Winning Thoroughbred Strat. by Dick Mitchell

[The Gambler08]

Is this Dick Mitchell book on money management worth buying for 12 bucks used? Thanks for the help.

[GameTheory]

For $12 it is worth a read.

You can probably sell it for $50 later, as people seem to be looking for it...

[The Gambler08]

Very good point. Mitchell books have some value.

[anotherdave]

There are a couple of copies of it on abebooks.com for $9 and $10, so $12 seems fair. I got mine about a year ago for $6 on ebay. But some of Mitchell's books - "Commonsense Handicapping" and "Thoroughbred Handicapping as an Investment" come to mind - go for a lot ($60++) on the used book sites.

AD

[GameTheory]

When did the "...as an investment" book come out? I don't think I've ever actually seen that one. I saw Commonsense Handicapping in my local shop for $10 or so a couple weeks back...

[Dave Schwartz]

Game Theory,

If you find that book locally for $10, buy it! Going price on half.com is probably 7 or 8 times that!

Dave

[anotherdave]

Originally posted by Dave Schwartz
Game Theory,

If you find that book locally for $10, buy it! Going price on half.com is probably 7 or 8 times that!

Dave

Always wondered why they call it half.com when everything I look for seems to be threetimes.com

AD

[Dave Schwartz]

AD,

LOL

Sincerely,
Dave Schwartz

[GameTheory]

Ok,

I'm going to try to pick up the Mitchell book tomorrow for the sole purpose of selling it for more money. I remember they also had Henry Kuck's "Winner's File" there -- which I see is also listed at $50 and up on the web. Anyone read that one?

[hdcper]

Game Theory,

Thoroughbred Handicapping as an Investment has a copyright date of 1986.

Hdcper

[so.cal.fan]

Didn't Mitchell do an Invest in the Stockmarket book?
I bet that's not worth much. LOL

[Dave Schwartz]

SCF,

I don't know if he did a stock-market book or not.

I always had a hard time getting much I could use from Dick Mitchell's work because it was not easy to apply it to "real" handicapping. However, books like Commonsense Betting and Commonsense Handicapping are treaures IMHO. The man's knowledge of math is staggering. If we could just build a "real" probability it might all come together.

Personally, I'd enjoy reading a stock market book by Mitchell. At least the lay person or non-statistics guy such as myself could understand it.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[so.cal.fan]

I've never read Dick Mitchell's books, Dave S.
I did listen to an audio taped seminar he did with Jim Cramer on RS_POS back in 1997.
Jim Cramer was interesting. Dick Mitchell was annoying, at least to me.
I'm not knocking Mitchell's stock market reports, anymore than I would knock anyone elses. They all stink!
I'm sure Dick is a smart business man. He's been around a long time.

PS
Of course no one should listen to So Cal Fan's stock market opinions (see off-topic) because I am an embittered loser in the market!
:confused:

[Dave Schwartz]

SCF,

I did not get that you were knocking Mitchell. It was just another opinion.

And as for long-term predictions, I will never live down a prediction I made in the '60s after watching the Dave Clark Five perform on Ed Sullivan: "These guys will make you forget the Beatles." - LOL


Dave

PS: I liked the part about Mitchell being annoying. I am sure I have been called WAY worse. LOL

[Rick]

Dave,

Mitchell's math is not always all that great, especially regarding losing streaks. He makes some misleading (or misinformed) statements about their frequency supported by fuzzy math.

[anotherdave]

Originally posted by Rick
Dave,

Mitchell's math is not always all that great, especially regarding losing streaks. He makes some misleading (or misinformed) statements about their frequency supported by fuzzy math.

I agree, Rick. Although some of Mitchell's work is quite good, there are some instances where math is questionable at best.

AD

[Dave Schwartz]

Rick,

>>Mitchell's math is not always all that great, especially regarding losing streaks. He makes some misleading (or misinformed) statements about their frequency supported by fuzzy math.<<

Of course, being a math-dunderhead, how would I know? It looked pretty good to me. <G>

Seriously, even I have seen flaws but there were two things I really liked:

1. His approach to building an odds line - Select your contenders and assume that the non-contenders combined will win 1/(contenders+1). Now, the numbers are certainly wrong, but the theory is not so bad as a starting point.

2. His approach to attacking the pools once you have an accurate probability for each horse. Of course, that word "accurate" gets in the way, doesn't it?

Thanks for your opinion.

Dave

[Tom]

Originally posted by anotherdave


Always wondered why they call it half.com when everything I look for seems to be threetimes.com

AD

Reminds me a "Big and Tall" store for women in Rochester....it's called Three Times a Lady! :eek:

[kitts]

so cal fan
I was there at that 1997 seminar and Dick was annoying since he felt the need to give his handicapping advice. However, most of the attendees were Mitchell customers so it might have been a good idea. Mitchell and Cramer gave great picks at that seminar!
And Dick once did put together a sort-of financial advice package and the beauty of that was in the eye of the beholder. However, I can assure you that Dick has made way more money than I have in the stock market. He even taught investment technique at, I think, UCLA.

An Winning Thoroughbred Strategies "fits" some folks and not others. When I read it in 1989 I had been a losing player for many, too many, years and no losing years since.

[Rick]

Dave,

I really don't like the idea of choosing a fixed number of contenders. It seems totally arbitrary and inaccurate. I think using it with my approach would eliminate the very best of my overlays. But I will admit that it probably will keep your losing streaks shorter though.

[Dick Schmidt]

I agree that a fixed number of contenders is a mistake. In fact, I think choosing contenders at all is a mistake. I stopped doing it about 1990 and haven't looked back since. I put them all in, and then let my handicapping method rate them. I will bet some of the top few and the rest eliminate themselves. If you can't trust your method to rank the horses, how can you trust it to bet with?

