How good can you be with limited information?

[2000_ls1]

Without PP's, any cards, anything else needing to be paid for, how good can one be? Also, how do you know when it is time to step up and start looking into purchasing this information? When I go to the track I'll buy a DRF and a program but only when I go, that's about once a week. So when would you consider actually paying for info to bet from home? When you're making x # of bets, or when you're wagering x # of dollars, or what?

Obviously you couldn't go pro, that's not what I am asking, nor am I even considering it right now. Hell, I just started in this game.

Thanks

2000

[JackS]

Without any info you'd have to count on luck and believe me it will all be bad.
If your playing from home, buy the Form on-line.

[twindouble]

Without PP's, any cards, anything else needing to be paid for, how good can one be? Also, how do you know when it is time to step up and start looking into purchasing this information? When I go to the track I'll buy a DRF and a program but only when I go, that's about once a week. So when would you consider actually paying for info to bet from home? When you're making x # of bets, or when you're wagering x # of dollars, or what?

Obviously you couldn't go pro, that's not what I am asking, nor am I even considering it right now. Hell, I just started in this game.

Thanks

2000

I could say, just scratch tickets only because doing what your suggesting misses what handicapping and horse racing is all about.

On the other hand, just playing overlays and underlays who's to say you couldn't make a buck. You would improve your chances by playing the gimmicks. How it hold up over the long run I couldn't tell you, throw in a little luck, maybe.

T.D.

[GaryG]

Start from the beginning and just learn the game. Practice until you think you know what you are doing without betting at all. The money spent for whatever info you need, online pps, software, etc. is a necessary expense just as are books. You can learn plenty from this forum.

[alysheba88]

Having the same info as everyone else is practically the same as having no info

[twindouble]

Having the same info as everyone else is practically the same as having no info

Just because everyone uses the same tools that don't mean you can't do a better job.


T.D.

[MONEY]

I guarantee that someone out there in (pace advantage land) can make a winning computer program using the following free information only. When you do, send me a copy. ;)
brisbet pps
http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/instant.cgi?type=inp

equibase top leaders by track
http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/instant.cgi?type=inp

equibase top 100 list
http://www.equibase.com/Leaders/racingleaders.cfm

[GaryG]

Having the same info as everyone else is practically the same as having no infoThe best player that I know, Michael Kipness, uses nothing but a racing form and his trip notes. He watches the races carefully and knows what is important. The search for more and better info is like the Holy Grail. My own play is very similar to TD, two tracks and try to know them in great detail.

[Zaf]

I use CJ's program and other software. If I didn't have these resources I would probably try to scoop up info on trainers, especially for the circuits I play regularly.

Z

[shanta]

The best player that I know, Michael Kipness, uses nothing but a racing form and his trip notes. He watches the races carefully and knows what is important. The search for more and better info is like the Holy Grail. My own play is very similar to TD, two tracks and try to know them in great detail.

Gary,
Years back Michael used to sit in the Empire Terraces room at Yonkers Raceway and cap the horses. If this is the same fellow he is AWESOME.

Richie :)

[rrbauer]

It depends on what your motivations and expectations are. If you're going to the track primarily for social and recreation purposes and you find satisfaction at that level; and, the expense, including your betting, is not a hardship then don't complicate your life by trying to become an "expert".

[GaryG]

Gary,
Years back Michael used to sit in the Empire Terraces room at Yonkers Raceway and cap the horses. If this is the same fellow he is AWESOME.

Richie :)Richie, may have been, I didn't know he visited the dark side but he is definitely a New Yawker thru and thru!

[chickenhead]

Without PP's, any cards, anything else needing to be paid for, how good can one be? Also, how do you know when it is time to step up and start looking into purchasing this information? When I go to the track I'll buy a DRF and a program but only when I go, that's about once a week. So when would you consider actually paying for info to bet from home? When you're making x # of bets, or when you're wagering x # of dollars, or what?

Obviously you couldn't go pro, that's not what I am asking, nor am I even considering it right now. Hell, I just started in this game.

