What Were They Thinking ?

[john del riccio]

There are always going to be races where things fall right into place
and have you asking yourself why the betting public has percieved
things a certain way by backing up those opinions at the mutuel windows.

Handicapping the day before and being married to certain selections on race day is never a good thing. After handicapping thoroughly and landing on a solid 6-1 ML prospect can sometimes turn into a mediocre play at 2-1. The flip side is also possible. A solid 7-2 ML play can sometimes turn into a 5-1
gift.

A new feature we have added to our web-site will articles with
races that make you ask the question of "What were they thinking ?"
The link just below will open up the article.

http://www.woodsideassociates.com/pdfs/wwtt1.pdf



For those of you who are interested in doing some test-driving of the
Henry Kuck Ratings, simply goto our "Woulda, Soulda, Choulda" page and you can get yesterdays ratings emailed to you for any tracks that you select.
This service is FREE. You will be able to regression test for a finite period of time. The link to that page is:

http://www.woodsideassociates.com/wsc.php


Good Luck,
John

[PriceAnProbability]

There are always going to be races where things fall right into place
and have you asking yourself why the betting public has percieved
things a certain way by backing up those opinions at the mutuel windows.

Handicapping the day before and being married to certain selections on race day is never a good thing. After handicapping thoroughly and landing on a solid 6-1 ML prospect can sometimes turn into a mediocre play at 2-1.

So you're saying if I think a horse should be say 5-2, but it's 6-1 in the program, I have a good bet until I notice that the barn, the grooms, about fifty guys from the backstretch who can't speak English, the Maitre'D from the clubhouse dining room, and a security guard who is more blinged out than a rap star lined up at the $50.00 window to bet the horse, at which point the "value" is gone.

Okay.

[john del riccio]

I think you are being sarcastic for no reason. All I am saying is that sometimes
leaving for the races with a solid value play in mind can turn into a not so valuable 2-1 prospect by post-time. My approach is always based on value. Thats my point, nothing else. You can never tell in advance how the crowd will react at race time and it pays to be flexible and patient. Having made the mistake of being married to a selection who's odd's depleted significantly
by post time is something I now avoid. The flip side of that is when a horse gets left alone to the point where its odds are significantly higher than its chances of winning, it pays to take note of these occurances. Its my approach, it doesn't need to be everyones. It seems to work for me.

John

[PriceAnProbability]

I think you are being sarcastic for no reason. All I am saying is that sometimes
leaving for the races with a solid value play in mind can turn into a not so valuable 2-1 prospect by post-time. My approach is always based on value.

So is mine.

If you find no value in inside money that is not my concern.

I nailed a cold $524.80 trifecta in the first at Philadelphia today. How'd you do?

[Suff]

So is mine.

If you find no value in inside money that is not my concern.

I nailed a cold $524.80 trifecta in the first at Philadelphia today. How'd you do?

lol. 5 and a quarter? It was probably gone by the 6th race. or half of it was.

Touting a funk & wagner trifecta after the fact is sooooooo......ucked up?

[njcurveball]

I have to say that the crowd was sharp in the race you have mentioned. The favorite was the best horse in the race, check the replay.

If these two horses both come back in the same race, you can bet the favorite comfortably against the winner.

I like your bravado, but using figures to toss favorites out after a race is run, is probably the easiest thing to do in racing.

Yes things fell into place this race, if you bet the winner. Congrats!

[Tom]

Everyone who ever lost a fortune had to have one to start with.

Don't mind him, John, many of us appreciate your posts.:ThmbUp:

[PriceAnProbability]

lol. 5 and a quarter? It was probably gone by the 6th race. or half of it was.

Not even close. Actually extended a bit on the rest of the card. Lots of dumb NY money comes into Philadelphia on Tuesdays.

The original debate was whether or not the discovery of inside money is worth the odds drop caused by it. My research says conclusively that it is. This guy says it's not.

What's your opinion?

[bigmack]

The original debate was whether or not the discovery of inside money is worth the odds drop caused by it. My research says conclusively that it is. This guy says it's not.
So your "research" of spoting the barn, the grooms, about fifty guys from the backstretch who can't speak English, the Maitre'D from the clubhouse dining room, and a security guard who is more blinged out than a rap star lined up at the $50.00 window to bet the horse is your clue to bet? Sounds like you're more of BF Skinner type than an actual handicapper. Whatever it takes I guess. That "research" gets a bit time consuming though huh?

