Win Betting vs Exotics

[alexander99]

Bet to WIN only (unless selection is 20-1 +), then bet W/Pl at a 2-1 ratio.

Has anyone recorded personal results - long term -

WIN bet results vs Exotics ??


At the most basic level,

Lets say...You have $40 to invest in a race.

You play $20 WIN and $20 exotics.

Ex. Horse wins and pays $8.00

You miss the exotics.

$40 wager returns $80. WIN alone--> $40 wager returns $160.

This $80 discrepancy is huge.

Sure..you can hit a few big scores with exotic wagering,

but the ONLY result that matters is long-term R.O.I.


As stated above, at 20-1....i'd be interested in adding a few exotic wagers.

Otherwise, why bother?

Just pick the winner. Bet to Win. Keep it simple.

[K9Pup]

I think it depends on what kind of money you want to make. IMO to make any decent money in the long run you need to do both.

Good handicappers can pick the winner 40%? of the time in selected races. But ROI is more like 0 -5%. Most of those same players can hit exactas in those same races 15-18%? But their ROIs are usually above 10%. And they can hit the tris about 10% with a 15-20%+ ROI.

The WIN bets give good mental re-enforcement and can sometimes cover the losses in the exotic pools. And adds to your rebate if you use a rebate shop. But in the long run the AMOUNT of profit may not justify the work involved.

[alexander99]

Thanks for the reply.


Yes, win rate is important....but. also factor in the average mutual.

The bottom line is all about long-term R.O.I. Return on Investment $$$


WIN RATE X AVERAGE MUTUAL

EX. 40% X 7.00 = 2.80 (based on 2.00 breakeven)

therefore, return = 40%

[GaryG]

I am a win bettor except in certain sitiations where I will play the exacta. I make a list in the morning of the races that I am interested in and the acceptable odds. This is what has worked for me for years. Not as sexy as a lot of betting schemes but I am comfortable with it.

[ranchwest]

From what I've seen, the biggest mistake people make with exotics is "short-arming" -- not putting enough into a ticket. But, you have to play the right amount -- too much or too little will drive you broke.

Right now, I'm only betting win, but I expect that I'll play exotics in the future. Exotics can give that life changing experience in one day.

[alexander99]

This is like the old saying:

Low Risk, Lown return (but steady returns)........

will always beat High Risk, High Return.


If you doubt it- look at Warren Buffet with his investment success through the years. Can't knock a multi-billionaire.

Another interesting point relating to Warren Buffet,

his right hand man & vice president Charlie Munger once said:

All successful horseplayers have one thing in common- they bet very seldomly, but they bet large amounts.

Absolutely correct...obvious overlays occur rarely. When they do, you have to hammer them.

[cj]

Your bets should mirror your opinion of a race. Sometimes that means bet to win, other times it means bet exotics.

[K9Pup]

Thanks for the reply.



WIN RATE X AVERAGE MUTUAL

EX. 40% X 7.00 = 2.80 (based on 2.00 breakeven)

therefore, return = 40%

Easy to say, hard to do. But if you can that that is the way to go.

[raybo]

Haven't seen proof lately of anyone making a living betting to win only. Notice I said "proof".

[cj]

Haven't seen proof lately of anyone making a living betting to win only. Notice I said "proof".

How would you?

[K9Pup]

Haven't seen proof lately of anyone making a living betting to win only. Notice I said "proof".

Well I play the dogs and I show a profit on win bets there. But my ROI on them is more like 7% NOT 40%. And in the case of the dogs it's not practical to ramp up the win bets much. The pools are just non-existent.

[melman]

Craig your last two posts on this thread make far to much sense. Please have them deleted ASAP. :jump: Also while your at it submit all your betting records and tax information so that we may know for sure that you are winning. :) I would but my CPA is mad at me right now. :)

[raybo]

Not trying to offend anyone here with my post, but I did post the screenshot of my AmericaTab record in a previous thread, showing $400 turn into $7700 in about 4 months time, not with win bets however. I don't really care what you guys are doing but I would like to see the superfecta pools get even better, thus part of my reasoning for advocating exotics over WPS wagering.

[wallstplyr]

I only bet on $1 superfectas and $2 trifectas -- both boxed.

I only bet on Win only if there is a sure favorite (such as Chelokee of the Barbaro Stakes).

My max budget is $40 per "undercard" race. And way more for the major stake races:

Example:

Race 2
---------
$1 Super: 4 x 4 x 4 x 4 = $24
$1 Tri: 3 x 3 x 3 = $12

[GaryG]

I only bet on Win only if there is a sure favorite (such as Chelokee of the Barbaro Stakes).You bet 1-5 shots to win????

[1st time lasix]

This is a traditional discussion that has been debated here in the forum at length in the past. The answer to the the two choices {win or exotics} is ......"yes." In my experience.....it is not an either/or type of situation. It varies by the odds proprosition at hand. The key in the para-mutual game with a takeout is to have overlay tickets and avoid underlays. That can occur in the win pool ....the same race exotic pools.... or the multi -race pick 3's and 4's for the non-syndicate player. It also helps the ROI to avoid high takeout venues. I personally believe in the "bet small to win big" exotic philosophy at the track....however one is foolish not to have a win bet on a horse in some denomination with odds above 5/2 if you think it is very probable to win with confidence based on your handicapping experience. Example: say you believe a favorite in a particular race is quite vulnerable. maybe the second choice is not that great either. The race has a big field and you give a horse at 5-1 a very solid chance. I would construct an exacta, perhaps a trifecta or multi-race pick 3 with him but I would put something on his nose to win in case you were right with him but screwed up every thing else. Nothing is more important than ticket construction at the window for the exotic player. Assuming a level of handicapping competence......Knowing when to go deep....when to pass...which pools to play.... and staying "within" the money management budget based on your bankroll is the key to be a winning player.