Thanks

2000

Hi 2000,
Check out www.tsnhorse.com. You can buy past performances for any card at $0.50 a pop, even if you are not betting but just want to cap this shouldn't be too much for you for a few hours of diversion.

There is also some very valuable free info available. Craig posts some of his figures for free at www.pacefigures.com. You can learn more about what the numbers mean at his site, they are the creme de la creme if you are into that sort of thing.
GL

[Bala]

Does More Dope Just Make Us Dopier?
by Gordon Pine

<<<http://www.netcapper.com/TrackTractsArchive/TT010427.htm>>>

[JackS]

Bala- Good point. Many people overcap and spend too many hours daily trying to discover something they probably noted in the first few minuites.
I think the good handicappers know when to move away from their top choice and go with known (to them) overlays at better prices.

[2000_ls1]

I guarantee that someone out there in (pace advantage land) can make a winning computer program using the following free information only. When you do, send me a copy. ;)
brisbet pps
http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/instant.cgi?type=inp

equibase top leaders by track
http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/instant.cgi?type=inp

equibase top 100 list
http://www.equibase.com/Leaders/racingleaders.cfm (http://www.equibase.com/Leaders/racingleaders.cfm)

This is what i have used and haven't done half bad in my opinion. Kinda on a downhill run lately but maybe it'll turn around, today hopefully.

Chickenhead, I have never purchased a "racecard" so does one racecard cover one race, one track, one circuit, or one whole day? Sorry if it's a dumb question but I can't seem to find the answer.

[chickenhead]

One card will give you all of the past performance information that you see in the DRF for one day at one track. That is what you get for $0.50.

[toetoe]

PA,

Is it practical to dedicate a separate permanent thread to free stuff, cheap stuff, etc. Maybe add it to the title of Handicapping Contests? That way, the questions might be avoided as to free stuff, and someone won't have to tout Horse-Races.net EVERY STNKIN' TIME! Chris Russo voice, of course. :D

[toetoe]

Bala,

The Gordon Pine thing is good, but his contention that all good 'cappers are egomaniacs is very sad, and I pray it's inaccurate. If it's true, I have ... NO SHOT!

[alysheba88]

The best player that I know, Michael Kipness, uses nothing but a racing form and his trip notes. He watches the races carefully and knows what is important. The search for more and better info is like the Holy Grail. My own play is very similar to TD, two tracks and try to know them in great detail.

Your post proves my point.

He watches races carfully. He takes trip notes.

In otherwards he has unique insight. Thats what separates him.
Not the info

[traynor]

alysheba88 wrote: <Having the same info as everyone else is practically the same as having no info>

I agree, with one added feature. There is a world of difference between data and information. In business, the feature most demanded by executives and managers is the executive summary--"What does all this really mean in one paragraph?"

Data providers, as well as most handicapping applications, do not provide information; they provide data. The data may be crunched, tweaked, and massaged, but it is still data--not information. Reading a dozen or more arcane, obscure "adjusted ratings" that supposedly represent reality is not a source of information--it is only a different representation of the same data.

Given the apparent complexity of handicapping software, it seems it would be a simple matter for the application to create its own data models, and in every race, select the most predictive of those "ratings" and display a single line on the screen; "The most probable winner of the 7th race at Aqueduct today is #4 - RunsReallyFast." That is an executive summary.

Anything other than that, and the applications only provide re-formatted data. If I have to "interpret" the ratings, what--exactly--is the purpose of the application? Conceptually, masses of data are more reminiscent of tea leaves (and often as difficult to "interpret") than of information. Good, useful, valuable data (at times), but a long, long way from being "information."
Good Luck

[alysheba88]

alysheba88 wrote: <Having the same info as everyone else is practically the same as having no info>

I agree, with one added feature. There is a world of difference between data and information. In business, the feature most demanded by executives and managers is the executive summary--"What does all this really mean in one paragraph?"

Data providers, as well as most handicapping applications, do not provide information; they provide data. The data may be crunched, tweaked, and massaged, but it is still data--not information. Reading a dozen or more arcane, obscure "adjusted ratings" that supposedly represent reality is not a source of information--it is only a different representation of the same data.

