Misconceptions Of Horseplayers

[BMeadow]

I'm preparing my next monthly column for American Turf Monthly. The subject will be misconceptions of horsesplayers.

These will NOT be handicapping or betting misconceptions (such as bet the longer price if there's an entry or prefer a first-time starter at the track where he trained or bet the late money) which I covered in a different column. Instead, this will cover general misperceptions of the game. Among those I'm planning to discuss (you may not agree with them, but hey,it's my column!):

* You need inside information to be successful/races are fixed, etc.
* Some automatic handicapping system will make you rich.
* A betting system will, long-term, turn losses into profits.
* A particular set of numbers/ratings will give you an edge.
* Folloiwing a particular handicapper/selector will make you rich.
* You can make a large amount of money with small bets.

I'm sure you have others, and I'd appreciate your input. Thank you.

[GameTheory]

I would say three of those are true. Sounds like the article might just compound the problem. Of course I would also say that anyone reading ATM looking for good advice is beyond hope anyway...

Negatively,

GameTheory

[Valuist]

The perceptions that:

1. The overwhelming large minority of horse bettors will not only lose but will likely lose other possessions, like their homes and cars, and probably their kids and wives as well.

2. The very few who actually do win are multi millionaires. They don't have to work or do research, they just "know". They never even have losing days, because as we all know, all the results are predetermined and they happen to know. :rolleyes:

[GaryG]

Of course I would also say that anyone reading ATM looking for good advice is beyond hope anyway...

Negatively,

GameTheoryYears ago Raleigh Burroughs was editor of T&SD and made the following comment: Of course it is possible that we may one day publish a system that will make you rich, but not if I see it first...:lol: ATM has promised big things to horse players for about 60 years now.

[Vegas711]

I didn't know that there were any misconceptions concerning horseplayers I just assumed we were all degenerates:lol:

[Overlay]

How about:

The object of the game is solely to find the horse that is most likely to finish first (that is, "to pick the winner"), and then to bet it (regardless of its odds).

[shanta]

I'm preparing my next monthly column for American Turf Monthly. The subject will be misconceptions of horsesplayers.

These will NOT be handicapping or betting misconceptions (such as bet the longer price if there's an entry or prefer a first-time starter at the track where he trained or bet the late money) which I covered in a different column. Instead, this will cover general misperceptions of the game. Among those I'm planning to discuss (you may not agree with them, but hey,it's my column!):

* You need inside information to be successful/races are fixed, etc.
* Some automatic handicapping system will make you rich.
* A betting system will, long-term, turn losses into profits.
* A particular set of numbers/ratings will give you an edge.
* Folloiwing a particular handicapper/selector will make you rich.
* You can make a large amount of money with small bets.

I'm sure you have others, and I'd appreciate your input. Thank you.


* - That there is some kind of par time or magic number that will turn losers into winners.

*- That betting 2 horses to win in a race is a big mistake.

*- That the more information you have the better your decision making will be at wagering time.


Good luck
Richie :)

[boxcar]

* - That there is some kind of par time or magic number that will turn losers into winners.

*- That betting 2 horses to win in a race is a big mistake.

*- That the more information you have the better your decision making will be at wagering time.


Good luck
Richie :)


:D :D And I would add: Sometimes even betting three horses to win is sensible and logical.

Boxcar

[Overlay]

One more (the flip side of your "A particular set of numbers/ratings will give you an edge"):

Handicapping is an exclusively subjective process that cannot be meaningfully quantified.

[sjk]

That horseplayers are all gamblers at heart who are thrilled by making large bets when they are ahead and have money in their pockets.

For some it is a psychological battle to pull the trigger on a large bet even when they know that they have a big edge.

[boxcar]

One more (the flip side of your "A particular set of numbers/ratings will give you an edge"):

Handicapping is an exclusively subjective process that cannot be meaningfully quantified.

AND...meaningful quantification doesn't necessarily have to come in the form of numbers only. :)

Boxcar

[Indulto]

originally posted by Bmeadow:
Misconceptions Of Horseplayers

. . .

You need inside information to be successful/races are fixed, etc.

I’m not sure that’s a misconception.