Dick

[Rick]

I think the idea of selecting contenders came from the necessity to reduce handicapping time when most methods were manual and tedious. Computer assisted handicapping makes the idea pretty much obsolete now. It may, however, be worthwhile to try to find the horses (however many they are) that comprise the top 50% or 80% or whatever of the probabilities in the race.

[Molock]

Don't know about a book, but he does have an investment VIDEO:

http://www.cynthiapublishing.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=THS&Category_Code=FINANCE

I also want to pipe in and say that Mitchell's article on Group Overlays (though not necessarily a new idea) is truly wonderful and led to many profitable weeks, even if it only meant one or two wagers a day:

http://www.gambleinparadise.com/articlex184.html

SM

[Jake]

The Group Overlay method was borrowed from M. Pascual. I would be very careful here, though, this is one of those areas where Mitchell has his numbers wrong. I can't challenge profitable weeks, but the math is misleading.


Originally posted by shanemooney
Don't know about a book, but he does have an investment VIDEO:

http://www.cynthiapublishing.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=THS&Category_Code=FINANCE

I also want to pipe in and say that Mitchell's article on Group Overlays (though not necessarily a new idea) is truly wonderful and led to many profitable weeks, even if it only meant one or two wagers a day:

http://www.gambleinparadise.com/articlex184.html

SM

[GameTheory]

I am interested in this topic of splitting up bet sizes appropriately. If Mitchell is wrong, what is the proper way?

Assuming that you want to bet a fixed amount per race, that is, and you're looking to split that amount up over three contenders...

[Jake]

Just use a general hedge or dutch approach. There are a number of software programs that can do that for you. An old Dos program called Hedgehog is still available; wagering tools at the DMTC track site has a Java app that does this; Steed and Scribe had a program. The math isn't difficult to figure. My comments on the bad numbers was just in reference to the Group Overlay stuff; hedging and dutching 3 horses isn't a difficult approach.

Originally posted by GameTheory
I am interested in this topic of splitting up bet sizes appropriately. If Mitchell is wrong, what is the proper way?

Assuming that you want to bet a fixed amount per race, that is, and you're looking to split that amount up over three contenders...

[Topcat]

Originally posted by so.cal.fan
Didn't Mitchell do an Invest in the Stockmarket book?
I bet that's not worth much. LOL

Dick Mitchell did a booklet on stock market investing that had a great summary of some approaches to stock investing and he also covered it in a video and covered off some predictions in an audio/book tape series.

It's ironice that I actually made thousands of $s from his stock market advice but never really made any money from his handicapping advice. I have incorporated a phrase he used "good bet bad outcome" it really helps the mind set.

Of course I wish I had not passed on his one stock recommendation of Apple Computers when it was
trading t about 5-it is now 20 and last year it was as high as 70.

I have most of his books (all the earlier ones put out by Cynthia Publishing) and found them all to be keepers. I didn't get his latest because he was starting to repeat himself.

But I put his books in the "keeper" category because they approached racing from a fact based perspective as opposed tothe usual opinion or handicapping as art approach..

Unlike others I found him entertaining and quite a wordsmith-hmm maybe I will buy his latest.

[Rick]

Topcat,

I wouldn't bother with his latest. I didn't buy it but looked through it when I was at GBC. Very disappointing, and just one of those stapled paper things, not a bound book.

[anotherdave]

Originally posted by Rick
Topcat,

I wouldn't bother with his latest. I didn't buy it but looked through it when I was at GBC. Very disappointing, and just one of those stapled paper things, not a bound book.

I didn't know he'd written much for a while. (21st Century Handicapping was the last I saw - that I didn't like much)
Which book is Mitchell's latest?

AD

[BlueChip@DRF]

Originally posted by so.cal.fan
Didn't Mitchell do an Invest in the Stockmarket book?
I bet that's not worth much. LOL


I think the book you are referring to is "Thoroughbred Handicapping As An Investment". I obtained a copy of that book last summer on eBay for $20. Still has the dust jacket and is in good condition. Two months later I checked for this book on other used-book sites only to find that this book is being sold for $100 to $175 per copy. I have no idea why this book commands such a price, but it sure is different from any other handicapping book I've read.

[so.cal.fan]

No, it wasn't a handicapping book, BlueChip.
He was involved in stock market seminars for a while (before the tech crash of 2000).
I wasn't knocking his handicapping (of horses)........it is just laughable to think of anyone touting "stock market investing".....
Congratulations on your "collectable" book!
I had no idea these books sold for so much!
I found out one day, checking eBay......I was sick.
A neighbor passed away a couple of years ago, leaving me boxes of handicapping books.......I "donated" them to Sierra Madre library..........only to find out they were worth hundreds of dollars.
One was the rare Dr. Z book........I sure felt dumb!:(

PS:
To So. Cal handicappers on board,
You may want to check out Sierra Madre Library's free book bin from time to time..........never know what some dummy will give away!:D

[Richard]

I remember I got a mailing from Cynthia Publishing Co. back in the late 80's about som kind of some kind or other stock market program(not computer)that Mitchell was coming out with.Didnt pay it much attention and didnt get another mailing of that type.
I do however have several of Mitchell's handicapping books including(so I believe) two lesser known paperbacks.MYTHS THAT DESTROY A HORSEPLAYER'S BANKROLL and A WINNING THOROUGHBRED STRATEGY (Cynthia Publishing)I havent read them in years so I cant tell you much about them.I most certainly liked however,Mitchell's more widely published books.