Given the apparent complexity of handicapping software, it seems it would be a simple matter for the application to create its own data models, and in every race, select the most predictive of those "ratings" and display a single line on the screen; "The most probable winner of the 7th race at Aqueduct today is #4 - RunsReallyFast." That is an executive summary.

Anything other than that, and the applications only provide re-formatted data. If I have to "interpret" the ratings, what--exactly--is the purpose of the application? Conceptually, masses of data are more reminiscent of tea leaves (and often as difficult to "interpret") than of information. Good, useful, valuable data (at times), but a long, long way from being "information."
Good Luck


Yes good clarification. I definitely meant to distinguish the too. Also distinguish data and insight

[the_fat_man]

The best player that I know, Michael Kipness, uses nothing but a racing form and his trip notes. He watches the races carefully and knows what is important. The search for more and better info is like the Holy Grail. My own play is very similar to TD, two tracks and try to know them in great detail.

I've been hanging around here for a few months and it seems that most on this forum are advocates of numbers or computer generated models.
Whatever works, I suppose.

I knew Kipness in the late '80's, right around the time he was launching his sheet. (The Wizard, for those unfamiliar).

Back then, I was very much into watching races and keeping notes (along with paddox and warmup exams). In fact, I watched so much tape back then that I can't motivate myself to get back into the game--- the time/effort investment is much too intense for a lazy, fat man like myself.

Still believe that if you focus on 1 track (or 2), keep good notes and watch the races very carefully (this would mean MORE than a single viewing and the gate, backstretch and headon shots) the game can be beaten. There is so much information in the (visual) race itself. Anything other than watching the race (numbers, for example) is an abstraction of it.

Analogy: the coach that watches the most film usually wins the game (ceteris paribus).

[twindouble]

Back then, I was very much into watching races and keeping notes (along with paddox and warmup exams). In fact, I watched so much tape back then that I can't motivate myself to get back into the game--- the time/effort investment is much too intense for a lazy, fat man like myself.

Still believe that if you focus on 1 track (or 2), keep good notes and watch the races very carefully (this would mean MORE than a single viewing and the gate, backstretch and headon shots) the game can be beaten. There is so much information in the (visual) race itself. Anything other than watching the race (numbers, for example) is an abstraction of it. Quote; The Fat Man

I take the above to mean you no longer play the horses? No question it takes a lot time and commitment, you really have to LIVE whats going on even if it's just one or two tracks. I've backed of conciderably over the last 5 years, just hanging in by comparison but it would be hard for me drop it intirely.
I did good last year, by good I mean I was satisfied concidering the effort I put in. I just keep things simple and enjoy it, was never much on extreme stats loading myself up with needless informantion anyway. Boy, I would really have to dig deep to get back into that pace again, not about to happen.

I think anyone can be a moderate player and make a buck, ESP if you had many years of experience. Obviously your interest in the game hasn't ended.

Good luck,

T.D.

[Overlay]

I can't see the possibility of getting totally away from published material that you have to pay for, in whatever source it might be found. But, to me, even information as widely-disseminated as that in the Form can still be useful and sufficient, as long as you look at the probabilities associated with the various pieces of data, and bet when the odds offer value, rather than operating on the basis of completely eliminating horses from consideration if they don't meet a particular performance criterion, or of using only one key handicapping characteristic as a basis for selection and wagering decisions.

[sly fox]

A large number of behavioral studies indicate that giving experts more information doesn’t seem to improve their judgement. One particularly relevant academic study by Paul Slovic involved eight handicappers, who were given 5 to 40 pieces of information they considered important in picking winners. The increased information did not improve their results one iota. As it turned out, their confidence level increased with the amount of information, but their win percentage did not. Overconfidence when making predictions in an uncertain environment is common. Apologies to any licensed headshrinkers among my readers, but clinical psychologists are among the most egregious bumblers. In one study, they believed their diagnoses were correct 90% of the time, when they were actually right only 50% of the time. QUOTE from link that BALA provided


In Dec. last year, I asked for the 5 most important pieces of data were in
all the members' opinion.