The Jeff Mullins squabble with L.A. Times reporters a year ago raised the inside information issue to a new level. What conclusions would you draw from the following two DRF columns from August, 2004:


Del Mar pick six pays $2.1 million By JAY PRIVMAN 08/01/2004
http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=57815&subs=0&arc=1 (http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=57815&subs=0&arc=1)

Pick six winner collects $2.1M By JAY PRIVMAN 08/02/2004
http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=57839&subs=0&arc=1

[DJofSD]

Barry,

What about the idea that's often promoted the race track either "fixes" the card so there's a pick 6 carry over, or, the track maintenance crew grooms the surface to favor a particular runner?

[Buckeye]

Barry, don't believe in any of those misconceptions, and I'm STILL losing!

:)

[NY BRED]

when handicapping,rely on the person making the morning odds line

when a trainer has a split entry always bet the horse with shorter odds


rely on the stewards, they always protect the fan

forget about those odds changing dramatically during a race,since it is late money which can not be controlled


trainers and jockeys convicted of drugs, larceny, race fixing and the like
rarely get a second chance in this game.

eclipse winners are always fairly selected by the racing community

racinos, casinos etc will certainly bring the racing fans back to
the sport since gambling without truly understanding this game
is what horse racing is all about.

[Buckeye]

gee, and I thought I was sarcastic! Nice job NY BRED. Don't worry, it all evens out in the end. what? Where money is involved, expect the worst, how about that? I mean really, how bad can they be? :cool:

[twindouble]

Here's mine;

You need an extensive library of statistical information to be a winner.

If jocks aren't among the top 10 they lack riding skills.

Your better off wagering on graded races.

Only 3 % of players win at the horses.

The racing industry is doing everything it can about the drug problem.

The only way to make money is take advantage of rebates.

Turning tracks into Vegas type operations are good for the player.

Overly inflated breeding fees and purchase are good for the game as a whole.

Offering huge purses for graded races and not scaling it proportionately to the lower ranks are good for the game.

Higher take out is the answer to a successful operation.

Charging excessive fees for seating, parking, programs ETC. won't hurt attendance.

Taxing horse racing winnings like it's comparable to any other income is no consequence to the players or tracks.

Progressive wagering is a good wagering strategy.

Having a fixed wagering system is better than being flexable.

You can only make money just betting winners.


Take whatever fits your criteria, maybe I got carried away a little. :D


T.D.

[toetoe]

Before my list, a quick note: rebates can only help, so unless you oppose them on moral grounds, how can they be bad?

1) Two speedballs will guarantee a winning closer.

2) Bet big after a big score. So much money is thrown away in post-killing euphoria, it's a crying shame.

3) Quit for the day after a couple of tough losses. This is correct ONLY if you recognize you're hopelessly steamed, which would be a facet to work on. The horses in later races don't know your wagering history. They just think they'll win. Presumably, you were rational last night when you picked that best bet in the nightcap.

[Doc]

I've been on the backstretch of the racetrack in various capacities for the last 20 years. The only way I've made lots of money, either through win bets or through keying a certain horse in the exotics, is to have inside knowledge about that horse, either from the groom, trainer or owner. So one of your misconceptions - "you need inside information to be successful/races are fixed, etc." - for me, is absolutely true. I never try and bet races in which I don't know a little something about the connections. It would be like betting blind.

Doc

[kenwoodallpromos]

1) You can't win the races.
2) Only obvious variations matter.
3) Winning the first day ever at the track means you will keep winning without time, effort, and study.

[Sailwolf]

I've been on the backstretch of the racetrack in various capacities for the last 20 years. The only way I've made lots of money, either through win bets or through keying a certain horse in the exotics, is to have inside knowledge about that horse, either from the groom, trainer or owner. So one of your misconceptions - "you need inside information to be successful/races are fixed, etc." - for me, is absolutely true. I never try and bet races in which I don't know a little something about the connections. It would be like betting blind.

Doc

How do you know if the inside knowledge is any good? Mark Cramer in his C&X report has had over the last few years stories on inside knowledge that has no basis in reality.:confused:

[Sailwolf]

[QUOTE=BMeadow]I'm preparing my next monthly column for American Turf Monthly.= /QUOTE]


You write a column for them every month? (If so, I subscribe to ATM since your monthly newsletter went bye-bye)

[Indulto]

TD,
Your list included, “Your better off wagering on graded races.”

Why is that a misconception?

