Betting question

[Drew]

For those of you in the group.

I am an average handicapper who has good runs but I am nowhere near others on this board because I have bad money management skills and some horrible tendancies like chasing, etc. I enjoy handicapping but I honestly would rather not bet because it takes away my enjoyment of the races. I enjoy going to the races, simulcasting, or watching from home on TVG/HRTV. Does anybody know a game or stragety to keep myself amused so I don't have to bet. I have tried to fix some of my bad tendacies and to be honest I just don't have the control that it takes. Sometimes I am very good and others very bad. I have not lost an extreme amount of money over time but I am honest enough to say out side of a winning year or two and a few even years, I am a loser at the races. Sometimes I bet small out of boredom. Any ideas? I feel that since I am a losing player and I really don't have what it takes to win that I should be on the sidelines.

Thanks to all who reply.

[GameTheory]

For those of you in the group.

I am an average handicapper who has good runs but I am nowhere near others on this board because I have bad money management skills and some horrible tendancies like chasing, etc. I enjoy handicapping but I honestly would rather not bet because it takes away my enjoyment of the races. I enjoy going to the races, simulcasting, or watching from home on TVG/HRTV. Does anybody know a game or stragety to keep myself amused so I don't have to bet. I have tried to fix some of my bad tendacies and to be honest I just don't have the control that it takes. Sometimes I am very good and others very bad. I have not lost an extreme amount of money over time but I am honest enough to say out side of a winning year or two and a few even years, I am a loser at the races. Sometimes I bet small out of boredom. Any ideas? I feel that since I am a losing player and I really don't have what it takes to win that I should be on the sidelines.

Thanks to all who reply.Close your online accounts so you can't bet from home, and when you go to the track, only take $20 or so betting money, and leave the ATM card at home. Then watch and enjoy the races. Bring a camera and take photos...

[cj]

Hunt meets and harness racing at the fairs.

[sq764]

For those of you in the group.

I am an average handicapper who has good runs but I am nowhere near others on this board because I have bad money management skills and some horrible tendancies like chasing, etc. I enjoy handicapping but I honestly would rather not bet because it takes away my enjoyment of the races. I enjoy going to the races, simulcasting, or watching from home on TVG/HRTV. Does anybody know a game or stragety to keep myself amused so I don't have to bet. I have tried to fix some of my bad tendacies and to be honest I just don't have the control that it takes. Sometimes I am very good and others very bad. I have not lost an extreme amount of money over time but I am honest enough to say out side of a winning year or two and a few even years, I am a loser at the races. Sometimes I bet small out of boredom. Any ideas? I feel that since I am a losing player and I really don't have what it takes to win that I should be on the sidelines.

Thanks to all who reply.
Why don't you take a month or 2 off and instead of searching for other forms of entertainment, spend that time learning how to win (or at least keep your losses to a minimum)..

Once you are comfortable to come back, try to play 'sessions'.. I did this a few years back and it really helped me get back on track. PLay a session where you make 20 bets of $5 per bet or $5 or $10 per race. After you bet through your $100, stop.. See where you are..

[dav4463]

Why not make a tip sheet and post it for others to use? You still get to handicap and if you're pretty good, you will get a following who will be looking forward to your picks and insights. You could offer it free to anyone who emails you and through word of mouth, you could build up a clientele. Who knows? You might could become another "Wizard" and start selling your picks. That way, you guarantee yourself a profit! As for your own betting. Take $20 or $40 and just bet all your best bets ahead of time. Keep a little back for food and beverage and just enjoy the day at the track.

[twindouble]

Come on guys, tell him the truth. Sounds like he's a cronic loser and compulsive to boot. Average handicappers that don't know how to gamble with no control is in deep shit, I'll say it straight up. He says he enjoys racing but is beating himself up at the same time. That's sick and he knows it. I say stay away, find something eles to do horse racing related, owning, training, groom anything that will put you in the game. Maybe then you get a handle on yourself.


T.D.

[DrugSalvastore]

I have tried to fix some of my bad tendacies and to be honest I just don't have the control that it takes.

It's funny how you rarely or never see stuff like this addressed in the many handicapping books published.

As early as when I was 15 years-old I was confident that I had built up and developed the needed handicapping and betting skills it took to beat the races. However, I would always self-destruct and bet irrationally. It only took about three losses in a row to get me on tilt and pressing wagers. Sometime's I'd bail myself out---but the times that I couldn't, I'd tap out altogether and end up looking for a job cleaning off tables or washing cars at a dealership right away.

I knew I had GIGANTIC character flaws that took away any chance I might have had at beating the races, over an extended period of time, for a sizable amount of money. Mainly, I became way too cautious when things were going well--and WAY out-of-control and desperate to recoup when things weren't going well.

At that time, I was VERY cocky, and just assumed as I kept improving myself, that I would soon become so dramatically better than everyone else at the handicapping aspect of the game--that I would someday be certain of making a lot of money betting on the races...even inspite of my almost weekly melt-downs and idiotic overreactions.

As I got a year or two older, I started to realize that even though you can always improve yourself and outwork other bettors---that advantage was always going to be negated by destructive behavior.

I got an idea that helped me turn things around from something that football coaches do. A coach will script 15 plays to run on the first possesion of each half. So, after I finished handicapping each race, I decided I would actually write-up an analysis on how I think the race should be bet and why I think it should be bet that way.

After I finished with the entire card, I would go structure what I thought was a good betting play in all races where multi-win wagers (like daily doubles and P3's) were available.

When it came time to go to the track, not only was all my handicapping completed, but I would have all my bets for the entire card already scripted.

In football, just because you have a play called doesn't mean you have to run it. For example, if the defense is loading up the line of scrimage with players in hopes of shutting down the run--you would want to change the play and pass the ball to a reciever, who is 1-on-1 in coverage against a defensive player he matches up favorable with.

The same applies to betting on horse racing. Sometimes a clever horse you are looking to bet is 10/1 on the morning line--you know the public isn't stupid and think the horse will probably go off at about 7/1 or so. And even at that price, you'd like him enough to bet him. Well, when that horse opens at 5/2 and eventually drifts up to 4/1 by the time race goes off---you might have called an audible of your own and changed the inital plan you had regarding how you wanted to bet the race. Weather related factors and scratches can obviously throw certain races into chaos as well. And you'll have to start over.