"Honey, I cant' talk now, I'm counting the number of people associated with a horse who are betting on it" :lol:

[Tom]

"Honey, I cant' talk now, I'm counting the number of people associated with a horse who are betting on it" :lol:



Oh, I get it - it's a mechanical thing? :kiss:

[MichaelNunamaker]

Hi PriceAnProbability,

You wrote "The original debate was whether or not the discovery of inside money is worth the odds drop caused by it."

OK, for the sake of discussion, I'll accept as a given that when there is inside money on a horse, that is tremendously positive factor. That leaves the question of how can you tell if there is inside money on a horse?

Mike Nunamaker

[ezrabrooks]

Hi PriceAnProbability,

You wrote "The original debate was whether or not the discovery of inside money is worth the odds drop caused by it."

OK, for the sake of discussion, I'll accept as a given that when there is inside money on a horse, that is tremendously positive factor. That leaves the question of how can you tell if there is inside money on a horse?

Mike Nunamaker

The age old question..."inside money"...or just "shoe clerks" getting on board. Value is what you make of it. After the race, all winners have value, its the before race thing that causes the value question to come into play.

Ez

[john del riccio]

Mike,

Actually, My original point was simply identifying value and had nothing to do with "smart money". It had promarily to do with a horses odds being much higher than its chance of winning.

There is most definitely smart money but it is pretty obvious that the truly BIG money is not put through the pools anyway. Yes, some of it is there, but why would you make a very large bet into a realtively small pool. On big days, several thousand in the win pool will not likely make dent, a weekday at most any B or C track will tilt the tote.

John

[BIG RED]

I was just going to say what the original point was, and you got the thread back on track.

I used to go to the track for just two types of races. They were Allowance and route turfs. This was before simulcasting, so, there weren't to many times I would have a bet. Yes, I do relate to what you said. What I used to get very disheartened over, was watching my 3rd ml choice get bet down to 7/5, there goes the day. I would go have a beer, and go home. Wasted trip? No, because there were days were patients were rewarded. That was years ago though.

[john del riccio]

Big Red,

The surprise of having an evenly matched group on paper turn into
a pari-mutuel puzzle happens alot as well. I can't tell you how many times
that I have handicapped a race and wound up with three evenly matched prospects with no real strong feeling for either. Then when the betting starts
it becomes apparent that the crowd has other ideas. Trying to make sense
of that in real time can be a challenge (sometimes we miss subtler hints in our handicapping), but if you've been thorough in your handicapping, you have to go with the price. There are times when it doesn't work out, but if you use the price as your guide to the final decision process, you will alsways be ahead of the game if you are both consistent and a thorough handicapper.

John

[BIG RED]

That's a different barrel of monkeys altogether.

I was commenting on one horse. More than one, you always will have that option to go for higher odds, if you choose to take that root. Hedging may be the way to go also. Many different aspects, even exotics then to get your returns worth.

[cj]

What were they thinking Part Deux?

Tampa, Monday, January 30th, Race 6


1 Quackers Appeal 89
2 Marshall Rooster 55
3 Heza Wild Guy 84
4 Affirmative Action 83
5 Puppeteer 81
6 Bodgiteer 84
7 Curry's Honor 84
8 Grato Recuerdo 94
9 Prospectors Legacy 83


8 24.40 9.60 6.40
8-1 exacta 74.20

[bigmack]

Tampa, Monday, January 30th, Race 6
Sometimes Tuesdays feel like Mondays but the point is made.

Grato: top Quirin, top class, top PER, top pace
Wins W2W

[skate]

I was just going to say what the original point was, and you got the thread back on track.

I used to go to the track for just two types of races. They were Allowance and route turfs. This was before simulcasting, so, there weren't to many times I would have a bet. Yes, I do relate to what you said. What I used to get very disheartened over, was watching my 3rd ml choice get bet down to 7/5, there goes the day. I would go have a beer, and go home. Wasted trip? No, because there were days were patients were rewarded. That was years ago though.

that wouldn't be red boarding or would it?
but hey , good move red.

and thanks

[john del riccio]

TAM is one of the best places to play after the first 3 weeks. I went there last summer for a few days and had a great time. Lezcano was like a man amonngst men down there and overlays were occuring in many races. If you have never been to TAM and you get a chance to, take the time to do so. The track is so close to the fans that it feels like you are part of it.