[oddswizard]

I will be looking forward to your articles in ATM. I also contribute once in a while. A word about ATM. I love the magazine. I like reading about other successful handicappers and they feature them. I have a friend in San Jose, Ca. that ONLY BETS ON ATM longshots and he is way ahead of the game. Last week he said "Danny, you are a much better handicapper than I am. However, I do well by following the ATM clockers picks. I have my subscription air mailed to me so I don't miss any of the horses." He is playing win, exactas and is now keying super-fectas. Several years ago I met their clocker at Golden Gate Fields. I spent the day with him in his box and enjoyed watching him put his morning workouts together. I also made a nice score on one of their longshots in a Cal-Neva contest in Reno. It works for me and my friend Chuck. Will get back to Barry following his articles. Danny Holmes

[rastajenk]

There's always a track bias that can explain everything.

Sprinters can't win going long, and routers can't win going short.

[twindouble]

TD,
Your list included, “Your better off wagering on graded races.”

Why is that a misconception?

For the simple reason, those races are very competitive, with a higher risk factor. Older horses in the lower claiming ranks offer a greater opportunity to find value and the process of elimination is easier to boot. A player doesn't need a huge bankroll to make money but you do need one.

When it comes to major stake races, I enjoy handicapping them but that's as far as it goes with the exception of a modest wager. I didn't mean to say one couldn't make money on them here and there but it's a much tougher job over the long haul.


T.D.

[RaceIsClosed]

I'm preparing my next monthly column for American Turf Monthly. The subject will be misconceptions of horsesplayers.

These will NOT be handicapping or betting misconceptions (such as bet the longer price if there's an entry or prefer a first-time starter at the track where he trained or bet the late money) which I covered in a different column. Instead, this will cover general misperceptions of the game. Among those I'm planning to discuss (you may not agree with them, but hey,it's my column!):

* You need inside information to be successful/races are fixed, etc.
* Some automatic handicapping system will make you rich.
* A betting system will, long-term, turn losses into profits.
* A particular set of numbers/ratings will give you an edge.
* Folloiwing a particular handicapper/selector will make you rich.
* You can make a large amount of money with small bets.

I'm sure you have others, and I'd appreciate your input. Thank you.

The #1 myth in this game is that win betting is more "prudent" than exotic wagering for the profitable handicapper, even if simple math says otherwise.

With win betting, you get maybe 10 horses and have to choose ONE of them to overcome a 17 percent takeout. Take the exacta in the same race, and you get TWO horses to choose from NINETY combinations to accomplish the same goal.

[thebeacondeacon]

I'm preparing my next monthly column for American Turf Monthly. The subject will be misconceptions of horsesplayers.

These will NOT be handicapping or betting misconceptions (such as bet the longer price if there's an entry or prefer a first-time starter at the track where he trained or bet the late money) which I covered in a different column. Instead, this will cover general misperceptions of the game. Among those I'm planning to discuss (you may not agree with them, but hey,it's my column!):

* You need inside information to be successful/races are fixed, etc.
* Some automatic handicapping system will make you rich.
* A betting system will, long-term, turn losses into profits.
* A particular set of numbers/ratings will give you an edge.
* Following a particular handicapper/selector will make you rich.
* You can make a large amount of money with small bets.

I'm sure you have others, and I'd appreciate your input. Thank you.

Barry,

Michael Pizzolla would say that the #1 misconception is:

* The key to this game is picking winners.

The truth is that one needs to make good value bets.

He would also say that the converse of your last point is also false, that

* The key to this game is making large bets.

One needs to make intelligent bets, whether they are $2, $20 or $200.

Good luck with your article. I read ATM every month and have been enjoying your series.

Best regards,

Mike Eisen

[classhandicapper]

I've been on the backstretch of the racetrack in various capacities for the last 20 years. The only way I've made lots of money, either through win bets or through keying a certain horse in the exotics, is to have inside knowledge about that horse, either from the groom, trainer or owner. So one of your misconceptions - "you need inside information to be successful/races are fixed, etc." - for me, is absolutely true. I never try and bet races in which I don't know a little something about the connections. It would be like betting blind.
Doc

I tend to agree with you. The idea that all trainers, grooms etc... don't know what's going on with their own horses is nonsense. They may or may not be good handicappers, but they can tell you if the horse has been hurting, missing training, doing better, bled last out etc...

I win now and won when I worked on the backstretch, but when I won back in the days I worked on the backstretch I didn't have the skill to win without the information I was getting about individual horses.

If you combine the tidbits of info about the horses you get with sharp handicapping skills, it has to be an advantage.

[classhandicapper]

For the simple reason, those races are very competitive, with a higher risk factor. Older horses in the lower claiming ranks offer a greater opportunity to find value and the process of elimination is easier to boot. A player doesn't need a huge bankroll to make money but you do need one.