For whatever reason, doing this process really helped eliminate the self-destructive betting habits I had. It's to the point now, where I only have to spend about 30 minutes per card formulating strategies for betting the races on the card. I also don't bother to type out my reasoning for every bet anymore. When I first started, I would write a little essay for each race, and E-mail it to myself when I was done.

A lot of the popular authors and big-name players seem to have either attendend Harvard or have made a lot of money doing something else. They may say they don't have these flaws. They might not be lying either. Those people probably aren't going to starve if they can't make their living beating the races. It's kind of funny how people with these fancy educations always seem to have access to a decent job if they decide they want one. I'm not so sure these type of people really feel the same kind of Inner-frustration that occurs when things aren't going well from a betting standpoint. They might think they feel it...but I'm not sure they do anyway.

My temperament has changed markedly since the time I first started betting. I would have found myself in a world of trouble had I not learned to control myself.

[bigmack]

Sharp post DrugS

[twindouble]

My temperament has changed markedly since the time I first started betting. I would have found myself in a world of trouble had I not learned to control myself. Quote; DrugSalvastore

I think that's about what I said. Congratulations Drug, not many people can achieve what you did but it sure is possible when they try.


Hat's off to you.


T.D.

[Stevie Belmont]

Discipline....Thats the only thing that can help you. If you don't have this, you have nothing, and you will never enjoy the track.



For those of you in the group.

I am an average handicapper who has good runs but I am nowhere near others on this board because I have bad money management skills and some horrible tendancies like chasing, etc. I enjoy handicapping but I honestly would rather not bet because it takes away my enjoyment of the races. I enjoy going to the races, simulcasting, or watching from home on TVG/HRTV. Does anybody know a game or stragety to keep myself amused so I don't have to bet. I have tried to fix some of my bad tendacies and to be honest I just don't have the control that it takes. Sometimes I am very good and others very bad. I have not lost an extreme amount of money over time but I am honest enough to say out side of a winning year or two and a few even years, I am a loser at the races. Sometimes I bet small out of boredom. Any ideas? I feel that since I am a losing player and I really don't have what it takes to win that I should be on the sidelines.

Thanks to all who reply.

[oexplayer68]

Do yourself a favor and start playing somewhere that offers rebates. There are plenty of places that offer them. Rebates can turn a marginal player into a break-even or possibly a profitable player.

[samyn on the green]

Tremendous post DrugS. You have to read 5,000 trashcan posts on boards like this before you find one is as inciteful and unselfish as yours. These are the words of a real player. This post is so good it is proprietary information.

molto grazie

[ryesteve]

Do yourself a favor and start playing somewhere that offers rebates. There are plenty of places that offer them. Rebates can turn a marginal player into a break-even or possibly a profitable player.
Not that this is bad advice in general, but this guy's problem is behavioral not financial. If he starts betting with rebates, that might be an excuse to exercise even LESS self-control.

[bigmack]

My temperament has changed markedly since the time I first started betting. I would have found myself in a world of trouble had I not learned to control myself.
I posted earlier that it was a sharp post DS, and I retract that.

It was a one of kind post and should be an introductory read for anyone entering the game.

Great insight

[TRM]

Get your priorities in line first. Family, Job etc.....then racing.

If you feel the need to play, then just play on paper. Take some time to explore more on the handicapping aspect.

Definitely close the online accounts as GT alluded. If you have a more serious issue like compulsive gambling, then seek professional help. Don't let it take control of your life.

[PaceAdvantage]

Great post DrugS, no doubt about that. Excellent advice as well....

But damn samyn, did you really have to cut me down with the "You have to read 5,000 trashcan posts on boards like this...." comment? :eek: :faint: :lol:

[WJ47]

I have the same problem. I am a pretty good handicapper without any self control! :) Fortunately, I'm a small better ($2 to win or $1 exacta/quinellas). Somedays I'm bored (being a housewife without an outside job, just eBay) and an afternoon betting many races really livens things up! But I set a limit (usually $50 a week) and when its gone, I don't put anymore in until the next week. My account on Brisbet usually goes up and down like a yo yo. I'll win a little, lose a little. Bet on races that I have no business betting, like a mule race! :) But eventually by weeks end, my account is bankrupt! :lol:

I guess I look at it like my entertainment for the week. Other family members go to the casino once a week and blow a $100 and call it "their night out". So I don't think there is anything wrong with losing, as long as you stick with a limit and aren't using the money for the mortgage or bills.

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather win! :) But its hard to win when you want to bet every race. But I think my problem is boredom. I actually haven't placed a bet in several months, but I watch TVG all day. I guess I'm an all or nothing person. If I'm in a betting mood, I could bet all day. Or I could watch races all day and not bet for months.

To alleviate the boredom, I signed up to go back to college to get my degree. I'm starting to feel the pinch of "empy nest syndrome" with my oldest son being 19 and the youngest is turning 13 next month. They don't need me much anymore and I'm thinking that at 37, I need to find something to do with my life! I had my first classes last week (College Composition, Sociology, American Government, Psychology, and Human Biology!) and I'm excited for more this week. I downloaded Formulator on my laptop so I can enjoy reading the form between classes!

I liked DrugS's post too! Great advice! :) I'm going to print out a copy of it for my handicapping notebook.

[Valuist]

Drew-

Do you bet differently when you are with friends as opposed to betting by yourself? I've seen people get caught up in competition with their friends and it clouds their judgement.

The other advice I'm going to suggest will irritate some people but if control is an issue, I think you should try it. Handicap the races either the night before or in the morning (or possibly both). Make what you feel are your best wagers. Limit it to no more than four or five. Get track conditions and scratches then make your bets. Tape the races or watch online replays later on. Betting blind causes one to only make wagers that they like. There's no "action" bets, or chasing previous losses.

[Cesario!]

This is turning into a great thread with terrific, honest posts by Drew, DrugS and WJ47.

The only thing that I want to take issue with is the characterization that the problems that horseplayers have with emotional control are flaws. I think this negative conception leads to a focus on correcting the problem by trying to act perfectly and pretending to be something that you're not -- unfortunately, such self-deception rarely, if ever, works. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being emotional -- it's just much better to find ways to make your traits and personality work for you, instead of against you.