[orrug2k]

I have spot plays that have a pos roi of 110. Most are $20 avg. They hit often usually daily. Should I key them on top in superfecta, maybe the dime version of course. I wonder how much more they are worth overall in pick 4 and superfectas. No one sane keys $20 horses on top in supers, I say the avg joe fires away at it like this fav infirst the second thru 4th choices for the place spot and maybe all with all to catch the pig. For a .10 cent play. ANyone with experience here ?

[pandy]

The problem with win betting is that you are not in a position to get lucky. For instance, say you make a horse 4-1 and it goes off at 6-1 so you bet and it wins. Okay, instead of $10 you got $14.00. Assuming that you were correct and it really should've been a 4-1 shot, you won on a nice overlay 40% overlay. But in exotic pools you can get incredibly lucky. For instance, I hit a pick 3 recently that paid $2,300 for a $2.00 bet. The winners paid $4.60, $8.80, and $27.20. A parlay would've come back about $230, so I got a 1000% overlay. You can't do that win with bets. A successful gambler once told me, "You have to put yourself in a position to get lucky."

Look at a big bettor who bets $2,500 or more into a Pick 6 carryover, and hits one for 100 grand. To me that's not handicapping, it's luck. But they had the bankroll and by taking the risk, they put themself in a position to get lucky.

[raybo]

I have spot plays that have a pos roi of 110. Most are $20 avg. They hit often usually daily. Should I key them on top in superfecta, maybe the dime version of course. I wonder how much more they are worth overall in pick 4 and superfectas. No one sane keys $20 horses on top in supers, I say the avg joe fires away at it like this fav infirst the second thru 4th choices for the place spot and maybe all with all to catch the pig. For a .10 cent play. ANyone with experience here ?

Well, without giving away the store, I rate every horse in every superfecta race at the tracks I play. I then examine the odds structure for the race I'm watching. I then estimate the minimum payout (for one winning ticket), this has become an art, by the way. I have a minimum payout requirement under which I will not wager. If all requirements are met I bet my top grade to win, my next 4 grades (plus ties) for 2nd and 3rd, and those same horses, plus one or two more depending on field size and grade spread, for 4th. I don't care if my top grade is 1/1 or 20/1 as long as the estimated minimum payout for the super meets my requirement. I hit supers at a rate of about 8%, but I'm not shooting at $100 payouts either.

[raybo]

The problem with win betting is that you are not in a position to get lucky. For instance, say you make a horse 4-1 and it goes off at 6-1 so you bet and it wins. Okay, instead of $10 you got $14.00. Assuming that you were correct and it really should've been a 4-1 shot, you won on a nice overlay 40% overlay. But in exotic pools you can get incredibly lucky. For instance, I hit a pick 3 recently that paid $2,300 for a $2.00 bet. The winners paid $4.60, $8.80, and $27.20. A parlay would've come back about $230, so I got a 1000% overlay. You can't do that win with bets. A successful gambler once told me, "You have to put yourself in a position to get lucky."

Look at a big bettor who bets $2,500 or more into a Pick 6 carryover, and hits one for 100 grand. To me that's not handicapping, it's luck. But they had the bankroll and by taking the risk, they put themself in a position to get lucky.

Exactly! I hit supers on consecutive days once, for $2400 and $3000 (on $1 tickets that cost $24 each) and against super pools of less than $12,000. That will make your whole year when you combine it with the more normal payouts along the way.

No way you can do that with WPS bets.

[K9Pup]

Look at a big bettor who bets $2,500 or more into a Pick 6 carryover, and hits one for 100 grand. To me that's not handicapping, it's luck. But they had the bankroll and by taking the risk, they put themself in a position to get lucky.

LOL. And I guess when Tiger Woods wins a golf tournament you think that is lucky too?????

There is LUCK in every race we play, some times good, some times bad. But there is also skill. Hitting a P6, TT, or TS requires a little luck and a lot of skill.

[K9Pup]

Exactly! I hit supers on consecutive days once, for $2400 and $3000 (on $1 tickets that cost $24 each) and against super pools of less than $12,000. That will make your whole year when you combine it with the more normal payouts along the way.

No way you can do that with WPS bets.

This is why I see you need a combination of both. Sure you can't win $5k on WPS bets, but you don't go days without winning either. A lot depends on your personality. Some people can wait it out, others can't. I've found that the WP betting keeps me in the game and covers the expenses for the exotics.

[raybo]

This is why I see you need a combination of both. Sure you can't win $5k on WPS bets, but you don't go days without winning either. A lot depends on your personality. Some people can wait it out, others can't. I've found that the WP betting keeps me in the game and covers the expenses for the exotics.