When it comes to major stake races, I enjoy handicapping them but that's as far as it goes with the exception of a modest wager. I didn't mean to say one couldn't make money on them here and there but it's a much tougher job over the long haul.
T.D.

I think every race type has a specific skill set required to beat them.

If you are having trouble with stakes, you may be using the wrong tools because they work so well in other types of races you are successful at.

[BIG49010]

If betting the horses was like trading stock, every trainer, jock agent, groom, and hot walker would be in hot water with the SEC!!! If you think this is a myth, your playing the wrong game

[twindouble]

I think every race type has a specific skill set required to beat them.

If you are having trouble with stakes, you may be using the wrong tools because they work so well in other types of races you are successful at.

I don't say I have trouble with stake races, I just know where the pickings are better like I said, less risk. I've found I can reduce the risk factor by avoiding those races when it comes to serious wagers. Why, because as said, very competitive, young horses improving, learning to race, trying different distances, different tracks, to many unknowns. Even stake races 3yo and up those 3yo's are on a maturing curve plus anyone who thinks they can make a living betting 2yo's or first time starters are in for a big disappointment. It's risk assessment with me, not my ability to handicap them along with my peers.

Good luck,

T.D.

[RaceIsClosed]

I don't say I have trouble with stake races, I just know where the pickings are better like I said, less risk. I've found I can reduce the risk factor by avoiding those races when it comes to serious wagers. Why, because as said, very competitive, young horses improving, learning to race, trying different distances, different tracks, to many unknowns. Even stake races 3yo and up those 3yo's are on a maturing curve plus anyone who thinks they can make a living betting 2yo's or first time starters are in for a big disappointment. It's risk assessment with me, not my ability to handicap them along with my peers.

Good luck,

T.D.

So because YOU find these races to be unplayable, that means I have to?

[twindouble]

So because YOU find these races to be unplayable, that means I have to?

Well lets stay on subject here. Misconceptions Of Horseplayers . What I'm saying is some advocate playing just stake races, like that's the best condition to make money. To me that's a misconception, there's better conditions to exploit the game. That's my opinion, you can bet them all you like if you think otherwise. It isn't like I wouldn't route for you win or drag you into thinking the way I do. Besides if we get into a word game, you'll surely win. :)


T.D.

[DJofSD]

Ya, I want to know, where is FD when it comes to betting horses?

[JustRalph]

Great Thread. This thread is so full of contradictions it was a blast to read.

[boxcar]

Great Thread. This thread is so full of contradictions it was a blast to read.

Kinda mirrors how many people at the windows. :D

Boxcar

[rokitman]

Biggest misconception in horse racing: The Daily Racing Form.

[JustRalph]

Biggest misconception in horse racing: The Daily Racing Form.

or the fact that you should be reading it................I have never purchased one except for when out of town a few times.............. in a foreign casino without internet access.

[classhandicapper]

So because YOU find these races to be unplayable, that means I have to?

Exactly. He actually made my point.

Every type of race requires a different skill set.

I do far better in stakes races than anything else because I've refined the skills required to do well in those races over a long period of time.

I used to be terrible at turf races, but now that I understand the issues better I do quite well.

Even now I'm not very good at low level claiming races because I have a tough time pulling the trigger when trainer changes and understanding suspicious class moves are so important in knowing how well a horse will run on any given day.

[JimG]

Misconception:

"You can beat a race, but you cannot beat the races"


Actually, just the opposite is true. Anytime you feel that a particular race is can't miss, you are treading on dangerous ground (and in danger of squandering money). However, with good handicapping, value-oriented wagering strategy and sound money management, you can beat the races.

Jim

[twindouble]

Exactly. He actually made my point.

Every type of race requires a different skill set.

I do far better in stakes races than anything else because I've refined the skills required to do well in those races over a long period of time.

I used to be terrible at turf races, but now that I understand the issues better I do quite well.

Even now I'm not very good at low level claiming races because I have a tough time pulling the trigger when trainer changes and understanding suspicious class moves are so important in knowing how well a horse will run on any given day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaceIsClosed
So because YOU find these races to be unplayable, that means I have to?

Class, why carry Race's quote forward? I thought I made it very clear I didn't say stake races are uplayable, now did I.

What is that different skill set that works so well picking winners when 6 of 9 have comparable talent and the other 3 are just coming into their own. Like I said, a good percentage of stake races are very competitive. That's just one example. Just to risky for me, maybe not for you.