It is interesting to look back at the answers I got


SLY FOX

[Tom]

I would say it is how you use the common information that matters more. Not everyone can handicap worth a crap no matter what they use and others will come out ahead under many circumstances.

[Stevie Belmont]

Michael Kippness is great. Being able to watch the race is one of the biggest parts of his game. Put aside all the numbers, there important as well, but seeing what the horse has done in real time or on tape is the single most important angle in capping, surpasses any number of any importance given by numbers guys. Over capping is a huge problem for many. Make it as simple as possible, because this game can ruin your mindset. There are some very important factors in capping. Class is the most important factor, for me anyway. Stuff like Jock capping, and messing with 4% trainers will kill you.

[traynor]

sly fox wrote: <One particularly relevant academic study by Paul Slovic involved eight handicappers, who were given 5 to 40 pieces of information they considered important in picking winners.>

I think if you check back, you will find that it was 5 and 20, not 5 and 40.
Good Luck

[2000_ls1]

Well, today, the first day of being a little more selective, showed a 72% profit. I know it's the first day and even the sun shines on an, okay I'll quit, but hey, I think it's going good so far without PP's (one day). I am not ready for them, or I would have to decrease the amount of bets I am making anyway. I can barely keep up with I am doing now.


We'll see how it goes from here, selections in the correct forum I might add.

[sly fox]

sly fox wrote: <One particularly relevant academic study by Paul Slovic involved eight handicappers, who were given 5 to 40 pieces of information they considered important in picking winners.>

I think if you check back, you will find that it was 5 and 20, not 5 and 40.
Good Luck


I copied and pasted from the article that G Pine wrote provided by the link from BALA
Impossible to misquote.

My point was to refer back to the answers I got back in Dec.

The best in my opinion was from Overlay

Cheers
Sly Fox

[chickenhead]

Well, today, the first day of being a little more selective, showed a 72% profit. I know it's the first day and even the sun shines on an, okay I'll quit, but hey, I think it's going good so far without PP's (one day). I am not ready for them, or I would have to decrease the amount of bets I am making anyway. I can barely keep up with I am doing now.


We'll see how it goes from here, selections in the correct forum I might add.

So what are you basing your opinion on, if not some sort of past performance information? There is a big difference between limited information and no information. Your cart seems to be way out in front of your horse.

[chickenhead]

If you plan on staying interested in this sport for awhile you should read some of the handicapping books that are out, they will give you some ideas. I've got an extra (older) copy of Davidowitzs Betting Thoroughbreds that you're welcome to, send me a PM if you want it. Free Gratis. But the best free source you will find is this website, everything you need to know has been posted here.

[2000_ls1]

Lol, it probably is and it always has been. If it works for me that is all I can ask for.

[JackS]

2000- We're still waiting to know the basis of your selections. Are you handicapping or are you using a selection service/other?

[Koko]

2000 ls1,

This is meant in no way to demean you, it's simply to help bring you to some realizations that you MAY not currently have. Again, this is NOT to rain on your parade, as your enthusiasm, honesty and humility are to be commended.

1. Until or unless you've posted a cumulative positve ROI on your selections, it's highly unlikely that ANYONE here would even consider betting on any of your selections, just as we would act towards anyone else's selections that haven't been time tested so to speak. Notwithstanding all the views that your selections get, consider them nothing more than rubber-necking to see what kind of wreck is up ahead, honestly. This is not to discourage you from posting your picks, as obviously that's what the section of PA is there for. Just try and realize that at this point, we're all just looking to see when you'll figure out that just breaking even is a substantial undertaking.

2. If you have any interest in getting to breakeven and/or winning at this game of 20% house takeout (roughly), your time would be much better spent reading, reading, reading and thinking about the game from many angles. Sure, many of us well understand the pride and fulfillment you can gain by displaying profitable selections to others, and potentially make some money doing it. Let me be quite frank here. Your selections haven't been and likely won't be profitable for some time to come. No knock there, that's just a reality. How long would you be in the game at the blackjack table at a 20% house takeout? Not long huh?