Certainly, I respect your opinion, K9Pup. Betting exotics is not for everyone, especially those above trifecta level. It takes tremendous discipline and patience and the bankroll to see you through the inevitable slow periods. Those players who are in the game for the action or have little patience probably should stay away from these type wagers.

It all really depends on why one is involved with this thing. If you are serious about making sizeable profits and treating it like an investment vehicle, then there are basically 2 ways to go about it. 1. You can wager in the lesser paying pools and make many, many trips to the betting windows, growing your bankroll in small increments over time, or, 2. you can wager in the higher paying pools, leveraging your money by putting it in positions that offer high rewards, growing your bankroll in leaps and bounds. The former is a safer method, much like investing in mutual funds or bonds, although nothing is guaranteed either way. The latter is much like looking for market influenced depressed prices on solid stocks and taking advantage of those low prices by investing sizeably, waiting for the market to rebound (it always does), raising the value of those stocks, often, quite dramatically.

My philosophy is, and has been for several years, "Put the money where the money is". I'd much rather place a $20 wager on something that will pay $1000+ if it hits than $20 on one that is guaranteed to pay much less than that. Sure I only hit 8% of my wagers vs. 30% or slightly higher for an expert handicapper, but when those long slow periods come around, I know it only takes 1 or 2 hits to put me back in stride, with the lower paying wagers it takes many more than that to recover.

My longest losing streak on superfectas, to date, was 44 races before hitting one for $1400 or so. 44 races cost me in the neighborhood of $1100 in wagers. If I'd wagered that same $20-$25 on WPS tickets and went 44 races without a hit I'd be much longer recovering.

Rather than hedging my bets by placing WPS wagers, I'd opt to put another horse on the win line, it's just another bet to me and I know I'm going to lose 90-92% of all my wagers. It's all gambling, when you come right down to it, and if I'm going to gamble I'd rather make it worth it.

If I were a thief, I wouldn't be robbing 7/11s I'd be robbing places that have big bucks. The downside of both is prison. The upside is chump change vs. thousands or tens of thousands. What makes more sense?

[DanG]

The problem with win betting is that you are not in a position to get lucky.A successful gambler once told me, "You have to put yourself in a position to get lucky."

Look at a big bettor who bets $2,500 or more into a Pick 6 carryover, and hits one for 100 grand. To me that's not handicapping, it's luck. But they had the bankroll and by taking the risk, they put themself in a position to get lucky.
I agree completely with Pandy's 1st paragraph and not so much with the second, but I’ll take 50% anytime.

I admire the person who can grind out a steady income through the win pool in modern betting. I’ve learned I don’t have what it takes without eventually climbing the walls a bit. It always felt like a “traditional” job to me. I need the adrenaline rush of possible 4-6 figure scores that drives me to do the necessary work. (Having said that I do have win bets through spot plays, but rarely from my daily play.)

As Andy Beyer is fond of saying. “Horseracing offers one overwhelming redeeming value. The ability to turn modest capital into a life changing event.” (That’s from memory and not quite exact.)

Pandy…If this is the “Pandy” that I’m aware of I would be honored to share Hollywood’s pick-6 with you tomorrow…be it luck, skill or throwing darts…best of luck and I enjoy reading your work. :ThmbUp:

PS-I: There is obviously an element of luck in hitting the pick-6. “Putting yourself in a position to get lucky” is a good way to put it. Knowing when to isolate or when to be aggressive in that potential bust-out race is where skill takes part and its almost regardless of your investment.

PS-II: If it’s not that “Pandy”…As Gilda Radner used to say…”Never Mind”:blush:

[m001001]

This is like the old saying:
Low Risk, Lown return (but steady returns)........
will always beat High Risk, High Return.



his right hand man & vice president Charlie Munger once said:

All successful horseplayers have one thing in common- they bet very seldomly, but they bet large amounts.


The above two quotes contradict to each other. Betting seldemly but large increase your risk and variance, vs betting often but small.

And apparently Mr. Right Hand Man did not know about modern computer teams who bet mechanically at every race. But then again, perhaps MR. RHM did not consider computer teams "horseplayers". ;)

[WJ47]

I'm not crazy about exacta or trifecta betting so I mostly do win wagers. I'm fond of multi-race wagers like Pick 3s and Pick 4s. I know alot of people on this board do great with exactas, but I'm pretty pitiful at picking the 2nd place finishers. The only time I'll do an exacta is if I'm pretty sure of a certain horse to win and I'll wheel him with others (and sometimes hit the ALL button if the prices are good on some of the longest combinations).

I read that book about Exactas (I think Exacta Expose) and it kind of turned me off to them.

I think that a bettor would have an easier time making money betting exactas if he was good with them, especially if there isn't a big bankroll.

[K9Pup]

It all really depends on why one is involved with this thing. If you are serious about making sizeable profits and treating it like an investment vehicle, then there are basically 2 ways to go about it. 1. You can wager in the lesser paying pools and make many, many trips to the betting windows, growing your bankroll in small increments over time, or, 2. you can wager in the higher paying pools, leveraging your money by putting it in positions that offer high rewards, growing your bankroll in leaps and bounds. The former is a safer method, much like investing in mutual funds or bonds, although nothing is guaranteed either way. The latter is much like looking for market influenced depressed prices on solid stocks and taking advantage of those low prices by investing sizeably, waiting for the market to rebound (it always does), raising the value of those stocks, often, quite dramatically.