I would venture to say, number crunching players feel secure wagering on horses that have more consistency in performance than the lower claiming ranks. Handicapping the lower ranks requires traditional methods of handicapping, that is a skill as well. We only differ in risk assessment. I would like to think after 45 years I drew a reasonable conclusion when it comes to risk.

T.D.

[classhandicapper]

twindouble,

You are again making my point without realizing it.

From what I gather, when you look at the typcial stakes race you see a lot of sharp horses of similar ability and others that are developing . So you have a difficult time seperating them and consider the races risky as a result.

I have much less trouble seperating horses like that because I have a lot of information and techniques for measuring performance and ability that go beyond the obvious ones. I see a bunch of consistent horses that run to their abilities a high percentage of the time and I have a very good idea of who is better, who is moving forward , who is moving backward etc....

When I look at a bunch of battle scarred claimers I see a bunch of horses whose performances are all over the map and whose probabilities of running well, moving forward or backward today, etc.. are as much related to trainer ability (and perhaps illegal drug use) and injuries as their own ability. I'm not very skilled at quantifying any of this. You and others may be.

It's a skill set. Both can be handicapped and beaten equally. They should just be handicapped very differently using different information in different weights. If you don't understand the uniqueness well (like me with claimers) you won't do as well and they will seem riskier or more difficult.

[twindouble]

It's a skill set. Both can be handicapped and beaten equally. They should just be handicapped very differently using different information in different weights. If you don't understand the uniqueness well (like me with claimers) you won't do as well and they will seem riskier or more difficult. quote; by Class.


Well, the above says to me you do have the "Class" to go with classhandicapper. Your position is clear to me now.


Thanks,

T.D.

[hurrikane]

It's the 'Sport of Kings'

[hurrikane]

Of course I would also say that anyone reading ATM looking for good advice is beyond hope anyway...

Negatively,

GameTheory

Touche' !

[Sailwolf]

Why??

[formula_2002]

BM, I think a follow-up to your article is required.

"The correct conceptions of horsesplayers."

1. er...nope
2. er.... nope that won't do either
3. er....oh no. certainly not.

I'll get back to you on this.. :rolleyes:

Joe M

[classhandicapper]

Well, the above says to me you do have the "Class" to go with classhandicapper. Your position is clear to me now. T.D.

I think a variety of classing techniques I use go a long way towards seperating horses that otherwise look very similar on speed and pace figures.

Using the same techniques in claiming races will often put you on horses that are on the decline while the recently claimed cheapster is about to move forward 5 lengths. ;)

[twindouble]

I think a variety of classing techniques I use go a long way towards seperating horses that otherwise look very similar on speed and pace figures.

Using the same techniques in claiming races will often put you on horses that are on the decline while the recently claimed cheapster is about to move forward 5 lengths. ;)


Yes, I would say there's a lot of common ground when it comes to handicapping any class or conditions. I just question the need for specialist when it comes to handicapping. In the building business we have the specialist but they have limited effect on construction as a whole, just a piece of the puzzle. Over the years, they were excepted with open arms because of their efficiency, quality and productivity. I don't see that happening in racing, unless handicappers can incorperate all in their methods, in other words be the general contractor.

We all speak of tools of the trade when it comes to handicapping, well I've got many tools but I can go through many races without useing some of them. So it boils down to knowing when to bring out the right tools.


T.D.

[rokitman]

It's the 'Sport of Kings'
:D :D :D

[NY BRED]

i'll bet most novices, and possibly some "experienced" players have this
misconception:

the time of the race starts when the gate opens..

[Secretariat]

Biggest misconception I see is still the beleif that the horse who ran fastest last should win again, OR else the classiest horse will win.

Another misconception is that a horse who looks bad can't win. I've heard it said more often than not, "That horse has no chance."

Also, that traditional handicapping advice by experts is just as valid today as when they wrote something years ago. It's like reading a Donald Trump how to get rich book from the 80s and blindly following those same principles today, not realizing Trump may see things a lot differently today.