John

[trying2win]

So is mine.

If you find no value in inside money that is not my concern.

I nailed a cold $524.80 trifecta in the first at Philadelphia today. How'd you do?

PRICEANPROBABILITY:

--Yawn! Another bragger with probably low-self esteem, who feels the need to boast about his alleged accomplishments in order to raise his ego. I'm going to add you to my 'IGNORE' list of PA members, who seem to have traits of being either 'uncouth' or 'legends in their own mind'.

T2W

[PriceAnProbability]

PRICEANPROBABILITY:

--Yawn! Another bragger with probably low-self esteem, who feels the need to boast about his alleged accomplishments in order to raise his ego. I'm going to add you to my 'IGNORE' list of PA members, who seem to have traits of being either 'uncouth' or 'legends in their own mind'.

T2W

Alleged?

You think I can fake BRIS records?

Oh wait, you're JEALOUS. You come here for answers and bash those who have them as know-it-alls.

Bernardini wasn't a redboard, and I got flamed even more for that.

[PriceAnProbability]

What were they thinking Part Deux?

Tampa, Monday, January 30th, Race 6


1 Quackers Appeal 89
2 Marshall Rooster 55
3 Heza Wild Guy 84
4 Affirmative Action 83
5 Puppeteer 81
6 Bodgiteer 84
7 Curry's Honor 84
8 Grato Recuerdo 94
9 Prospectors Legacy 83


8 24.40 9.60 6.40
8-1 exacta 74.20

On what scale/method does an 11-1 shot rate five points higher than the rest of the field?

[PriceAnProbability]

I think you are being sarcastic for no reason. All I am saying is that sometimes
leaving for the races with a solid value play in mind can turn into a not so valuable 2-1 prospect by post-time. My approach is always based on value. Thats my point, nothing else. You can never tell in advance how the crowd will react at race time and it pays to be flexible and patient. Having made the mistake of being married to a selection who's odd's depleted significantly
by post time is something I now avoid. The flip side of that is when a horse gets left alone to the point where its odds are significantly higher than its chances of winning, it pays to take note of these occurances. Its my approach, it doesn't need to be everyones. It seems to work for me.

John

In the real world, you know, where people actually BET money, inside money is generally respected and not treated as a theoretical "value" equation.

You write as if you are a winning horseplayer or want people to think you are. How much in winnings did you declare on your income taxes last year? That's something winning horseplayers do and anyone trying to sell stuff wouldn't hesitate to allow scrutiny of.

Have a nice day.

[cj]

On what scale/method does an 11-1 shot rate five points higher than the rest of the field?

I use the Beyer scale, but combine pace and speed and a few other smaller factors.

As for "inside money", how exactly do you identify it? Even if it could be identified, I would find it of no value in 95% of races.

[PriceAnProbability]

I use the Beyer scale, but combine pace and speed and a few other smaller factors.

As for "inside money", how exactly do you identify it? Even if it could be identified, I would find it of no value in 95% of races.

So you project a speed figure for the horse that you think the horse will earn that day. That's what I do with my "power rating."

I don't think I've ever had a horse with a five-point edge over a large field pay 11-1, but I could see where one might pay 9-2.

I'm sure you'll be thrilled when I release my book on how to convert that list of ratings into an accurate morning line LOL.

[cj]

So you project a speed figure for the horse that you think the horse will earn that day. That's what I do with my "power rating."

I don't think I've ever had a horse with a five-point edge over a large field pay 11-1, but I could see where one might pay 9-2.

I'm sure you'll be thrilled when I release my book on how to convert that list of ratings into an accurate morning line LOL.

5 points is about 2-3 lengths. It happens, and I'd go broke if the best I could ever get was 9-2 on this type of horse.

As for converting to an odds line, I already do it. I don't know how accurate it is for every horse, but it gets enough overlays to make money.

[PriceAnProbability]

5 points is about 2-3 lengths. It happens, and I'd go broke if the best I could ever get was 9-2 on this type of horse.

As for converting to an odds line, I already do it. I don't know how accurate it is for every horse, but it gets enough overlays to make money.