It's why I really appreciate the initial post from Drew -- such honesty is extremely rare in these circles. As Drew alluded to, I think the key is figuring out ways that you can participate in the game while being honest with who you are. It's why certain players have an "action" fund which, while not technically the most efficient use of money, reflects a reality of who they are. It's why some players force themselves to take vacations from the game -- no matter how badly they want to play. And it's why certain personalities just aren't suited to being a gambler -- it's not a character indictment in any way, and it's very important to view it in those terms. The emotion that leads to poor gambling has tremendous upsides in other areas of life, and even upsides within this game. The challenge, of course, is being honest with yourself long enough to figure out just what those activities could be.

Seth

[twindouble]

This is turning into a great thread with terrific, honest posts by Drew, DrugS and WJ47.

The only thing that I want to take issue with is the characterization that the problems that horseplayers have with emotional control are flaws. I think this negative conception leads to a focus on correcting the problem by trying to act perfectly and pretending to be something that you're not -- unfortunately, such self-deception rarely, if ever, works. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being emotional -- it's just much better to find ways to make your traits and personality work for you, instead of against you.

It's why I really appreciate the initial post from Drew -- such honesty is extremely rare in these circles. As Drew alluded to, I think the key is figuring out ways that you can participate in the game while being honest with who you are. It's why certain players have an "action" fund which, while not technically the most efficient use of money, reflects a reality of who they are. It's why some players force themselves to take vacations from the game -- no matter how badly they want to play. And it's why certain personalities just aren't suited to being a gambler -- it's not a character indictment in any way, and it's very important to view it in those terms. The emotion that leads to poor gambling has tremendous upsides in other areas of life, and even upsides within this game. The challenge, of course, is being honest with yourself long enough to figure out just what those activities could be.

Seth

I wouldn't risk giving bad advice to people you don't know or understand what the core problems are. I would leave that up to the professionals. I know you guys mean well but what works for you may be death to someone else.

The guy needs help, by stopping what he's doing is the first step, then leave it to take it's course with the right help.

T.D.

[Dave Schwartz]

This is an excellent thread. If I may weigh in with an opinion or two...


I spend quite a bit of time counseling guys on how to win. There is a logical progression of things to accomplish.

1. Determine that the client is not a winning player.
One would assume that he is not, else why would he be seeking advice.


2. Get the client to admit that he is not a winning player.
This is different than the first step.


3. Come to an agreement about "What a winning player is."
To someone, the definition of "winning player" means "not losing," while to another it means "earning $60k per year at the races" (or some other - often much larger - number).


4. Come to an understanding of how important it is to become a winning player.
This is a fair question. I spoke to someone from board in the last couple of days and it is clear that his intention is to make a significant income from racing. This person is willing to do anything (within reason) to accomplish this goal.

Conversely, a truly recreational player will not likely have the desire and drive to do what is necessary to cross over (as I call it) to being a winning player. And you know what? That is okay.

An client explained it to me really well some years ago: She asked me if I knew anyone who played golf 3 or 4 times each week. When I said, "Yes," she asked me if he had any aspirations of playing on the PGA tour. Point well-taken.

So, what can this type of "serious-but-not-serious-enough" player expect to accomplish? Realistically, he can become a "competitive" player (i.e. lose less). More than likely, this player simply enjoys the game.

"Improvement" to such a player should be based upon increasing his enjoyment of the game and generally depends upon improving his wagering process to include more price horses with a little hedging to keep the hit rate up (which is generally similar to what the win-oriented player needs to accomplish).


5. At this point, either type of player needs to Assess "where he is."
That is, he needs to determine his hit rate, $net, contender hit rate (if applicable) etc. One cannot know how to improve if one does not know what needs improving. Further, without something to measure against, one will not know if one is actually improving.

Actually, improvement is the goal. One does not simply go from losing to winning overnight, although someone who has been playing a very poor strategy (or no strategy at all) may experience just that when the strategy is corrected. (Several on this board have mentioned good selection methods coupled with poor wagering strategies.)


6. Ultimately, a new wagering strategy is learned and adopted.
The learning process itself is one of multiple phases... introduction, acceptance and application... with much testing and confidence-building along the way.


I could go on and on (perhaps I already have).

Moving from losing to winning player starts with a willingness to change and many players do not have that capability.

I am amazed at how many players have taken my (free) Basics of Winning class and, even though they have seen me demonstrate how well it works, they quickly go back to what they were doing before. It is no surprise to me (and probably not to them) that they continue to lose.

Horseplayers (people? me?) are naturally resistant to change. The funniest story I have about that is a man who called me up and explained that he had been losing for 30 years and was tired of it. When I discussed some of the concepts that the winners I knew apply, he said they could not possibly win with an approach like that; that he, with all his experience, knew what it took to win; that nobody could tell him how to handicap the races.

As funny as it sounds, it is representative of most of us, to one degree or another.



Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[GameTheory]

I am amazed at how many players have taken my (free) Basics of Winning class and, even though they have seen me demonstrate how well it works, they quickly go back to what they were doing before. It is no surprise to me (and probably not to them) that they continue to lose.

Horseplayers (people? me?) are naturally resistant to change. The funniest story I have about that is a man who called me up and explained that he had been losing for 30 years and was tired of it. When I discussed some of the concepts that the winners I knew apply, he said they could not possibly win with an approach like that; that he, with all his experience, knew what it took to win; that nobody could tell him how to handicap the races.

As funny as it sounds, it is representative of most of us, to one degree or another.A book called THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE by Robert Fritz will explain these phenonemen and also show why even if you are NOT resistant to change you'll likely end up doing the same thing as before. Showing someone how to do something is not going to get many people to do it. First you've got to remove them from their current pattern. Most think changes come purely as an act of willpower, but if you are stuck in the wrong dynamic, willpower won't get you anywhere either, at least not in the long-term...

[1st time lasix]

Winners at the horse races are a true minority. Unfortunately it the true mathematical essence of the para-mutual game with a hefty takeout. A sobering fact of life. Throw in the infinite complexity of solid handicapping angles, {trainers angles, form, pace, speed, class, surface, jockeys, surface, etc}....the dicipline requirement of money management, the art of creating overlay exotic tickets, the time required for taking notes on observations and you begin to understand that it is a very daunting task. Few have all the various attributes required to do it properly and have the temperment to handle the ups...downs and tough beats. In a perfect world the takeouts on exotics and in the win pool would be cut in half and that minority would certainly grow in number. Not likely to happen. I think the game is enjoyable when you really understand the challenge...love the animals....gamble within your means ....and not let any outcome negatively affect your lifestyle or attitude toward things more important in life. Savor the winning sessions....shrug off the losing days and always try to improve your skills. My experience tells me that a wager small...win big philosophy is the only way to go. It takes some patience. When you get those days when racing luck corresponds to your handicapping and ticket structure skills...you can cover a lot of losing days and have a positive roi for the meet. If you can't afford the loses....you have to quit the game. "Chasing" under pressure is a recipe for disaster. Spend more time exercising, being with your family. volunteering your time to someone less fortunate or channeling your competetive spitit in a more positve channel.

