hand the PP's remain a valued commodity from any source, because the guru's have brain-washed everyone into believing that the answers lie somewhere within all that information. All you have to do is buy the information and of course find the answers!

Thousands of horseplayers may enjoy dissecting the PP’s, and that’s fine. Good luck with it! I might take this game a bit more seriously then the next guy, but that’s my problem. My bottom line is no longer learning more about the horses. Its about who controls them and makes money doing it. Really I guess it just a question of what you want to get out of this game: Money or understanding the PP’s. One does not necessarily lead to the other.

Best of Luck!

[midnight]

(the DRF was once named the Morning Telegraph)

The Daily Racing Form and Morning Telegraph were once separate companies, both based out of New York. At one time, the MT served both racing and the theater. Moses Annenberg, who controlled the racing wires that most bookies subscribed to, bought the DRF in 1920 and the MT in 1929. From that point on, they were sister papers, run by Moses and later his son Walter. The MT served New York and a few other tracks in the East, and the DRF could be found at almost all tracks. The past performances of the MT were much more detailed than those of the DRF, as dictated by the preferences of the then more sophisticated and demanding New York crowds.

The MT ceased publication under that name in 1972 and took on the title of its sister publication, DRF.

[JackS]

Tote- See answer in Hcp Software under "master consenus". Don't want to re-type.

[Overlay]

Here's that response that JackS referred to that he mistakenly posted under the Handicapping Software thread:

Tote- An old friend of mine who is now deceased, Used what he called "The Millioniare Owner Trainer System. This method was his method and even though he understood speed and pace ,I don't beleive he ever used them but not sure.
His method was fairly simple- Play the horse from the largest most well to do stable that is also trained by a millionaire. The logic is simple. For him , earned money was the key.
I can only guess and would describe the size of his bets as well above average. In the couple of years that I knew him, I've seen him hit quite a few multi- thousand dollar tickets and also saw him take down an entire Super pool. On top of this Super hit, he also had a $10 exacta which paid more than $10K.
Do I think he was a winning horse player? I think he was but never had a thought of asking him and he never volunteered to inform me of anything he was doing.
The point being- any method if it works, who cares?

[Overlay]

My own take on Tote Master's post is that, even if one were to accept his contention that racing harbors collusion on the grand scale that he implies, the running of races also features recurring statistical patterns that have manifested themselves consistently enough and over a long enough period of time to demonstrate that they are not the product of accident or coincidence. If you use that information to assign an accurate fair probability of winning to every horse in a given race (rather than just concentrating on finding the one horse most likely to win today, regardless of its odds), you'll be able to spot when a horse or exotic combination is being allowed to go off at odds which are longer than its true winning chances call for. Betting on those overlays will assure that you catch your fair share of longshots (including those horses that may be the product of any behind-the-scenes darkening of form or toteboard manipulation in the anticipation of a big payoff), while not going against the fundamental realities of the game, and (most importantly, it seems to me) not driving yourself crazy or paranoid (or both) by trying to find the horse that "they" (whoever "they" are) have decided will win today.

[midnight]

The "One step get rich quick" ads play at the emotions of those who can't beat the horses by conventional means. Some players may want to believe that tote analysis (his/her own or that of some program) is the key to making money, because they're in denial that they can't win by handicapping. It's not much different than those who want to believe that one of RPM's many systems do indeed win a high of all plays with a healthy ROI. In reality it isn't that simple, but many gamblers aren't firmly rooted in reality or are grasping at straws in an attempt to win.

[Tom]

Midnight...I used to get the MT for $.35! It was a good paper. I remeber a lot of articles in it about handicapping as well. I think Tom Ainsle even had few in there. I remember looking a Belmont PPs and thinking, WOW! The've got $5,000 claimers running there! Class track! (FL had $1,500)
When they swtiched to DRF, I was disappointed becase the PPs lost a lot of
info.

[46zilzal]

The old Morning Telegraph would have news of the world and reviews of movies and plays on Broadway. I have one from Majestic Prince's time. It was a very large paper as well. We used to be pissed because the West coast form had no intermediate pace time (final time only) and we longed to have that better coverage from the east coast DRF or the MT.

[Tote Master]

Yes, the old “tele” certainly brings back lots fond memories!