If you are getting 9-2 (let alone 11-1) on horses with five-point power-rating (power rating = projected figure for today) horses, you will not go broke, I assure you, unless you are the worst money manager of all time. The other thing is you might get a lot of fluctuations, where your top figure also loses more often.

You're about the only horseplayer on this board where I would vouch that you are profitable without asking to see a tax return to verify it.

After much deliberation, I decided not to release my method for pre-race projecting, because even a profitable method winds up unprofitable if one does that, but the formula for making the odds line can be released without killing the profitability.

The only main difference in how we handicap, it seems, is that you use pace to adjust the figures, and I use multiple performances (when available), which in a way leads to the same thing because a pace-skewed speed-figure will usually not get any confirmation from a horse's other races, or if it does, then it's not as "skewed" as we might be led to believe.

[Kelso]

After much deliberation, I decided not to release my method for pre-race projecting, because even a profitable method winds up unprofitable if one does that,

<snip>

The only main difference in how we handicap, it seems, is that you use pace to adjust the figures, and I use multiple performances (when available)




Does this mean you work with only speed figures to construct your power ratings?

Do you restrict the multi-performances at which you look by quantity and/or recency of a horse's prior races ... or do you use all the races the horse has run?

(Greatly disappointed by your "release" decision, but certainly understand your rationale.)

Thank you.

[cj]

If you are getting 9-2 (let alone 11-1) on horses with five-point power-rating...

This is getting off track. By posting what I did, I was being sarcastic. I could find races every single day where my top figure horse was big odds and post "what were they thinking?" after the fact. Plenty of them lose as well.

The only thing that matters is if you can decide what is and what is not a good bet. Obviously, this horse had negatives the public was focusing on. Sometimes those negatives overcome any perceived figure edge a horse may have and the public was right.

In the above example, if I made an odds line based on figures alone, the winner would have been 2-1, or probably lower. The public saw the horse as 11-1, after takeout. I doubt either was right. Anytime a handicapper sees what he thinks is a greatly overbet or underbet horse, the truth is usally somewhere in the middle.

[PriceAnProbability]

Does this mean you work with only speed figures to construct your power ratings?

Do you restrict the multi-performances at which you look by quantity and/or recency of a horse's prior races ... or do you use all the races the horse has run?

(Greatly disappointed by your "release" decision, but certainly understand your rationale.)

Thank you.

Actually, the sharper horseplayers will be very glad I don't release "Volume II" becuase that leaves more profitability on the table for all of us. The method in Volume I is the actual method anyway, since that deals with what to do once you've made your figure projections. Volume II would also cost about $50,000.00 each since a big bettor could make that much with a simple $0.01 bump in his ROI. Beyer didn't teach people how to make speed figures for each day, but he still published his method for making them, for those who could handle the math. My book will be very similar to that.

For example, for about five years I did very well betting Scott Lake's horses on Saturdays and against them the rest of the week. It just seemed that Lake would bring out his best horses on that day of the week, and they would run back to whatever back class they had, and a best-case scenario would unfold more often than not. I got a lot of 2-1 and 3-1 payoffs on horses who should have been 6-5 or less if one knew about the angle.

I publish that now because I no longer use the angle, and don't care who has it. I doubt it's even profitable anymore (or if it ever was profitable, or maybe I just combined it right with other factors).

Point is, let's say this angle had an ROI of $1.10. Now let's say I put it in my book. What happens is either it's a losing angle, which makes me look bad, or it's a winning angle, my readers destroy it, and the game is tougher for all of us.

As for how I look at "multiple performances," what I mean is that CJ might see a horse who earned an 80 last out, decide that it was pace-deflated, and bump it up to an 85 or 90, while I might look at the horse's last five races to see if the last one was a true deflation; i.e., if the horse had 86, 87, 88, 85, and 89 before the 80, I might be willing to accept the pace adjustment more readily.

As for how to make power ratings, literally every relevant factor must be considered, because any factor that isn't will repeatedly destroy your morning line, your selections, your wagers, and your exotic wagers where you keep missing by one slot. For example, if you don't account for pace inflation or deflation of a performance, you'll ignore some horse who dueled to a 44.2 half mile, quit and earned a 75, when in fact you should have given it an 85. Your morning line will be off, your concept of "value" will be flawed, etc. Same thing if you don't downgrade a horse who is claimed off a supertrainer by a crap barn, or upgrade one if the reverse is true.