[joeyspicks]

My temperament has changed markedly since the time I first started betting. I would have found myself in a world of trouble had I not learned to control myself.

The Entire post was great Drugs........but the above quote SAYS IT ALL.

This is what I'm talking about most of he time. Lack of displine and emotional control is the biggest reason for losing money. Bigger than having the wrong program etc.

thanks DrugS

[joeyspicks]

Horseplayers (people? me?) are naturally resistant to change. The funniest story I have about that is a man who called me up and explained that he had been losing for 30 years and was tired of it. When I discussed some of the concepts that the winners I knew apply, he said they could not possibly win with an approach like that; that he, with all his experience, knew what it took to win; that nobody could tell him how to handicap the races.

As funny as it sounds, it is representative of most of us, to one degree or another.



Regards,
Dave Schwartz



God Dave I love that!:lol:

he said they could not possibly win with an approach like that; that he, with all his experience, knew what it took to win; that nobody could tell him how to handicap the races. :lol: :lol:

[kitts]

What a super thread. Almost intimidated me from replying. I just want to share what did the discipline thing for me. I handicap at night and write down my bets on a 3x5 card and do not deviate. If there is a significant scratch or off turf then those races are passed.

Works for me.

[bigmack]

Paradoxically, the initial post by Drew illustrates his love of the game and his inability to generate winnings to encourage his interest and enjoyment of handicapping. That, for me is the dividing line, amongst many, that can lure a person into the game while slapping them down with losses. I've never been much of a gambler. I've never placed a sports bet in my life and casino games bore the bejesus out of me.

When I play I don't "jones" on the exhilaration of hitting a 25-1+, or beat myself up over a loosing ticket, it's just a piece of the larger puzzle that forms the outcome of my play at the end of the day/week/...

Push comes to shove Drew and I wouldn't jeopardize your love of the game with losses that can accrue towards a distain for the game.

If you get the chance, play on paper. Enjoy the cerebral portion of the game. Know that DSChwartz knows what he's talking of when he refers to "hedging".

[traynor]

Dave Schwartz has some valuable advice, for those who respond to the format. Unfortuantely, there is a direct correlation between aggression and wagering success that is in direct conflict with defining one's self as a loser as the initial step. For many, it may be the best first step--accurate self-assessment is essential to success, and if you are deluding yourself about being a "winning handicapper," then Dave Schwartz's advice can be some of the most valuable you will ever get.

However, for the others, who are unable to readily relinquish control to others by defining themselves as losers, I have a suggestion: Stop betting, and keep a meticulously accurate journal of every bet you would have made for at least two weeks. Tally the results, and you will easily determine whether you are a winner or loser.

One caveat; every single bet must be clearly and precisely indicated BEFORE the race. No Sartin-style "I coulda had that one" allowed. That will give you a sometimes unnerving insight into your own skill level. The first time you think, "I coulda had that tri by keying the fourth choice with the first, second, and third choices to place and show" you will realize that you are deluding yourself. Put the wager on paper in indelible ink BEFORE THE RACE.

As you progress, you will find that your paper wagers go one of two directions; you will either be boxing four or five horses in every race looking for long prices to pull you out of the hole, or you will turn ultra-conservative, choking down the exacta combinations as tightly as possible, ignoring the digressions into fantasy land and focusing on leveraging your skills. In the latter event, you may find that you can actually turn a profit.

By the end of two weeks, you should know, clearly and unambiguously, whether or not you can win on your own. THEN re-read Dave Schwartz's post and you will know exactly what you need to do. ;)
Good Luck

[Dave Schwartz]

...defining themselves as losers...


I really hope that nobody took what I said to infer that a player who does not win at the races is a loser.

To me, that word denotes a person who is a loser in life, which extends far beyond our realm of horse racing.

Remember those tests you took when you were in school with questions like these?

"If all Bleefers are Globs and some Globs are Hoffers, are all Bleefers Hoffers?"

While I will accept that some horseplayers are losers in life, so are golfers, tennis players and many other avocations/hobbyists. The fact that one does not show a profit for one's choice of intellectual stimulation simly does not qualify as evidence of loserness.

A player who cannot break par on a consistent basis is not considered a loser. Why should a horse player?


I was referring to one being able to admit their level of skill is (apparently) below what it takes to be profitable.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[traynor]

God Dave I love that!:lol:

he said they could not possibly win with an approach like that; that he, with all his experience, knew what it took to win; that nobody could tell him how to handicap the races. :lol: :lol:


It is called "commitment," a specific, technical term for a psychological state that almost guarantees losers will continue to lose, and winners will continue to win. Leon Festinger used the term "cognitive dissonance" to describe it.

Scenario: Player A perceives himself or herself to be a "winning handicapper." Player A will selectively remember wins (that validate the pre-existing self-image) and literally ignore losses (that conflict with the pre-existing self-image). Sounds crazy? No, it sounds like almost every "handicapper" I have ever known. In the 1980s there were whole flocks of Sartin players who kept meticulously detailed records of winning races, and discarded records of losing races in response to Sartin's admonition to "accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative."

The issue is that until you can consciously accept the fact that your self-serving bias is preventing you from processing disconfirming evidence (or, more simply, that you are kidding yourself), what Dave Schwartz is saying may not make as much sense. What you need is what is commonly referred to as a "reality check." Specifically, an objective analysis of the "goodness of fit" between your self-perception of your handicapping skills and the actual results of applying those skills over time.

Dave Schwartz has some really good advice. In order to take advantage of it, you have to do an ACCURATE self-assessment. That is tough for a lot of people. In fact, the tendency toward self-delusion is so prevalent that it is called the "fundamental attribution error." Two people hold up winning tickets. Each looks at the other and thinks, "I picked the winner because of my superior analytical skills and expert knowledge of horse racing. That person just got lucky."

Pay attention to Dave Schwartz. He knows.
Good Luck

[traynor]

I really hope that nobody took what I said to infer that a player who does not win at the races is a loser.

To me, that word denotes a person who is a loser in life, which extends far beyond our realm of horse racing.