Yeah I agree. I used to play solely #2. I went for the big (bigger?) hits mainly in the tri and super pools. But MY personality got to me. I would get upset when I had win and place but not show, or wps and not 4th. It just frustrated the heck out of me. So now I still play SOME of those bets but that isn't my ENTIRE set of wagers. Also I have to admit getting rebates from the online wagering service has made a great impact on how I play. I play wagers that I know show a small loss over time but when the rebated is added in now show a profit.



My philosophy is, and has been for several years, "Put the money where the money is". I'd much rather place a $20 wager on something that will pay $1000+ if it hits than $20 on one that is guaranteed to pay much less than that. Sure I only hit 8% of my wagers vs. 30% or slightly higher for an expert handicapper, but when those long slow periods come around, I know it only takes 1 or 2 hits to put me back in stride, with the lower paying wagers it takes many more than that to recover.


On the other hand with the WP (I don't even mess much with show), Qu and Ex betting you don't HAVE that much to recover from. On my busiest days I wagered $1000 - $1500. But unless I use the wrong day's wagering report, I KNOW I have no chance of losing ALL of that money. Playing strictly supers that wasn't always the case.


My longest losing streak on superfectas, to date, was 44 races before hitting one for $1400 or so. 44 races cost me in the neighborhood of $1100 in wagers. If I'd wagered that same $20-$25 on WPS tickets and went 44 races without a hit I'd be much longer recovering.

Rather than hedging my bets by placing WPS wagers, I'd opt to put another horse on the win line, it's just another bet to me and I know I'm going to lose 90-92% of all my wagers. It's all gambling, when you come right down to it, and if I'm going to gamble I'd rather make it worth it.

For sure. Of course "worth it" varies from person to person. I've always told people I do this for the excitement, challenge and money. IN THAT ORDER.


If I were a thief, I wouldn't be robbing 7/11s I'd be robbing places that have big bucks. The downside of both is prison. The upside is chump change vs. thousands or tens of thousands. What makes more sense?

LOL!! True. But there are still idoits out there robbing 7/11s everyday.

I have to admit some of the excitment goes away when you play the smaller bets. It's hard to get excited about cashing a $50 exacta ticket. But in my case switching to a more "conservative" approach has improved the bottom line. I set a goal starting this year of making $1000 a month. So far I've exceeded that goal every month, so I can't complain.

[alexander99]

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexander99
This is like the old saying:
Low Risk, Lown return (but steady returns)........
will always beat High Risk, High Return.




Quote:
Originally Posted by alexander99
his right hand man & vice president Charlie Munger once said:

All successful horseplayers have one thing in common- they bet very seldomly, but they bet large amounts.




The above two quotes contradict to each other. Betting seldemly but large increase your risk and variance, vs betting often but small.

And apparently Mr. Right Hand Man did not know about modern computer teams who bet mechanically at every race. But then again, perhaps MR. RHM did not consider computer teams "horseplayers". ;)


---------> The main idea is to minimize risk.

Betting very seldomly, or as i like to say- "only bet the obvious" (ex. clear lone speed, speed biased track)...is actually a very low risk wager. Mostl likely, the return won't be very high (as more and more handicappers are catching on to lone speed plays), but it is a very safe wager.

I never said anything about betting very often...A low risk - low return strategy...does not necessarily entail betting often.

LOL modern computer teams? that bet mechanically at every race?
I'll believe this one when i see it.
Computer teams?
Tell me more..what do they do exacyly?
They have programs that handicap & select winners?
This is rediculous.
Handicapping is an ART, not a SCIENCE.
For this reason, i'll be very surprised if anyone shows me a computer program with long-term positive results.

Let's wake up and live in the real world, if someone really had a program that consistently beat the track...he would be making an absolute fortune.
Further, I am sure people would also hear about this, and eventually learn his methods.
There is no computer system that produces good results long-term.
And you say these teams bet every race?? LOL...there is NO WAY, absolutely NO WAY...to beat this game if you play every race.

Let me add an example...1- Races where there is a clear standout on ratings (computer program), but there is a clear lone speed type...often these lone speed horses (rated lower than top selection)...they often win.

Further, computer programs??? do they consider probable race shape?
Once again...what if top selection is a stone closer....but, is running in a race with no pace to run at?

Computer systems make alot of money for the jokers who can market them.

but i'll take a sound, patient approach anytime.

I'll just sit back, and wait for my lone speed type- on a speed biased track. Very patient.

This works well for me, but heyy...to each his own.

[alexander99]

The problem with win betting is that you are not in a position to get lucky


-------->Get lucky?

You mean making a huge score one day?

LOL you guys amuse me.

I couldn't care less about having ONE lucky day,

the ONLY thing that matters in this game is LONG-TERM RETURN ON INVESTMENT...

over many races.

What are your results after a few months, a few years?

We must have a long-term approach.

I have seen 100's of bettors make big scores,

only to be dead broke a few days later.


Getting lucky..is exactly that....getting LUCKY.

To be a winning player does not mean- getting lucky....

it means having positive long-term results.

Not just picking winners, but knowing WHY the horse won the race.

If you can develop a systematic approach, and learn to classify horses...

then you are almost there.

The rest has to do with Patience, Value for Money, and using correct money management.