Midnight
The "One step get rich quick" ads play at the emotions of those who can't beat the horses by conventional means. Some players may want to believe that tote analysis (his/her own or that of some program) is the key to making money, because they're in denial that they can't win by handicapping. It's not much different than those who want to believe that one of RPM's many systems do indeed win a high of all plays with a healthy ROI. In reality it isn't that simple, but many gamblers aren't firmly rooted in reality or are grasping at straws in an attempt to win. It’s unfortunate that you and many others are so ingrained with your conventional so-called wisdom, that you can’t even interpret comments properly. Maybe my comments have hit a sore point with you by undermining everything you've been led to believe and perhaps they even play on your emotions. It’s not that I just believe the tote analysis is superior, I know it is! As I’ve mentioned before, just because you don’t believe something is true, doesn’t mean that it isn’t. But you’re right! I couldn't win all of the money I wanted to using the great traditional handicapping techniques (found in all that literature). Neither can you, or the other 95% of all the players out there! So lets just call an “Ace an Ace”!

You’re also correct in presuming that a thorough tote analysis is not a very simple undertaking, but properly developed and with the aid of technology, its results are easily discernable. I also find that not only is more efficient then laboring over the PP’s, it’s much more rewarding. Your reality must be based on the Horses. Mine is simply based on the Money. Let me know when the horses start doing the betting!

Until then to each his own.

I’ll just leave you with one final thought.
The following link illustrates a portion of an "actual" tote analysis for some recently run races at Delmar (On a Single race card). The last Interval is about 6-mins to post time. You’ll notice the relationship between Par and the adjacent Entry numbers in each case. This just happens to be what I call a “betting pattern” that is more prevalent at the larger tracks like Delmar. It's one of the most important aspects of the analysis. I hope its not too complex, and I’m not sure if you’d know what to do with all those numbers, but for whatever its worth you might want to check the actual results for those races, particularly the Supers. (As usual, I'm sure you'll have your doubts, but yes all of the analyses are well documented)

http://www.tote-works.com/PublicImages/Delmar_R2-5-6-8_9-1-05.jpg
(Note: Place the cursor on it and you can click on the image enlarge button and they will sharpen up)

Best of Luck!

[Suff]

Yes, the old “tele” certainly brings back lots fond memories!

It’s unfortunate that you and many others are so ingrained with your conventional so-called wisdom, that you can’t even interpret comments properly.




You attempted to pontificate on your particular style of playing horses by diminishing another way.

I think that using some of those methods can certainly provide some analytical and mental exercises that can be self-fulfilling and even boost one’s ego from time to time.
When I read that I looked at the rest of your post through skeptical eyes. You start out by saying you prefer your way because the other way is mental gymnastics and emotional ta-ta.




Until then to each his own

Amen

[Overlay]

Your reality must be based on the Horses. Mine is simply based on the Money. Let me know when the horses start doing the betting!

I'll do that if you'll let me know when the horses start being aware of which one of them the smart money is being bet on today. You can stiff a good horse, but all the smart money in the world isn't going to guarantee that a horse that can't win a race based on form will jump up and finish first, unless every other horse's connections are in on the fix. And, to me, it flies in the face of self-interest that a trainer who had a fit and ready horse entered where it could win based on form would voluntarily forego that for an uncertain shot at a big mutuel payoff with a horse that he does not know as well as his own; which could win only if multiple parties similarly agreed to the fix (and then followed through on their stated intentions); and where the trainer would be placing his hopes (and his livelihood) in the actions of people who were known to be dishonest to begin with, rather than in his own ability as a conditioner (not to mention the disciplinary consequences when the whole arrangement came to light, as it surely would as soon as any of the parties to it felt that they didn't get their fair share of the pie, or if the unexpected happened, and the horse that the scheme was designed to benefit didn't win the race as anticipated).

[Overlay]

To clarify, I'm not saying that trainers always enter horses in races with the express intention of winning, or that there is no such thing as a race where one or more horses are running primarily for conditioning purposes as part of their training/form cycle. But, to me, those instances are satisfactorily addressed from a handicapping standpoint through analysis of published form and the use of fair odds. What I take issue with or find implausible (as I stated) is the extent of collusion, the denial of self-interest, and the degree of control that would be required over events that cannot be absolutely assured, for one or more trainers to engineer a betting coup based on a guarantee that a particular horse will win at high odds in a specific race.