[AwolAwolAtPA]

well, before I throw in my two cents worth, I want to quote the Webster's II Riverside desk dictionary:

pg 271: Misconceive V (verb): to mistake the meaning of.
==misconceiver n (noun); ==misconception n (noun)

(edit note added parentical full words verb and noun)
-----------------------------

I feel the operative word here is MISTAKE!!

my biggest gripe with horseplayers is the game is pari-mutuel, spelled with an E, as in EASY, and not an A as in Accounting. The Pari-Mutuel misconceptions can be confirmed on any day by just listening to losers complain about races they lost and races they won. Yes, the losers complain about how they had it once instead of a hundred times!!


specifically, two issues:

A. Track makes more money when longshots win.

B. Collect that long shot ticket a hundred times.

so, BMeadow, I know with your experience that you do not need any examples or clarification about these issues.

However, with the dime Superfecta tickets, is the recent fodder food for this complaint. The Equibase chart will report a ticket '..paid..' over a hundred thousand dollars but there is less than twenty thousand in the pool. Well, daaah, when dollar paid price is larger then the pool, then move the decimal point one place (ie, divide by ten) and get the dime price that the ONE TICKET paid.

I have given up trying to explain to folks that a ten dollar ticket would not pay a million dollars!!

so, this is an example, of a MISTAKE concerning how tickets are paid in the pari-Mutuel business.

----------------------
now in reply to other thread postings

the issue of fixed races is NOT a misconception unless a person says ALL races are fixed. Yes, some people believe that ALL races are fixed. I feel this is a MAJOR injustice to the many hard working and honest people in the business. The fact that larceny has happened and will happen again is a reality of any business with money involved in the outcome of an event. My reply to this MISUNDERSTANDING that ALL races are fixed is to tell the person that Duane believes: Horse racing is MORE HONEST than (...list..)

(...list: stock market, bingo, real estate, senators, used car salespersons, doctors, lawyers, ETC.)

-----------
ok now I have vented my frustration about horseplayers who complain about fixed races.
---------

Duane (aka AWOL)
AWOL founder of Double Awol Projects
A.Winner.Or.Loser

[DJofSD]

So, in a thread about the misconceptions of racing and handicapping, we have ideas, thoughts and perceptions which are in and of themselves misconceptions.

Boils down to the nature of truth.

[twindouble]

I feel the operative word here is MISTAKE!!

my biggest gripe with horseplayers is the game is pari-mutuel, spelled with an E, as in EASY, and not an A as in Accounting. The Pari-Mutuel misconceptions can be confirmed on any day by just listening to losers complain about races they lost and races they won. Yes, the losers complain about how they had it once instead of a hundred times!! quote; AwolPA

The topic of losers is an interesting one, only because there's many different kinds, some are on a learning curve, some lack the necessary capital and do win a fair percentage of races but lack control. Horse racing by it's very nature is addictive because the majority of players win, lose, win, lose. There are "losers" that can on any given day make a huge score but lack the where with all to handle it right, or it's a ticket to enlightened, having the capital to profit. Other players get off on the wrong foot by virtue of their association with others, that situation is complex and is tainted in many different ways.
I never looked at players that are struggling with the game like they live on the other side of tracks wallowing in ignorance and poverty never reaching a level of competence because my nose is so high that's all I see.

No it doesn't bother me when players bitch and complain doing something they love to do or are just plain hooked on it, win or lose. Sites like this are important, it's an opportunity to give others a better understanding of the game. If we can't do that we don't belong here.


Good luck,

T.D.

[AwolAwolAtPA]

Wed 1 Mar 2006

So, in a thread about the misconceptions of racing and handicapping, we have ideas, thoughts and perceptions which are in and of themselves misconceptions.

Boils down to the nature of truth.

...
because my nose is so high that's all I see....

well this has been bothering me about how I made a mistake in the way that I wrote my posting. I was at first angry with DJofSD and T-D for not understanding what I was TRYING to say. However, when I read the posting without my personnal bias for what I was writing, I realized that YES, both of you are right!!

so, Duane opened the posting quoting the dictionary as if someone reading this need to learn a definition of the word. Then, Duane went on to a lesson about spelling. THEN, Duane went on to a lesson about math!!

so, I accept that way that I composed that posting was wrong. IF others have been offended then please accept my apology.

About the math issue, that was really a put down to myself because I actually posted on another forum that I had not worked out the formula for the dime superfecta. That is, my chart extraction program, computes the value for One-more-Ticket for the trifecta and superfecta. Well, that was another example of my writing something which was in the brain fart categoy of ideas. The dime superfecta computation did NOT need a convoluted formula, just simple math!

About the spelling issue: I now accept that even experienced players will use the wrong word. Maybe the source is that spelling dictionaries do not have Mutuel but have Mutual.