[badcompany]

It varies by the odds proprosition at hand. The key in the para-mutual game with a takeout is to have overlay tickets and avoid underlays. That can occur in the win pool ....the same race exotic pools.....

But it's way more likely to occur in the the exotics because so many people spread out the money when they bet those type of races.

[1st time lasix]

Numerous ways to win at this game but an infinite number of ways to lose. You can focus on a particular type of race condition {ex; 2 year olds, ..msw, ...turf, ...sprints, stakes... etc} or a particular specific track. You can also specialize your wagering in a specific pool or be completely flexible. No one can definitely say that one approach is better than another. I just believe that with a 15-25% takeout....you must play overlays. That concept doesn't change if you play one race a week or twenty-five per day. In a paramutual game that removes so much $ from the pool....you must be far better than average in your handicapping .....and vastly superior than most at your wagering skill. At my venue....I chuckle at the macho male ego types that scream/curse at the simulcast tv's and brag about the one race they hit after their fourth cocktail. It is the intellegent quiet sharpie drinking ice tea with his notes at the corner table that generally gets the money on the way out the door. :ThmbUp:

[m001001]

alexander99, let me try again. You essentially saying
1. "Low Risk, Low but Steady Return" beats "High Risk, High Return"
2. then you quote Mr. RHM to bet less often but bet big.

My point is that 2 above is the type of behaviour that create high variance to your bankroll, thus deem undesirable in your point 1.

Re: computer teams, the only thing I am willing to say is that you should read more old messages here. You may need to change some of your fundamental assumptions.

[alexander99]

High Variance?

If you are betting solid overlays...in the long-term...

you will have positive results.

What does it matter if one week...i am down $700,

next week, i am up $1500, etc.

Short term cycles...do not bother me.

My focus is on the long-term.


Computer teams?

Come on, enough with this comedy.

You are reading too many Dick Francis novels.

Once again...handicapping is an Art, not a Science.

There is NOT ONE computer program that can generate significant long-term profits.

If you think computer teams can play every race...using their mechanical system, and turn a profit over the long-term....

you are brain-washed.

Name me ONE program that has produced long-term profits?
Any significant amount will be good proof.

Is there any proof? Anything documented?

The funny thing is..these clowns that market their programs...love to tout their services, they love to talk about their recent 10-1 winner....

however, isn't it strange that there is no record or proof...of their long-term results?

Maybe you have seen a few cheats..that just claim to have a huge ROI, but come on...

this is a hard game to beat. Very hard.

A computer program won't do.

Nice fantasy though.

[PaceAdvantage]

You're living in a fantasy if you think there isn't one person alive using a computer program to generate significant profits. In addition, you can combine a BREAK EVEN program with REBATES, and you will have another avenue for SIGNIFICANT PROFITS that doesn't even require a WINNING PROGRAM, simply a BREAK EVEN program.

Do you not think there is a program in existence that can generate a long term 1% LOSS to BREAK EVEN performance? Of course there is....

And where is it written that an "artful" handicapper CAN'T utilize the power of a computer program to enhance his or her abilities?

Your agenda stinks....it's clouding your judgement.

[dav4463]

Exotics vs Win betting. The key is to have a separate bankroll for each. Then it's real easy to see which one you are better at doing.

[ranchwest]

I do think there's more dead money in exotics, but a person should bet into the pool from which they can take down money (preferably a profit).

[DanG]

Computer teams?

Come on, enough with this comedy.

You are reading too many Dick Francis novels.

Once again...handicapping is an Art, not a Science.

There is NOT ONE computer program that can generate significant long-term profits.
You said so many immature ridiculous things it’s frankly not worth responding to…but…If you can read your own posts the way they are formatted and not crave aspirin, you’re a better man than me.

Signed;

Bill Benter… (Google the name, you might learn something ;))

PS: There are many people out there to meet my friend before you start talking in absolute terms.

[alexander99]

There is NOT ONE computer program that can generate significant long-term profits.

----->You must be one of those "entrepreneurs" pushing his latest program.

Read it carefully...SIGNIFICANT long-term profits.

You do not agree with my opinion....

but, i am still waiting to hear about ONE computer program that fits the bill.

Break-even or 1% return?

Are you kidding me?

Someone talked about variance in a previous post....

You know what kind of money you have to wager Daily, Weekly, Monthly,

to earn a reasonable income off a 1% edge?

Rediculous money.

Variance on this can run into tens of thousands of dollars...up or down.

Do you have an extra $50,000 or $100,000 as a cushion?

Lets be realistic.

1% and rebates....

I know of ONE handicapper who is getting by with this, but he is wagering multi- millions every year.

With that kind of money...invest in a solid mutual fund, etc.

You'll get much better returns...much less work.

[sjk]

There is more than one.

[alexander99]

I am sure there are many.

But, with a 1% edge???

You'd have to wager $100,000 weekly...on average...


to earn 1 K.

Of course, you can also have a bad week...lets say

- $70,000

What percentage of handicappers can deal with this?

Not easy.

Of course, LOL....we can just buy one of those computer programs...lie on the beach and get rich.

This is a hard game to beat...in order to do so,

you must find what the crowd is doing,

and do the OPPOSITE.

Develop your own approach.

If you are fortunate enough to find one that works, you would not be sharing it with the public. That would be foolish.

[cj]

I am sure there are many.

But, with a 1% edge???