[midnight]

Totemaster: I've been there and done that with the tote analysis. I was watching the win and exacta pools back in the early 1980's, long before most others did. It was spot-on at the harness races in Chicago. I was one of the first to use E-Horse Arbitrage when it came out. I made good money analyzing the betdowns. Then, too many guys got the same idea, and the horses were getting hammered at the last minute. I still trot out ATR once in a while and take a look. The betdowns are still getting hammered, and there aren't as many of them because more of the "smart guys" are sending it in late so that it doesn't show in the pool until after the race is started.

I used your website's free trial along with screen saves of ATR. I have a pretty good idea of what your software is doing to get your "proprietary information". Out of respect for copyright laws, I won't divulge my beliefs. If my beliefs are correct, however, what you're doing is a simpler spin on what I did, and if so, it isn't going to show a profit.

[Tom Barrister]

The “Write-off’s” are usually groups or syndicates that use their involvement in horse racing as just that: A tax write-off. Keep in mind that owning horses is considered farming by the government tax standards. So they could care less about whether or not they win or lose.


That's the stupidest thing I have seen today.

FYI most horsemen are losers at their betting.

Most trainers make money from the monthly fee they charge owners. If they get extra from their 10% of the purse that's a bonus. If not, they still get their monthly fee. Most owners are small-timers, not syndicates. They expect to lose and are in this for fun, not a tax writeoff.

Horses fall under agriculture, which is a broader category than farming.

[Tote Master]

Overlay
To clarify, I'm not saying that trainers always enter horses in races with the express intention of winning, or that there is no such thing as a race where one or more horses are running primarily for conditioning purposes as part of their training/form cycle. But, to me, those instances are satisfactorily addressed from a handicapping standpoint through analysis of published form and the use of fair odds. What I take issue with or find implausible (as I stated) is the extent of collusion, the denial of self-interest, and the degree of control that would be required over events that cannot be absolutely assured, for one or more trainers to engineer a betting coup based on a guarantee that a particular horse will win at high odds in a specific race. Thanks for the clarification! You might want to further clarify how “those instances” regarding “conditioning purposes” “are satisfactorily addressed from a handicapping standpoint through the analysis of published from”. I assume you’re talking about after the race is over? Too bad, because some of us would like to know in advance “who’s trying and who’s not! So, in your estimation seeing it published will somehow tell those who detect and understand it, that now the animal is fit and ready to roll in its next race!? Oh I forgot, it’s a “form cycle” so it might not be the very next one, perhaps it’s the one after that. Or maybe its something similar to what some accused trainer, John Shirrefs as doing: Hiding the form of the KY Derby winner, Giacomo. Now there’s one hell of a form cycle! Imagine that! In stakes races no less where we can generally assume that they’re all trying to win. Good for you John! You fooled them all!

So, you might find such a plan or conspiracy as implausible, but then again keep in mind its only a game. I can imagine how would you feel being bluffed in a high stakes poker game? How do you feel pulling a one-arm-bandit, knowing the odds are “set” against you? How might you even feel reading a really fun fiction book called “Fourth and Fixed”? To be that naive to think that there’s no collusion is I think pretty silly. Its as simple as giving a jockey some instructions or as complex as a “milk-shake”. But you are right, nothing is airtight in a horserace. Sometimes even the best-laid plans are spoiled by an unexpected event. You talk about control, but I think you’re forgetting about who’s actually in control. Remember the animal doesn’t even know it exists. In training, all it knows how to do is eat, sleep and run. (Okay sometimes they walk too). Ask yourself this; does any horse in a race even know the track condition? Does it know that there’s a strong head wind in the backstretch? Does it even know what kind of health or condition its in? Does it know how far it’s going to have to run today? No, but there are those who do.

Midnight
I used your website's free trial along with screen saves of ATR. I have a pretty good idea of what your software is doing to get your "proprietary information". Out of respect for copyright laws, I won't divulge my beliefs. If my beliefs are correct, however, what you're doing is a simpler spin on what I did, and if so, it isn't going to show a profit. Yes you’re right! You used it for all of (3) days! That must have been inspiring, especially since you’ve seen it all and done it all before. My friend, I appreciate your respect for copyrights! But if you actually believe that what you might have done back in the 80’s (with perhaps a calculator and a team of observers) is even remotely related to what I’m doing today, then please don’t worry yourself about any infringements. I’m sorry to hear that you hit a dead end. Fortunately I haven’t.