OK, well again, that's what this games price is. So, think of it this way. To profit, one needs to consistently find 6-1 shots that prove to be worth 4-1, in other words they come in 20% of the time. If you can do this, you can make a decent ROI. It's not easy to do at all. How many people do you know that think they can pick 60% NFL games against the spread. If you took an informal survey of people you'd find numerous people claiming that 60% is easy, that they can in fact do better than that. In case you're not aware, that is very, very difficult to do as well.

Think of it another way. At a 20% takeout, you have to be 30% smarter than the aggregate betting crowd to make a 10% profit. How confident are you right now that you're even at the level of the average? If you're even average, which is an accomplishment for someone as new as you in the game, and one who seems to be using very little good data, you will be losing $.20 on the dollar and again, whatever bankroll you have will be destroyed in short order. It's quite possible, and IMO likely that at this point you aren't even there meaning that any betting would likely return you less than $.80 on the dollar.

Take no offense now, I'm trying to put things in perspective for you. Not claiming myself as a handicapping rocket scientist by any means mind you, but others on the board are very, very sharp winning players who have no doubt spent thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars and hours sweating this game out trying to beat it.

Your posting picks is sort of like you being a high school diver who's school gets a visit by the US Olympic Diving Team, and instead of spending your time absorbing their wisdom and knowedge, decide to get on the board and give them an hour long demonstration of your skills. Even if they were polite enough to pretend like they were paying attention, what good did such a demonstration do for you or them? See my point? Why bother unless you just get a warm, fuzzy feeling posting your picks?

To sum up. I'm trying to politely point out the elephant in the room, so to speak. The elephant is that your selection posts are and will be "placemat material" just like everyone else's until or unless they show an impressive ROI, which is why Raceisclosed's positive ROI idea was a grand idea in my opinion.

Handicapping without PP's or PP type information is just insanity, no offense mind you.

Head on bro, do as you please by all means, I just want to give you a direction that I think will serve you far better in the long run. If you find this post in any way insulting, I'm sorry and there's really no reason it should be, I'm simply trying to save you pain and embarassment that's probably on the way if you stay on the course you're on.

[toetoe]

Koko's reply represents something that I don't see on other boards. People are civil and not too worried about being taken in by a hoaxster or multi-personality type (no allegation here, at all). Civility is paramount. :ThmbUp:

[twindouble]

Koko;

In general I agree with most of what you said but the reality is playing the horses isn't a game where anyone can hit home runs on a consistent bases, it isn't like an individual super talent that no one else can posses. Baseball and other sports fall in that category, therefor those that get wound up with competing for a top stop picking horses lose sight of who and what the real competition is, 99.999% of them will falter. A good handicapper gambler see that as foolhardy. Sure we all would like some recognition, better yet some respect. Respect is earned over time and it has nothing to do with a winning streak or a big score that most of us will or have experienced. Plus those that don't truly understand the pit falls in this game will lose anyway and the above is one of them.


T.D.

[JackS]

2000 can pay his dues just like the rest of us. He should start small and be willing to accept losses in the range of the track take and as Koko said this is nothing to be laughed at. A few weeks or months will prove to him that learning to handicap is the only possible way to ever expect to beat this game.

[kroebuck67]

2000,

www.thorostats.com (http://www.thorostats.com)

A very fine, and (for now) free tool for handicapping.

GL... see ya' around at OP (on that note, I also recommend hanging around the area South of the paddock... that's where the trainers, owners, and serious horse people congregrate. I have found that most of them are polite, approachable, and down-to-earth folks, who don't mind discussing their opinions of races, horses, etc.)

[Overlay]

In Dec. last year, I asked for the 5 most important pieces of data were in all the members' opinion.

It is interesting to look back at the answers I got.

The best in my opinion was from Overlay.

Cheers
Sly Fox

SLY FOX

Thanks very much for the kind words. I appreciate that.