You'd have to wager $100,000 weekly...on average...


to earn 1 K.

Of course, you can also have a bad week...lets say

- $70,000

What percentage of handicappers can deal with this?

Not easy.

Of course, LOL....we can just buy one of those computer programs...lie on the beach and get rich.

This is a hard game to beat...in order to do so,

you must find what the crowd is doing,

and do the OPPOSITE.

Develop your own approach.

If you are fortunate enough to find one that works, you would not be sharing it with the public. That would be foolish.

You are forgetting one thing. Break even or a 1% edge does not take into account a rebate. I find plenty of plays like that, so with rebate, I actually have a 7 or 8% edge. With a computer program, you can easily find 50 plays a day, something that would be very, very hard to do without one. If I bet $100 per play, I am now betting $5,000 a day, or $35,000 weekly. If I'm making 7%, that more than doubles the profit from your hypothetical $1,000 weekly to $2,450.

[1st time lasix]

My goodness. Of course there are computer programs that help identify plays that return a positive ROI. You are naive if you think that a player can't use them to gain significant profits. Several that post here over the years use them sucessfully. To say that "no one can" is looking at the world from your own reference point. You believe it...... so it must be true. :rolleyes:

[alexander99]

Yes, they can turn profits over the short-term.

But, are there any documented results over 12 months?

24 months?

Would like to see that.

[saevena]

Alexander 99 is correct that there is no accountability is this game. All we have are claims that this book writer or handicapping guru or computer program is successful and shows a profit. No proof, just claims.

[cj]

I'll provide proof in my upcoming book, "Thinking Inside the Box: My $100,000 Year at the Races". ;) Of course the box in question is a PC.

[BillW]

Alexander 99 is correct that there is no accountability is this game. All we have are claims that this book writer or handicapping guru or computer program is successful and shows a profit. No proof, just claims.

Yup he is right - we only know that he is the way and the light. :faint:


sheesh, a guy comes on here and declares that because he doesn't understand something, it must not be valid. I certainly believe him. :lol:

[cj]

I think it has become clear we have an internet troll amongst us. Enough of wasting time with this guy.

[alexander99]

Alexander 99 is correct that there is no accountability is this game. All we have are claims that this book writer or handicapping guru or computer program is successful and shows a profit. No proof, just claims.


------------> Thank-you.

Nice to see there are insightful people on here.

I was beginning to think everyone was brain-washed.

[alexander99]

CJ,

Of course you will not agree with my views.

You are one of those jokers that needs to sell his worthless books,

and systems...to feed his degenerate gambling habit.


This is a response to your previous insult.


Lets keep this civil.

I am expressing my opinions...by posting on here...

anyone is free to agree or disagree.

I will be happy to debate issues relating to this great game.

[DanG]

CJ,

Of course you will not agree with my views.

You are one of those jokers that needs to sell his worthless books,

and systems...to feed his degenerate gambling habit.
Simply put my friend you’re confusing “System” (As those pieces of garbage sold in the back of “mouth breather daily”) and the modern software that’s available.

You stated “At least when I purchase a racing form I know what I’m getting”. This statement proves you either don’t know what you’re attempting to discuss, or you’re posting because you’re trying to fill a void in yourself.

All of the software that sponsors this board and my personal choice of HTR are tools that are no different in intent than the DRF / formulator in anyway.

Quality software = Tools…Not “systems” my friend.

When you understand the difference I look forward to reading your next thoughts…I think? :rolleyes:


PS: I answer not to debate you ‘per say, but to hopefully spark a discussion with others who also don’t understand the distinction between involving a computer in your work and “Systems” that make ridiculous claims.

[ranchwest]

CJ,

Of course you will not agree with my views.

You are one of those jokers that needs to sell his worthless books,

and systems...to feed his degenerate gambling habit.


This is a response to your previous insult.


Lets keep this civil.

I am expressing my opinions...by posting on here...

anyone is free to agree or disagree.

I will be happy to debate issues relating to this great game.

Wow, I'm glad we're going to keep this civil by saying someone has a degenerate gambling habit. There for a minute I thought this thread might deteriorate. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[46zilzal]

no race is the same: some offer value with straight bets others with the "shotgun" approach... No hard or fast rules.

The tough thing to get into your head is that handicapping and wagering are different disciplines altogether.

[alexander99]

Ohh sorry, i did say- someone here has a degenerate gambling habit...

but that was a response to this gem-

"internet troll amongst us. Enough of wasting time with this guy."

let's look at both sides.

Anyhow...better to stick to handicapping discussions

[alexander99]

Dan,

Time for another coffee.

you state:

You stated “At least when I purchase a racing form I know what I’m getting”. This statement proves you either don’t know what you’re attempting to discuss, or you’re posting because you’re trying to fill a void in yourself.

All of the software that sponsors this board and my personal choice of HTR are tools that are no different in intent than the DRF / formulator in anyway.

------------>DRF Formulator?

I purchase the racing form for the p-a-s-t p-e-r-f-o-r-m-a-n-c-e-s

The only handicapping approach or system i use is my own.

[ranchwest]

Dan,

Time for another coffee.

you state:

You stated “At least when I purchase a racing form I know what I’m getting”. This statement proves you either don’t know what you’re attempting to discuss, or you’re posting because you’re trying to fill a void in yourself.