Remember those tests you took when you were in school with questions like these?



While I will accept that some horseplayers are losers in life, so are golfers, tennis players and many other avocations/hobbyists. The fact that one does not show a profit for one's choice of intellectual stimulation simly does not qualify as evidence of loserness.

A player who cannot break par on a consistent basis is not considered a loser. Why should a horse player?


I was referring to one being able to admit their level of skill is (apparently) below what it takes to be profitable.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

Therein lies the tale. The connotations of admitting to being a "loser" are profound, and ego-threatening. In comparison, the cost of losing tickets is insignificant. I agree completely with your definition of losing stated above.

It might be more acceptable to many to replace the references to "losing" with the reverse emphasis; "if your current level of handicapping skill is such that your ROI is less than (some arbitray value like 110%) over time, you should consider extending your current skill set with" (or something along that line).

I think you offer unique, valuable, and vitally important information for every handicapper. I wish you could re-frame and re-state it in a way that more would find less ego-threatening. In short, you have a lot to offer that is being ignored by the people who need it most, because of the negative connotations associated with some of the text and definitions used.

I think everyone is convinced you are a sincere handicapper advocate, and offer valuable information and services. It would be to everyone's benefit if your information and explanations were more acceptable (and accessible, in an intellectual sense) to the average racing fan.
Good Luck

PS - I would offer to re-write and edit your website and material, but the same problem may affect you. That is, you already know what is best, and any attempt to change what you have written or designed might be perceived as threatening to your ego. Think about it, Dave. How would you respond to someone telling you that a LOT of what you have written needs to be edited, re-written, or just plain deleted to be more acceptable to your target market? Then understand that is exactly what you are suggesting others do by defining themselves as "losers," regardless of how it is operationalized.

[TurfRuler]

If you feel the need to play, then just play on paper.

Here is my list for what to do if you want to not wager with real money, the top quote is the topper.

Leave the town that you live in that has a race track.

Move to a state that it is illegal to make wager and don't break the law.

Don't replace wagering on horses for a drug high.

Leave before 1995, if not use the internet to get your horse racing information.

Order the racing form for past races (before 1995) and handicap after the fact to see how you would come out.

Never stop hating to lose your money.

Dream big of picking a big pick 6 and try it on paper everyday. (See how thrilled you'll be if you get it.)

Play the free handicapping contests on the internet. If they have prizes accept them if you win.

Go to a racetrack or off track facility every now and then, just to keep the interest and juices flowing, hoping that you can win big.

Unfortunately, since 1988 I have exiled myself to North Carolina and this is how I have lived from day to day.....in purgatory.

[JustRalph]

www.youbet.net

http://www.youbet.net/skin/images/LeftBox_photo.jpg

[joeyspicks]

Dave Schwartz has some really good advice. In order to take advantage of it, you have to do an ACCURATE self-assessment. That is tough for a lot of people. In fact, the tendency toward self-delusion is so prevalent that it is called the "fundamental attribution error." Two people hold up winning tickets. Each looks at the other and thinks, "I picked the winner because of my superior analytical skills and expert knowledge of horse racing. That person just got lucky."

Pay attention to Dave Schwartz. He knows.
Good Luck
.................................................. ..........................


Pay attention to Dave Schwartz. He knows.:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

AGREE 100% Read his stuff....learn and apply:ThmbUp:

[Dave Schwartz]

PS - I would offer to re-write and edit your website and material, but the same problem may affect you. That is, you already know what is best, and any attempt to change what you have written or designed might be perceived as threatening to your ego. Think about it, Dave. How would you respond to someone telling you that a LOT of what you have written needs to be edited, re-written, or just plain deleted to be more acceptable to your target market? Then understand that is exactly what you are suggesting others do by defining themselves as "losers," regardless of how it is operationalized.


Well, I AM working on a new website. And I DO love the idea of volunteers...

:)

[1st time lasix]

Not real sure that two weeks of records data is enough to compile a record that tells you if are a "winner" or a losing gambler at the races. Most people "with a full life away from the track" do not go to the venue daily. In fact many considered "regulars" go about 1-3 times per week. I personally believe that with a "bet small...win big" exotic philosophy.....staying within your bankroll...it may take up to six weeks before you land a couple big signers that cover up all your losing combinations with something extra. Don't misunderstand me....nothing is better than sound handicapping fundamentals...but that learned skill must also be accompanied by betting the proposition {the race odds} correctly. Example: You find a solid 7/2 shot where the well-bet favorite is quite vulnerable due to today's pace scenario, distance or surface....that is when you take a stand. You play your selected horse to win but you also combine him as a key with a couple of higher odds overlay horses. {Vertically in the tri or super... or horizontally in multi-race wagers} to get yourself the big score. Beating the public chalk is not easy because generally there is a good reason why the favorites are being played. Getting enough return $$$ when you win for the true probability of the outcome is the crux of the matter. I think there are enough mistakes made in the simulcast era to catch some nice overlay winners. When you can identify mistakes....or vulnerability Bingo! You can get $500-700 for every 2 you bet. That return can cover a lot of losing unit wager tickets.

[xciceroguy]

Try golfing...........

[Cesario!]

This is an excellent thread. If I may weigh in with an opinion or two...


I spend quite a bit of time counseling guys on how to win. There is a logical progression of things to accomplish.

1. Determine that the client is not a winning player.
One would assume that he is not, else why would he be seeking advice.
[edited]

Regards,
Dave Schwartz

Dave:

I like your approach, but have one question: Do you believe that every person has the personality to be a winning horseplayer/gambler?

I'll admit that I go back and forth on this issue. But, deep down, I wonder if an obsession with changing not just how you play, but, as a result, who you are can be more detrimental than good.

Seth

[njcurveball]

Drew wrote "I am an average handicapper who has good runs but I am nowhere near others on this board because I have bad money management skills and some horrible tendancies like chasing, etc."


I agree with many posts that this thread has been one of the best I have seen on this board.

What do you consider an "average" handicapper? If it is a book definition, they would lose exactly the track take and breakage, roughly 20%. If you put that into terms of the favorite, they would win 1 out of 3 races and get back $4.80.

If you can accurately track your picks without betting, I would suggest seeing where you are the best. Perhaps you need to stay away from turf races, or maybe just bet those races exclusively.

Maybe Maidens are draining your bankroll, or perhaps stakes races? You may be a hero at Mountaineer and a zero at Charles Town.