About the dictionary issue: Just plain DUMB!!

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

again, I thank you DJofSD and T-D for your constructive, critical, comments.

duane/Awol

[46zilzal]

Handicapping is an exclusively subjective process that cannot be meaningfully quantified.
Balderdash!

[Overlay]

Balderdash!

I totally agree with you (I think)! It is balderdash (in my opinion) to say that handicapping is an entirely subjective process that cannot be meaningfully quantified. I put that statement forward as an example of a misconception that I was offering for Barry Meadow's consideration. (Or are you saying that, in your opinion, my categorization of that statement as a misconception is not accurate?)

[mhrussell]

Barry-

Study long and hard for several years to learn the game; develop a solid methodology, bet only value horses and you will consistently have a regular income stream to augment your present "day job". And because of your hard won and developed handicapping skills, losing streaks will be few and far between and short lived when they do ocurr.

NOT!

To be a winner in the long run, you need to be able to LOSE many, many races. Part time players in particular face an incredible psychological challenge. Nobody wants to hear this, and fewer still will believe it.

[Nicole]

That we are all "LOSERS".

When a guy asks about my "interests, hobbies, etc" and I reply "Horse Racing" it never fails that they ask if I have a gambling problem. lol

Needless to say, they just blew their chance!

Barry, now there's an article you could write about. I'm sure that male horseplayers have it even worse.

[twindouble]

That we are all "LOSERS".

When a guy asks about my "interests, hobbies, etc" and I reply "Horse Racing" it never fails that they ask if I have a gambling problem. lol

Needless to say, they just blew their chance!

Barry, now there's an article you could write about. I'm sure that male horseplayers have it even worse.

Yes the negative side of gambling is greater for men but woman of today are catching up real quick ESP when they act, dress and look the part. Actually, I believe they are emotionally and mentally better equipped for the game than men.

I'm a gambler along with anyone one else that plays the horses or Stock market including getting into any high risk venture. We all know certain endeavor have higher risks than others but in most cases the higher risk rewards us greater across the board. As handicappers we are constantly measuring the level of risk involved with each race we decide to wager on so risk assessment is part of the game. When you can do the latter reasonably successfull you become a better gambler. The exceptable lever of success varies from player to player including those that play just for entertainment. I enjoy the game as well as gambling.


T.D.

[Dave Schwartz]

Study long and hard for several years to learn the game; develop a solid methodology, bet only value horses and you will consistently have a regular income stream to augment your present "day job". And because of your hard won and developed handicapping skills, losing streaks will be few and far between and short lived when they do ocurr.

NOT!

To be a winner in the long run, you need to be able to LOSE many, many races. Part time players in particular face an incredible psychological challenge. Nobody wants to hear this, and fewer still will believe it.

Closest thing to helpful I have read in this thread!

To say that one's strategy should be to only wager on what is profitable would be akin to telling a grocery store owner that he must not carry anything on the shelf that he loses money on. "Lead items" drive retail sales!

The correlation to horse racing is that in order to be functionally profitable, one must address the risk-reward scenario of a given race as well as in relation to their daily strategy.

IMHO, the biggest misconception of the horse player is that he would cross over to the profit side if he could just improve his handicapping.



Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[RXB]

IMHO, the biggest misconception of the horse player is that he would cross over to the profit side if he could just improve his handicapping.

I agree with Dave.

[twindouble]

I agree with Dave.


If you agree with Dave, explain the alternatives to profit other than improving your handicapping skills.


T.D.

[betchatoo]

If you agree with Dave, explain the alternatives to profit other than improving your handicapping skills.


T.D.

The first would be to improve your discipline and money management skills

[twindouble]

The first would be to improve your discipline and money management skills

Wouldn't you say that fall along the same lines as risk assessment? I would think it takes discipline to assess risk. Anyway, I was waiting for RXB to respond.


T.D.

[Dave Schwartz]

Twin,

If you agree with Dave, explain the alternatives to profit other than improving your handicapping skills.

Since I agree with Dave, I'll start. <G>



Think of horse race wagering as a two-phase operation.

The first phase is the handicapping phase, where we assign the values (i.e. chances, probabilities, odds lines, or whatever else you choose to call it) to each horse.

The second phase is the exploitation phase where we decide how to best take advantage of this race. One might also refer to this as the wagering phase.