All of the software that sponsors this board and my personal choice of HTR are tools that are no different in intent than the DRF / formulator in anyway.

------------>DRF Formulator?

I purchase the racing form for the p-a-s-t p-e-r-f-o-r-m-a-n-c-e-s

The only handicapping approach or system i use is my own.

So, how is you having a system or approach any different than someone else having a system or approach?

[alexander99]

We all handicap a horserace differently.

There are Class Handicappers....Speed...Pace etc.

THis simply means that people place an emphasis in different areas.

I happen to be a Pace Handicapper.

My primary focus is PACE....Race Shape...

finding the lone S+


If we all had the same opinion...horseracing woud not exist.

I am not saying my approach is the World's Greatest...

but, it works for me.

( I am sure there is someone out there that produces better results..possibly:D )

[ranchwest]

We all handicap a horserace differently.

There are Class Handicappers....Speed...Pace etc.

THis simply means that people place an emphasis in different areas.

I happen to be a Pace Handicapper.

My primary focus is PACE....Race Shape...

finding the lone S+


If we all had the same opinion...horseracing woud not exist.

I am not saying my approach is the World's Greatest...

but, it works for me.

( I am sure there is someone out there that produces better results..possibly:D )

So why all the criticism of what others are doing?

[sjk]

We all handicap a horserace differently.



( I am sure there is someone out there that produces better results..possibly:D )

My computer program has made 19% over the past 10 years. Of course this discussion will not go far because you will ask me to prove it and I have no interest in proving it to you or anyone else.

Having read this board for many years it always seems as though the people who appear to be doing well (not only because they say they are but also because their posts have the ring of someone who has experienced success) seem to be the ones who accept that there are a number of successful players out there.

Those who are doing poorly have a hard time wrapping their minds around the idea that others are doing well.

[alexander99]

IF you have produced 19% over the last ten years...nice going.

I am not overly impressed by a 19% R.O.I.

but i have to commend you.

Most players could only dream about achieving this.

[ranchwest]

IF you have produced 19% over the last ten years...nice going.

I am not overly impressed by a 19% R.O.I.

but i have to commend you.

Most players could only dream about achieving this.

:lol: Why does this response not surprise me? :lol:

[cj]

I am not overly impressed by a 19% R.O.I.

Now that is funny.

[GaryG]

IF you have produced 19% over the last ten years...nice going.

I am not overly impressed by a 19% R.O.I.

but i have to commend you.

Most players could only dream about achieving this.Alexander, you might as well be wearing a trenchcoat....you are exposing yourself..:eek:

[ranchwest]

Alexander, you might as well be wearing a trenchcoat....you are exposing yourself..:eek:

I think you just won the hoot of the week. Good one. :lol:

[DanG]

Dan,

Time for another coffee.

I purchase the racing form for the p-a-s-t p-e-r-f-o-r-m-a-n-c-e-s

The only handicapping approach or system i use is my own.
For the benefit of others reading this, many of the software programs I was referring to have…

P*A*S*T*P*E*R*F*O*R*M*A*N*C*E*S

(Including the one I use)

Wow I feel like I’m back in high school. :bang:

[BillW]

Wow I feel like I’m back in high school. :bang:

You played in the sandbox in High School? :eek:

:lol:

[alexander99]

For the benefit of others reading this, many of the software programs I was referring to have…

P*A*S*T*P*E*R*F*O*R*M*A*N*C*E*S

------------> Do they really?

I thought maybe they had the lines from Humpty Dumpty.


Many of the software programs you were referring to?

How many are there???

If you are such a fan of using these programs...surely, by now...

you would have discovered the ONE (all powerful) cant-miss super system.

[alexander99]

Originally Posted by alexander99
IF you have produced 19% over the last ten years...nice going.

I am not overly impressed by a 19% R.O.I.

but i have to commend you.

Most players could only dream about achieving this.
Alexander, you might as well be wearing a trenchcoat....you are exposing yourself..


------------> Exposing myself?

Care to elaborate.

At least try to provide some kind of reasoning for your statements.

Once again, I am not OVERLY impressed by 19%.

This is not to say, its not impressive.

For most people on here, 19% would be a huge improvement on their current results.

[cj]

For most people on here, 19% would be a huge improvement on their current results.

It is only a small part of the picture. Of course, you already know that. ROI by itself doesn't mean a whole lot. You have to know how many plays are made and in what timeframe.

I have little doubt that sjk is doing very well for himself. Anyone that is not impressed by that is making a very small number of plays, or just has absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

[GaryG]

For most people on here, 19% would be a huge improvement on their current results.Now just how in HELL would you know that?

[alexander99]

How would i know that for most people on here 19% would be a big improvement on their current results???


-------->I have been around the game long enough.

Lets put it this way, choose 500 random racing fans....

any racetrack.

From these 500......

I would be very very suprised if ONE, just 1....can do 19% long-term.


I am not living in a dream world.

This is a very hard game to beat.

19% long-term....is an excellent result..compared to what the average horseplayer achieves.

[alexander99]

It is only a small part of the picture. Of course, you already know that. ROI by itself doesn't mean a whole lot. You have to know how many plays are made and in what timeframe.

------------> HUH? You mention that ROI by itself doesn't mean alot.

For any serious horseplayer....Long-Term ROI (Return on Investment)

in the ONLY thing that matters.