Record keeping is good, but only if it accurately reflects your choices. I would suggest setting aside $200 and playing 100 races $2 to win. If you are "average", you will have $160 at the end of this.

Try limiting it to 10 plays a day and that gives you 10 days of "fun" for 40 dollars ($4 a day if you are average). Cheap in todays entertainment world.

At the end of the 100 plays, group them by surface, distance, class, and track. You may be surprised that your perception of being average actually means you are great on turf and terrible on dirt, or visa versa. You may be a maiden wizard and lose all Graded stakes.

The quickest way to cure "bad" money management skills is to flat bet and many pros do this as well. Allocate your bankroll for 100 plays, all flat bet with the same amount. That will be a true test of your handicapping skills.

And thanks for starting this great thread with your honesty!

I wish you the best!
Jim

[Indulto]

Originally posted by Dave Schwartz

… 3. Come to an agreement about "What a winning player is."
To someone, the definition of "winning player" means "not losing," while to another it means "earning $60k per year at the races" (or some other - often much larger - number).

4. Come to an understanding of how important it is to become a winning player.
This is a fair question. I spoke to someone from board in the last couple of days and it is clear that his intention is to make a significant income from racing. This person is willing to do anything (within reason) to accomplish this goal.

Conversely, a truly recreational player will not likely have the desire and drive to do what is necessary to cross over (as I call it) to being a winning player. And you know what? That is okay.DS,
IMO there are many valid definitions for “winning player,” but only one for “professional player” – someone whose sole source of support is, and whose lifestyle depends upon, income from wagering. Anyone else betting on horse races -- profitable or not -- is a “recreational player.” If their primary income which pays the bills comes from any other endeavor – or, if retired, comes from pension, SS, and/or non-wagering investments – they should not be considered “professional” (if successful, however, I might grant them “professorial” status).

I’m sure that applying your techniques and data may well create and sustain “professional players,” but does it do so successfully for a greater % of those who attempt it than the % of those who are successful professionals among the horseplaying population in general?

Even rarer than the highly successful professional player – and possibly really worthy of envy on the part of other horseplayers – is the recreational player whose primary income is racing-related. Beyer and Crist come to mind immediately. Perhaps you qualify as well. To me, the question “Is one a winning horseplayer?” is not as significant as “Is one a happy horseplayer?” :D
Originally posted by twindouble
I wouldn't risk giving bad advice to people you don't know or understand what the core problems are. I would leave that up to the professionals. I know you guys mean well but what works for you may be death to someone else.

The guy needs help, by stopping what he's doing is the first step, then leave it to take it's course with the right help.

T.D.TD,
I agree, but exactly what kind of "professionals" did you have in mind? ;) Originally posted by 1st time lasix
… I think the game is enjoyable when you really understand the challenge...love the animals....gamble within your means ....and not let any outcome negatively affect your lifestyle or attitude toward things more important in life. Savor the winning sessions....shrug off the losing days and always try to improve your skills. My experience tells me that a wager small...win big philosophy is the only way to go.


… If you can't afford the loses....you have to quit the game.1TL,
My sentiments, exactly.Originally posted by Drew
… I enjoy handicapping but I honestly would rather not bet because it takes away my enjoyment of the races. I enjoy going to the races, simulcasting, or watching from home on TVG/HRTV. Does anybody know a game or stragety to keep myself amused so I don't have to bet.Drew,
Losing isn’t fun, but betting doesn’t have to always be the most prominent aspect of the game for you. Focus on handicapping as many races on the card as you can before structuring any bets. Try maximizing and prolonging your interest and excitement by playing only P3’s for a while -- each series for $12 or less (3 x 2 x 2, etc.) using your top choice and best value selection in each race -- or play “Round Robin” parlays on races that really interest you. Like 1TL suggested: Bet small to win big. Focus on enjoying all aspects of the entertaining event you are experiencing and lower expectations for potential payoffs from predictable performances while permitting pleasant surprises.:lol:

[Drew]

I still have to reread most of the posts to get a good idea of what I will do. First, thanks for all the replies. I would not say I am a compulsive player. I rarely play more than once a week and I am a $2, $5 player. I just don't like losing in general if I lose $14 it just ruins my day. When I chase I up by bets to $5 or $10 and I never lose more than $50 in a day. I just wanted to clear that up.

[Dave Schwartz]

I like your approach, but have one question: Do you believe that every person has the personality to be a winning horseplayer/gambler?


No. In fact, I would say that most people (including me at one time) lack some personality traits that are necessary to succeed at wagering. Personally, I still struggle with success issues of self-imposed limitations (but that is outside the scope of our conversation).

The better question is, "Can the necessary traits be successfully taught and learned?"

While I suppose there are some limitations individuals that jsut will not learn/be taught, I would say that most people can develop the necessary traits if they are willing to make change.


Dave

[PlanB]

Aren't computers supposed to protect us from our weaknesses? I mean,
if it says, bet #6, then how could someone sabotage that message?>
Maybe the program is incomplete?

[Dave Schwartz]

Indy,

IMO there are many valid definitions for “winning player,” but only one for “professional player” – someone whose sole source of support is, and whose lifestyle depends upon, income from wagering. Anyone else betting on horse races -- profitable or not -- is a “recreational player.” If their primary income which pays the bills comes from any other endeavor – or, if retired, comes from pension, SS, and/or non-wagering investments – they should not be considered “professional” (if successful, however, I might grant them “professorial” status).


I totally disagree with your definition.

If we applied that definition to (say) professional athletes, then Barry Bonds is no longer a professional because he makes so much on endorsements.

I would say that anyone who can make a significant amount of money from wagering is a "professional." If you need to put a number with it, then I'd say peg it at 50% above the Average American so that it is clearly better than a job.


I’m sure that applying your techniques and data may well create and sustain “professional players,” but does it do so successfully for a greater % of those who attempt it than the % of those who are successful professionals among the horseplaying population in general?

LOL- So, you want to know the impact value for using my approach, huh? Without offering any empirical evidence to support this, we've got around 60 active clients (in a good month) and 8 of those fall into the professional and mega-professional category. You be the judge. In addition, we still support two Asian teams and one based in Australia. One of them alone wagered over $700 million. (Note. They do not all use my software as it was intended and a couple don't use my software at all but they do use my approach.)


In my maybe-not-so-humble opinion on this issue, I would say that moving to the winners' side is a struggle of major effort. This struggle must begin and end with small, incremental improvements, not constantly starting over as most horseplayers tend to do.