Most players spend their entire existence trying to produce profit concentrating most of their efforts on the handicapping phase. So much so, that in the 30 minutes between races, a one-track player would probably spend all but 2 minutes on the handicapping (plus the beer and hot dog time).


So, here are these two dials - handicapping and wagering - the player sets the dial on the right (wagering) for how he likes/wants to play and keeps turning the nob on the left (handicapping) hoping to improve the results.

BTW, the successful winning players I know, if you hand them an approach, might twist the left nob just a little but almost immediately concentrate their efforts on the right-hand nob. They do this because they know that this is where the money is.

One last thing - This is not "money management." This is "wagering."



Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[twindouble]

Twin,



Since I agree with Dave, I'll start. <G>



Think of horse race wagering as a two-phase operation.

The first phase is the handicapping phase, where we assign the values (i.e. chances, probabilities, odds lines, or whatever else you choose to call it) to each horse.

The second phase is the exploitation phase where we decide how to best take advantage of this race. One might also refer to this as the wagering phase.


Most players spend their entire existence trying to produce profit concentrating most of their efforts on the handicapping phase. So much so, that in the 30 minutes between races, a one-track player would probably spend all but 2 minutes on the handicapping (plus the beer and hot dog time).


So, here are these two dials - handicapping and wagering - the player sets the dial on the right (wagering) for how he likes/wants to play and keeps turning the nob on the left (handicapping) hoping to improve the results.

BTW, the successful winning players I know, if you hand them an approach, might twist the left nob just a little but almost immediately concentrate their efforts on the right-hand nob. They do this because they know that this is where the money is.

One last thing - This is not "money management." This is "wagering."



Regards,
Dave Schwartz

You talk in terms of "exploitation", I say wagering opportunities, same thing. I have a bankroll to exploit those opportunities. Jan and Feb I'm in the red but my bankroll is healthy enough to over come that but I can't predict when that will happen but I'm sure the right conditions will come about. Those knobs will move without me forcing them.

T.D.

[betchatoo]

Wouldn't you say that fall along the same lines as risk assessment? I would think it takes discipline to assess risk. Anyway, I was waiting for RXB to respond.


T.D.

Gosh and I thought this was an open forum :blush:

[twindouble]

Gosh and I thought this was an open forum :blush:


Sorry about that, didn't mean it that way. When someone agrees and there's more to what they say they are agreeing with, I just would like them to elaborte on it rather then. "I agree with someone".


T.D.

[JackS]

Misconception- What ever method you are now using ,you should always use because regardless of losing streaks which naturally occur the races will eventually return to the profitability you enjoyed in the past.

Reality would dictate that you should be willing to change stratigies and methods that fit what is happening today.
You might win the races war but sometimes you'll need a machine gun and at other times a snipers rifle.

[The Judge]

I saw this a little late but if a particular set of numbers don't give you an edge what am I doing in this game. Numbers are a good way to start and that's for sure. For me its a good why to start and finish on most occassions but not all. Berry your numbers are some of the best whats wrong with numbers?

[betchatoo]

Sorry about that, didn't mean it that way. When someone agrees and there's more to what they say they are agreeing with, I just would like them to elaborte on it rather then. "I agree with someone".


T.D.

No offense taken

[Overlay]

Barry's article just appeared in the May, 2006 issue of American Turf Monthly. I won't recap the ten misconceptions Barry ended up discussing (so as not to violate copyright), but they're very reflective of the input in this thread. Just glancing through the article, I recognized points made by shanta, twindouble, kenwoodallpromos, thebeacondeacon, JimG, and Secretariat (and I'm sure there are others that I may have missed).

[JustRalph]

I just read the article last night. Pretty good. I liked it.

[Hank]

Gametheory read everything written by MR Taulbot and you will be humbled This cat was a frist class handicapper,sure much of it is antiquated now but his logic and methods were first rank for HIS era,few modern cappers could carry his jock.:ThmbUp:

[traynor]

Dave Schwartz wrote: <BTW, the successful winning players I know, if you hand them an approach, might twist the left nob just a little but almost immediately concentrate their efforts on the right-hand nob. They do this because they know that this is where the money is.>

Well said. Anyone can pick a few winners. The trick is to leverage those winners into a profit.
Good Luck

[cnollfan]

After Dave's post this seems like twisting the wrong knob, but here are a few of what I believe to be handicapping misconceptions:

-- Don't bet early speed on the turf.

-- Expensive yearlings are probably fast.

-- If a leading jockey doesn't ride a horse back, that's a negative.