Originally Posted by Tote Master
The “Write-off’s” are usually groups or syndicates that use their involvement in horse racing as just that: A tax write-off. Keep in mind that owning horses is considered farming by the government tax standards. So they could care less about whether or not they win or lose..Don’t you just love it when things are pulled out of context and then made issue of? Well here’s another example.
response Posted by TomB
That's the stupidest thing I have seen today.
FYI most horsemen are losers at their betting.

Most trainers make money from the monthly fee they charge owners. If they get extra from their 10% of the purse that's a bonus. If not, they still get their monthly fee. Most owners are small-timers, not syndicates. They expect to lose and are in this for fun, not a tax writeoff.

Horses fall under agriculture, which is a broader category than farming. This is what was actually written:
So what’s changed? Well, today I believe there are basically ( 3 ) types of racing stables. I categorize these owners into the following “W” groups: the Wealthy, the Write-off and the Wagering. Notice that I use the word “owners”. Is there any mention of trainers? TomB
Most owners are small-timers, not syndicates.Perhaps the next group I mentioned was missed? The “Wagering” are those that make up the majority of owners, who fill most of the race cards at every track. These people bet on their charges (and others) in order to survive in this game, and it’s no surprise considering the costs of keeping an animal in proper training and care.
You caught me though on that farming and agriculture thing! Sorry if anyone else misunderstood what I was trying to say.

So what can I say? Nah. Why even bother!
Enjoy whats left of your weekend!

[midnight]

please don’t worry yourself about any infringements.

Thanks for your permission to divulge, but after consideration, I've come to the conclusion that I really don't have to get your permission to offer my opinion on how I believe your tote-analysis methodology works.

If anybody here, who has 100 posts or more (no ghosts, thanks), wants to know how I believe Tote Master's site analyzes the tote, just send me a PM.

[the little guy]

God am I glad I stumbled upon this thread!

I have a question for Totemaster.....if you don't read the pps, how do you have any idea of what prices horses should be versus what prices they are on the board, thus supposedly knowing which horses are taking this supposed smart money?

[Tote Master]

little guy
God am I glad I stumbled upon this thread!

I have a question for Totemaster.....if you don't read the pps, how do you have any idea of what prices horses should be versus what prices they are on the board, thus supposedly knowing which horses are taking this supposed smart money? That’s a fair and typical question. I assume that’s it coming from your experiences as a traditional handicapper. I would like nothing better then to provide you with some good answers, but since I’ve already been accused of advertising on this forum in the past, I won’t provide them here. I certainly will not give those small-minded individuals another opportunity to make their superficial comments. If you’re really interested, just drop me an e-mail message and I’ll be glad to oblige.

If you don’t find that my answers are satisfactory, you can always contact Midnight. He apparently has concluded that the tote board analysis is of little value, yet he proclaims to have an insight into my methods. Wishful thinking I’m afraid.

Besides this thread is titled “What should I read next…”. Right? Since I haven’t written a book yet, I can only comment on what’s already out there. By the way, I should clarify one thing and mention that both Tom Ainsle and Joe Takach are two authors that have provided some insight into the tote board activities.

Best of Luck!

[Overlay]

By the way, I should clarify one thing and mention that both Tom Ainsle and Joe Takach are two authors that have provided some insight into the tote board activities.

I'd like to be able to quote Ainslie verbatim (so I could be totally accurate), but I distinctly recall verbiage from either The Compleat Horseplayer or Ainslie's Complete Guide to Thoroughbred Racing to the effect that any race will contain multiple entries whose connections truly believe that "today could be the day", and that the way to slice through this confusion, and reliably separate contenders from non-contenders, is to handicap based on the fundamental principles such as distance, class, and form that Ainslie always espoused. One quote of his that I do remember exactly was, "Inside information is for the sparrows."

[46zilzal]

remember exactly was, "Inside information is for the sparrows."
EXACTLY after standing around the saddling enclosure one would think both Bid and Secretariat were in the contests listening to the connections.