You find an approach, you benchmark that approach, and off you go to improving it. Little by little, you make improvements that take you closer to where you want to be; presumably on the profit side.

Only after great effort should one abandon what they are doing and start over. Obviously, some approaches are destined to "top out" far short of being profitable, while others have much more potential.

And Grasshopper, you must choose wisely where you begin because the starting point means so much. ;)


Dave

[ryesteve]

Aren't computers supposed to protect us from our weaknesses? I mean,
if it says, bet #6, then how could someone sabotage that message?>
Maybe the program is incomplete?
Most people who use software don't use it in a black box fashion. And even if they did, it probably wouldn't tell them "bet #6"... it would probably tell them "bet #6 if the odds are better than X". It wouldn't tell you what to do if the odds are hovering between "X" and "X-1" at 1 minute to post time. Also, it doesn't stop you from being distracted by a horse that looks "live" on the tote board. It doesn't stop you from coming up with "creative" exotic wagers that turn out to be bad ideas. It doesn't stop you from hedging your way out of most of your profit. It doesn't stop you from recklessly raising your bets trying to recoup losses. Etc.

Unless the computer makes the pick and then pipes in the bet for you, there are plenty of things that can go wrong.

[twindouble]

TD,
I agree, but exactly what kind of "professionals" did you have in mind? ;)
Quote: Indulto;

That's just it, we don't know if he needs "professional' help or not, there organizations out there that he might qualify for. Below describes a compulsive gambler. It's not that easy to talk someone out of it or giving him your tools to succeed. I dug this up but I've met many though out my life. There's do's and don't when it comes to gambling, either you see it, understand it and live by it or your in trouble.


Preoccupation with gambling (spending much of the time thinking about gambling, such as past experiences, or ways to get more money to gamble with)

Needing to gamble larger amounts of money in order to feel excitement
Repeated unsuccessful attempts to cut back or quit gambling
Restlessness or irritability when trying to cut back or quit gambling
Gambling to escape problems or feelings of sadness or anxiety
Chasing losses (gambling larger amounts of money to try to make back previous losses)
Lying about the amount of time or money spent gambling
Committing crimes to get money to gamble
Loss of job, significant relationship, or educational or career opportunity due to gambling
Need to borrow money for survival due to gambling losses

[Light]

I rarely play more than once a week... I never lose more than $50 in a day.

I don't see how that is a problem. Most losing horseplayers would love to average a $50 a week loss. Horseracing economics has not kept up with inflation. In the 1950's a win bet was a $2 minimum. Today a win bet is $2 minimum, but its not worth even half of what $2 was worth in the 50's. I don't think I could go out with my wife to dinner and the movies for $50. Don't kid yourself.You're doing great :ThmbUp:

[PlanB]

RyeSteve, I both see what you said as Right & Wrong. The ONLY factor
you claim is last minute odds. Its a very rapid decision feedbackloop: decision,
BET LESS, BET MORE, NO BET. I am not comfy with that strategy given
today's technology. Por Ejemplo: I've made a great formula that COULD
calculate a win bet as being DUMB/GREAT/or better used on TOP with horses
underneath. On most occasions, given the up-to-minute payoffs, you can
raise your "payoff" by ~9%. BUT, do I have the last payoffs? That's the
limiting factor.

[ryesteve]

The ONLY factor you claim is last minute odds.
No it wasn't. The was just one of 4 or 5 things I mentioned. The rest all had to do with how you end structuring your bet, how you manage your bankroll, and how you allow extra information to lead to second-guessing. These have very little to do with odds.

[Dave Schwartz]

Most people who use software don't use it in a black box fashion. And even if they did, it probably wouldn't tell them "bet #6"... it would probably tell them "bet #6 if the odds are better than X". It wouldn't tell you what to do if the odds are hovering between "X" and "X-1" at 1 minute to post time. Also, it doesn't stop you from being distracted by a horse that looks "live" on the tote board. It doesn't stop you from coming up with "creative" exotic wagers that turn out to be bad ideas. It doesn't stop you from hedging your way out of most of your profit. It doesn't stop you from recklessly raising your bets trying to recoup losses. Etc.

Unless the computer makes the pick and then pipes in the bet for you, there are plenty of things that can go wrong.


That would be HSH, version 4. Coming soon to a theatre near you. ;)

[traynor]

Well, I AM working on a new website. And I DO love the idea of volunteers...

:)

When I was a child and foolish enough to be aboard a big iron boat, I once fell for the newbie curse; when the call went out. "All volunteers take one step forward!" everyone but the newbies took one step back. That was a LONG time ago. I appreciate your offer, but I am way past the stage of volunteering for projects that require linguistic or rhetorical proficiency. I only do that for rather large sums of money. Worth it, of course, but definitely not cheap. ;)

Coherence in web design requires consistency and structure. A high-end web design with 100 pages (more or less) of content would run in the $8000-12,000 range, with the upper figure more realistic. It is possible to hire "web developers" all day who will do the same thing for $500-800. Some are even modestly talented. That misses the point entirely. Your website, and the content thereof, is the main point of interaction between you and your prospective clients. It is like saving a buck or two by getting those perforated business card sheets at Office Max; it can be done, but is it ultimately worth it? The principal is the same, only the amounts are different.

Ultimately, what you pay for in web design is reduction of semantic noise; those glaring little distractions that tug at the periphery of consciousness and create impressions and opinions without thought. Whether because of rhetorical inconsistencies, or grammatical glitches (like changing in mid-paragraph from third person to second person, or active voice to passive voice), or inappropriate and distracting blends of fonts and colors, semantic noise should be reduced as much as possible. The best design is the one you notice the least--all you really see is the message.
Good Luck

[Grifter]

Traynor -- Know what you mean... I find it distracting when someone uses "principal" when they mean "principle".... Doesn't stay at the periphery of my consciousness, but kicks the damn door down....

-- Grifter

[twindouble]

Traynor -- Know what you mean... I find it distracting when someone uses "principal" when they mean "principle".... Doesn't stay at the periphery of my consciousness, but kicks the damn door down....