[canadadry]

I have a Boeing engineering friend in Seattle who NEVER buys the DRF and relies only on the tote board odds to play the ponies. He shows a 15% ROI for each week.
Another friend plays only the top three jockeys at the tracks he plays and shows a profit. Granted, that wouldn't work at all tracks. However, if you were playing Saratoga and the jocks were Bailey, John Velasquez, and Prado you could cash a lot of winning tickets.
Currently at Aqueduct you could cash a lot of tickets playing Coa, Dominquez, and Luzzi since they represent most rides for the top trainers.;)

[Koko]

I have a Boeing engineering friend in Seattle who NEVER buys the DRF and relies only on the tote board odds to play the ponies. He shows a 15% ROI for each week.
Another friend plays only the top three jockeys at the tracks he plays and shows a profit. Granted, that wouldn't work at all tracks. However, if you were playing Saratoga and the jocks were Bailey, John Velasquez, and Prado you could cash a lot of winning tickets.
Currently at Aqueduct you could cash a lot of tickets playing Coa, Dominquez, and Luzzi since they represent most rides for the top trainers.;)

I have no doubt that IF one has figured out a decent way to analzye tote board activity that those results are POSSIBLE. Playing top jockeys blindly at ANY track, I suspect, wouldn't get you even close to breaking even.

[Valuist]

Anybody who says they beat the game by playing only the top jockeys is pulling your leg......either that or not a good record keeper.

[Tom]

Anybody who says they beat the game by playing only the top jockeys is pulling your leg......either that or not a good record keeper.

....or is a top jockey. :D

[Art P]

Just play jockey/trainer combos and trainer angles and use speed ratings, not beyers. and you can win .You dont need the form.

[PaceAdvantage]

Just play jockey/trainer combos and trainer angles and use speed ratings, not beyers. and you can win .You dont need the form.

Yeah, it's that easy.....:rolleyes:

[dav4463]

To each his own: give me Beyers, running lines, class moves(trainer intention), form cycle, and I'm set......

[2000_ls1]

Well, I do not look at jockey's, horses, trainers, odds or PP's....

All i watch for is owners, you know that top 100 list on equibase, I compare that the owner's record at the track, then place wager or decide to pass. Theory being, the more an owner wins, the more money he/she has to put back into his/her program. Thus you will find the better owners also have the best trainers/jockeys. Not always the best horses though. Most of the time, they are either the favorite or one of the longest shots on the board, 1st time starter or such. I do not play this in claiming races or stakes races though. I will go to the thorostats.com and look at their information before posting any picks on these types of races.

The way I found this...

I was at Oaklawn Park, the first time I went, and Maggi Moss' horses won 4/10 races that day. She only had 6 horses run. I noticed this and started keeping up with it. That's how this "system" works, if you can even call it a system. Works pretty well the last few days as well. I started being a lot more "selective" 3 days ago. I would play any horse an owner had, now I don't, I'll do a little more research on the track for that owner, the owner/trainer combo as well if I feel the need. In the last 3 days, it has a 72% return one day, 42% another, and 22% another, not bad IMHO. May fall out and never work again, but it has so far!!! BTW, Kelly R. Von Hemel was Moss' trainer, one of the best for Oaklawn Park, Scott Lake also handles a bunch for the top owners, and many more big name trainers.

So, IMO, you do not need PP's to be successful, so far...

2000

[Art P]

Philadelphia Park E&G Stables, Trainer Vaders jockey Pennington. A GOLD MINE. Small tracks fly under the radar irs easy to spot when they are going to win.

[Art P]

Vaders /Pennington $5.80 another LOCK

[PaceAdvantage]

Please try and take the thread back on topic....thanks!

[skate]

and here i thought we were gettin to the "spellign bee" topic.

[2000_ls1]

Well, 5 days later a +30% roi has been accomplished. I have until this weekend until I go back to work, I am on vacation, so I have until Friday at least to continue working on this. I said I was going to start buying PP's on Wednesday but I do not think I will until this week and experiment is over with. This will give us 1-0 worth of wagers to go by, should be enough. If it produces a posotive roi in 10 days then theoretically it could do it for however needed, right? Or was it just 10 days worth of luck? That doesn't happen to me I know, trust me.

All of the selections, stats and results are in the selections forum.

2000

[2000_ls1]

One other thing I meant to ask. Does anyone know where a virtual stable is that will send remiders for owners? All I can find is trainers, horses and jockeys.

Not trying to get off-topic, this is my angle.

2000