[Tote Master]

Overlay
I'd like to be able to quote Ainslie verbatim (so I could be totally accurate), but I distinctly recall verbiage from either The Compleat Horseplayer or Ainslie's Complete Guide to Thoroughbred Racing to the effect that any race will contain multiple entries whose connections truly believe that "today could be the day", and that the way to slice through this confusion, and reliably separate contenders from non-contenders, is to handicap based on the fundamental principles such as distance, class, and form that Ainslie always espoused. One quote of his that I do remember exactly was, "Inside information is for the sparrows." "Inside information is for the sparrows." Truer words could not have been spoken, but unfortunately (as espoused here) not many traditional handicappers understand their “true” meaning! As an example, just look at the very next comment: 46zilzal
EXACTLY after standing around the saddling enclosure one would think both Bid and Secretariat were in the contests listening to the connections. And that folks is EXACTLY the interpretation that most traditional handicappers would come away with after reading that passage or even experiencing some pre-race ramblings.

As far as I’m concerned, the “Word’s” of an insider hold very little water. But again I’m not searching for “Words” (as I assume other’s might be when trying to find answers anong all those books and PP’s).
Perhaps you’ve also heard the expression, “Actions speak louder then Words”! For those that don’t get it, it simply means that the “action of betting” is far more meaningful then “touting of an animal”. (I hope that doesn't require an explanation!) So I'll just add some more insight to Mr. Ainsile’s expression by saying “Inside information is for the sparrows, but Inside money is for the hawks”. And you can quote me on that too!

Best of Luck!

[GameTheory]

Totemaster --

So do you believe your success in toteboard methods is mainly due to following stable money, or do you think you can get any special insight from following public betting habits as well (assuming you can tell the difference)? With regard to stable money, do you look for specific patterns that match up with specific barns, or do you find universal patterns and don't really pay attention to the identities of the trainers/owners?

[Tote Master]

Totemaster --

Game Theory
So do you believe your success in toteboard methods is mainly due to following stable money, or do you think you can get any special insight from following public betting habits as well (assuming you can tell the difference)? With regard to stable money, do you look for specific patterns that match up with specific barns, or do you find universal patterns and don't really pay attention to the identities of the trainers/owners? As I responded before to the little guy
That’s a fair and typical question….. I would like nothing better then to provide you with some good answers, but since I’ve already been accused of advertising on this forum in the past, I won’t provide them here. I certainly will not give those small-minded individuals another opportunity to make their superficial comments. If you’re really interested, just drop me an e-mail message and I’ll be glad to oblige. Sorry Game Theory, as I mentioned, I’m not going to subject myself to the likes of some on this forum. It’s really not worth the aggravation. It seems that while there’s a lot of interesting commentary on PA, most of it is based on tunnel vision. Or maybe I should say that if you’re not wearing the blinkers don’t post anything outside the realm of traditional handicapping. But that’s okay really, because I think the best place to express yourself as a player is not on some forum where words are cheap, but rather at the betting windows.

Best of Luck!

[midnight]

Not surpisingly, nobody has sent me a PM asking for more information. That must mean that nobody cares.

Neither do I. Do you suppose somebody will take the hint?

It must be nice to have the run of the place: to be able to advertise a website and to berate and belittle people at will.

For all you toteboard watchers: buy At The Races Pro and keep an eye on the win/place and win/show ratios. You'll do about as well as you would paying $25 per race card per day for something else. You probably won't win, but you'll do just about as well.

[the little guy]

Is it me or has this thread become PA's version of " I've Got a Secret "?

[Tote Master]

Wow! Talk about predictions! Its too bad I couldn’t have placed a bet on it. This is the same guy who accused me of advertising the last time I posted a few comments. I guess he’s got nothing better to do with his time. Midnight
Not surpisingly, nobody has sent me a PM asking for more information. That must mean that nobody cares. Neither do I. Do you suppose somebody will take the hint? Hey don’t worry about it. Perhaps there were some other reasons why you weren’t contacted. Who knows maybe you should take the hint? Whats funny though is that I received some e-mail with some very interesing questions. I’m not sure if they’re all sincere, but generally I give people the benefit of the doubt. Midnight
It must be nice to have the run of the place: to be able to advertise a website and to berate and belittle people at will. Gee, I’m not aware of any special privileges here on the PA forum. I’m also not quite sure where the “berating and belittling” occurred on my posts, nor the advertising. If I’m not mistaken I was actually trying to avoid any confusion about that, by deliberately not discussing my methodology on this thread. Did you miss that too? Perhaps those previous questions were poised in an attempt to make me to do just that? Who knows and who cares! Midnight
For all you toteboard watchers: buy At The Races Pro and keep an eye on the win/place and win/show ratios. You'll do about as well as you would paying $25 per race card per day for something else. You probably won't win, but you'll do just about as well. And there you have it, not just an advertisement, but an actual public endorsement! When in fact, you don’t even need “At The Races Pro” to provide that basic information! Just visit the Brisnet tote, it provides the very same stuff for “FREE”. All you have to do is some simple math. Or didn’t you know that either? If this is all you’ve got, its no wonder you hit a dead end! You’re right it’s certainly not enough to win consistently, but I’m sure they appreciate your support!
the little guy
Is it me or has this thread become PA's version of " I've Got a Secret"? Now that's a good question! And a funny one at that!