-- Grifter

Now now, you shouldn't let little things like that bother you, even if it's just for a moment. You'll end up swatting flies don't exist. :D

[1st time lasix]

I ALWAYS THOUGHT A "PROFESSIONAL" WAS SOMEONE WHO PLAYED OR WORKED FOR MONEY.....SINCE HORSEPLAYERS WAGER FOR MONEY....WHY NOT ACT AS A PROFESSIONAL? DO THE HOMEWORK, WAGER WITH BANKROLL DICIPLINE, FOCUS ON THE TASK AT HAND, SEEK OPPORTUNITY, PASS RACES WHERE YOU DON'T FIND IT AND LEAVE THE DRINKING/SOCIALIZING TO THE END OF THE DAY AS YOU RECOUNT WHAT HAPPENED. MAY SOUND LIKE "NO FUN" BUT THE CHALLENGE IS THE FUN FOR A HANDICAPPER. MUCH LIKE A SOLID ROUND OF PAR GOLF TO A SCRATCH PLAYER. ;)

[Dave Schwartz]

1st Time,

I agree with you. Maybe a good test of "professional" is someone who makes enough money that most players would be willing to say, "I wish I made that much at the races." <G>

BTW, please turn off your caps lock. On a BBS that is akin to shouting.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[traynor]

Traynor -- Know what you mean... I find it distracting when someone uses "principal" when they mean "principle".... Doesn't stay at the periphery of my consciousness, but kicks the damn door down....

-- Grifter

My point exactly. Thank you. ;) Of course, it could be dismissed as an obscure double entendre intended to induce syntactic ambiguity, but that might be lost on those who fail to respond to being "sent to the principal's offfice," and all that implies.

Yet another distraction might be "implied mind reading," the presumption that one person "knows" what another "means" in writing. Or would that be too mean a thing to say?
Good Luck, and thanks for the comment. :)

[Indulto]

I totally disagree with your definition.

If we applied that definition to (say) professional athletes, then Barry Bonds is no longer a professional because he makes so much on endorsements.

I would say that anyone who can make a significant amount of money from wagering is a "professional." If you need to put a number with it, then I'd say peg it at 50% above the Average American so that it is clearly better than a job.Regardless of how much Bonds makes in endorsements, he gets them because he is a professional MLB player whose salary is sufficient to pay for his lifestyle including steroids. :lol: My definition may contain "semantic noise," but I think I'm on-track here. :D LOL- So, you want to know the impact value for using my approach, huh? Without offering any empirical evidence to support this, we've got around 60 active clients (in a good month) and 8 of those fall into the professional and mega-professional category. You be the judge. In addition, we still support two Asian teams and one based in Australia. One of them alone wagered over $700 million. (Note. They do not all use my software as it was intended and a couple don't use my software at all but they do use my approach.)I tried to slip in the IV surreptitiously, but you caught me red-handed. Not to red-board, but to really calculate the impact value, we'd need to know the total number of people who actually purchased the product (including returns) and narrow down the number who used it sufficiently profitably to support themseves.In my maybe-not-so-humble opinion on this issue, I would say that moving to the winners' side is a struggle of major effort. This struggle must begin and end with small, incremental improvements, not constantly starting over as most horseplayers tend to do.

You find an approach, you benchmark that approach, and off you go to improving it. Little by little, you make improvements that take you closer to where you want to be; presumably on the profit side.Very insightful. I believe I have done that to some extent, but the game keeps changing on me.Only after great effort should one abandon what they are doing and start over. Obviously, some approaches are destined to "top out" far short of being profitable, while others have much more potential.That sounded like my old stockbroker.;) And Grasshopper, you must choose wisely where you begin because the starting point means so much. ;) Indeed, winter is almost upon us. Should I visit SA or GP this year?

[Dave Schwartz]

Indy,

I tried to slip in the IV surreptitiously, but you caught me red-handed. Not to red-board, but to really calculate the impact value, we'd need to know the total number of people who actually purchased the product (including returns) and narrow down the number who used it sufficiently profitably to support themseves.


Actually, that would not work well. Most of the entrants in that race were scratched. Or, more realistically, they had no intention of showing up at the gate.


A significant percentage of people who use any software give it a try for a month or two and drop away. People who spend large money on software amazingly, do the same thing.

Here is an interesting statistic... we average 3 new customers per year who buy our software and never install it! Back in the DOS days it was even higher!


On the topic of software pricing, we have toyed with the idea of tripling the price or giving it away. LOL - quite different theories.


We had a marketing guru tell us, after lengthy conversations that people who will spend more than $279 for software will spend $1,500 or more; that raising the price that far will have no impact on sales.

Conversely, he said that if we give the software away, we get likely get three times as many customers but they will only last one month as opposed to our average of almost a year.


Dave

[Wiley]

I would not say I am a compulsive player. I rarely play more than once a week and I am a $2, $5 player. I just don't like losing in general if I lose $14 it just ruins my day. When I chase I up by bets to $5 or $10 and I never lose more than $50 in a day. I just wanted to clear that up.
If $50 a week doesn't effect your financial way of life, look at horse racing as a hobby or another form of entertainment. I love the wagering part of the game but I have always looked at racing as much as a sport and follow the top athletes just like in other sports. I follow and enjoy other professional sports but I only wager on racing. Attending a professional sporting event costs in the $200 to $300 range for a family of four, probably on the conservative side, so your track loss is marginal compared to say an avid baseball fan who attends at least a game a week during the season.

If you can't tolerate the losing part of racing why not try to become a better handicapper. If you haven't already, read some background books, you will find tons of recommendations on this board through searches, Beyer, Quirin, Davidowitz, Brohamer as examples. An easy place here to look is the reading room at Joe Takach's take that I find useful. You can also learn alot from the wealth of great information on this board from a wide variety of handicapping styles and many different program reviews and descriptions.

Guys that win on a consistent basis put a lot of work into it, playing once a week makes it tough to be a consistent winner and it's hard to consider your activity anything more than a hobby at that level. Realize no one wins every day that they play. We all have lousy days or even lousy weeks and lousy years for the longtime players. I could be wrong but I don't think there is any one 'holy grail' way to beat this game that satisfies everyones personality. Dave Swartz mentions a 30 year losing player who won't change even when given a clear example on how to beat the game which I think comes from ego and baggage. It's hard to overcome 30 years of negative learning and horseplayers are notorious for their independence and a belief that with enough gathered knowledge and experience they can beat the game on their own.

If that doesn't work and you want to continue to attend the races without the lure of wagering and losing then another option is to move to Dubai or Thailand where wagering is not allowed on racing or as someone suggested attend nonwagering county fairs. Close any online accounts and use, as Ralph suggests, Youbet.net that I guess uses fantasy money for wagering. Nice thread and responses.