Good Luck & Good Night!

[46zilzal]

folks come by all the time to PREACH to the rest of us POOR ignorant fools, then they get tired of it and thankfully leave.

[midnight]

Tote Master: Are you putting words into my mouth? I don't see your name or your website mentioned anywhere in the post you quoted. You're making assumptions, which is the same thing you're accusing others of doing.

[Tom]

Is it me or has this thread become PA's version of " I've Got a Secret "?

"$5 down, we move to Kitty Carlisle."
"Do you wear a uniform on your job?"
:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Tote Master]

46zilzal
folks come by all the time to PREACH to the rest of us POOR ignorant fools, then they get tired of it and thankfully leave.Tell me, how do you PREACH to the CHOIR?

And by the way, thanks for your previous comment!
You’re right I am getting a bit tired, but not to fret you guys can go on singing to your hearts content and then pat each other on the back for good measure.
Tom
"$5 down, we move to Kitty Carlisle."
"Do you wear a uniform on your job?"You’re right! Will the REAL Singer please stand up?!

Its been fun and Lots of Luck whatever approach you use!

[Tom Barrister]

Using your exact quotes...

Please don’t think that the “people putting on the show” are surviving in this game by winning just the purse monies!
Many of them are doing just that. Most owners are in it for the thrill, prestige, fun, or such. Most didn't get involved in it to make money.
They pay the trainer a monthly fee. Most owners either don't bet or don't bet enough to affect the pools. Most trainers either don't bet or don't bet enough to affect the pools.

The “Write-off’s” are usually groups or syndicates that use their involvement in horse racing as just that: A tax write-off.
Do you think think that they can deduct 100% of the losses from their taxes? They might be able to deduct it from their income. That means that they only save the 15-38% they would have paid in tax. They lose the other 62-85%.

Remember the animal doesn’t even know it exists. In training, all it knows how to do is eat, sleep and run.

That's not close to being true. Horses are much more complex than that. It's obvious that you've never spent much time on the backside of the track. Ask almost any trainer.

The “Wagering” are those that make up the majority of owners, who fill most of the race cards at every track. These people bet on their charges (and others) in order to survive in this game, and it’s no surprise considering the costs of keeping an animal in proper training and care.
Not close to the majority. Not even 10% of the owners bet with the purpose of "surviving." Most of that 10% are both owner and trainer. Most of those "survive" by working as assistants for larger barns. Most of the owners "survive" by working at their career job, which is very rarely in the racing industry. Their real life jobs pay the bills for their horse racing diversion as owners. Again, it's obvious that you've never spent much time with horsemen or around the barns.

I'll just add some more insight to Mr. Ainsile’s expression by saying “Inside information is for the sparrows, but Inside money is for the hawks”.
Since you've proven that you have no idea about stables, owners, or the backstretch, it's obvious that your "inside money" theories are full of holes. No substance. Not rooted in reality. You're exposed as a fraud.

You may now twist everything I said around and say the opposite---that's your game plan, right?

[the little guy]

On a slightly divergent note, and more towards the less exciting topic of this thread, I actually have a great horse racing related book to suggest. It's called " Seeing is Forgetting the Name of the Thing One Sees: A Life of Contemporary Artist Robert Irwin ". I know, you think I'm kidding, but I'm not. His story is great, and he's a serious horseplayer ( I think he's at the tracks in California fairly often ) as well as world famous artist. A lot of the book is about racing and his theories on horseplaying ( believe me, he got it WAY before most people did. He was far ahead of his time ).

You can order it through Amazon. I highly recommend it.

[ezpace]

is supposed to be in this thread. ;)

[ezpace]

could teach TOTE MASTER about handling rejection and maybe make him see the light and adopt all Bill's systems as for his own,, as the REST OF US did with this tried and tested method at this site.. ;)