When you invest in a stock....what do you look for?

Obvious.

[ranchwest]

How would i know that for most people on here 19% would be a big improvement on their current results???


-------->I have been around the game long enough.

Lets put it this way, choose 500 random racing fans....

any racetrack.

From these 500......

I would be very very suprised if ONE, just 1....can do 19% long-term.


I am not living in a dream world.

This is a very hard game to beat.

19% long-term....is an excellent result..compared to what the average horseplayer achieves.

But, of course, nobody on earth is as exceptional as you, right?

[ranchwest]

Hey, can we bring back Vet Scratch? :lol:

[alexander99]

I never said i am the greatest handicapper.

However, my long-term results (to-date)

are 40.5 % positive return.

This is exceptional, but is based on a very selective approach.

Random Example: Year 2001 Total wagers: 164

that is, 164 wagers for the year.

148 of which were strictly WIN bets.


2001 FINAL RESULTS- WIN RATE : 38% Average Mutual: 7.47

[ranchwest]

I never said i am the greatest handicapper.

However, my long-term results (to-date)

are 40.5 % positive return.

This is exceptional, but is based on a very selective approach.

Random Example: Year 2001 Total wagers: 164

that is, 164 wagers for the year.

148 of which were strictly WIN bets.


2001 FINAL RESULTS- WIN RATE : 38% Average Mutual: 7.47

Maybe so, maybe not. Nothing you've said provides me with a basis for believing or disbelieving your assertion.

[cj]

For any serious horseplayer....Long-Term ROI (Return on Investment)

in the ONLY thing that matters.




A person that bets $2 on one even money shot in a year and wins has a +100% ROI. A person that bets $100 on 50 races a day, 5 days a week, and averages a +1% ROI wins $13,000. Which one do you want?

You are showing your cluelessness.

[cj]

I never said i am the greatest handicapper.

However, my long-term results (to-date)

are 40.5 % positive return.

This is exceptional, but is based on a very selective approach.

Random Example: Year 2001 Total wagers: 164

that is, 164 wagers for the year.

148 of which were strictly WIN bets.


2001 FINAL RESULTS- WIN RATE : 38% Average Mutual: 7.47

These numbers are so small they are laughable. There are anywhere from 10 to 40 tracks running every day, and you find less than 1/2 play a day? You'll be lucky to cover racing expenses even with a 38% ROI.

Was 2001 your last winning year? Or did you just cut and paste something you found in the archives?

[raybo]

Must be time to close yet another thread, or change the subject of this one to: Black Boxes vs. Computerized Handicapping Programs/Tools.


Did Alexander ever say if he uses a pen or pencil? Does he use a calculator or slide rule? Abacus? :confused: ;)

[alexander99]

Bets $100 a day on 50 races????

You can find 50 playable races a day?

How many tracks u playing?

[alexander99]

CJ,

What is laughable is that you clearly have no clue.

My standard wager is $500 - 1000 WIN.

On average, i'll find 3 bets weekly.

Even if i had ONLY one bet weekly, i would not complain.

My largest bet to-date was $2000 win.

Wire to wire at 12.40 Absolute lock.

Who said you need 1000 bets a week to earn a solid profit???

[alexander99]

Was 2001 your last winning year? Or did you just cut and paste something you found in the archives?


-----------> I have not had a losing year since 1994.

In the last 4 years, i have not had one losing month.

And keep in mind, i'll make on average only approx. 12 bets monthly.


My approach is very selective...I usually play only southern cali tracks.

Also (depending on season) i'll play Belmont, Saratoga, & Gulfsteam.

On very rare occasions i'll also venture out to Canada..and play Woodbine.

[betchatoo]

Was 2001 your last winning year? Or did you just cut and paste something you found in the archives?


-----------> I have not had a losing year since 1994.

In the last 4 years, i have not had one losing month.

And keep in mind, i'll make on average only approx. 12 bets monthly.


My approach is very selective...I usually play only southern cali tracks.

Also (depending on season) i'll play Belmont, Saratoga, & Gulfsteam.

On very rare occasions i'll also venture out to Canada..and play Woodbine.


I've been away for a couple of days and missed all of this (and another thread I just went through). Shouldn't this guy's name be Alexander the Great? He is conqueror of his known world. Of course his known world seems very limited. And I'm guessing he is his only follower.

[alexander99]

Quote:
For any serious horseplayer....Long-Term ROI (Return on Investment)

in the ONLY thing that matters.





A person that bets $2 on one even money shot in a year and wins has a +100% ROI. A person that bets $100 on 50 races a day, 5 days a week, and averages a +1% ROI wins $13,000. Which one do you want?

You are showing your cluelessness.


-------------> Lets be realistic. Noone makes one bet in a year.

50 races a day? LOL...funny.

Once again..long-term ROI is the biggest factor.

Naturally, if you have proven success..and confidence....

you will not be wagering $2.

[raybo]

Was 2001 your last winning year? Or did you just cut and paste something you found in the archives?


-----------> I have not had a losing year since 1994.

In the last 4 years, i have not had one losing month.

And keep in mind, i'll make on average only approx. 12 bets monthly.


My approach is very selective...I usually play only southern cali tracks.

Also (depending on season) i'll play Belmont, Saratoga, & Gulfsteam.

On very rare occasions i'll also venture out to Canada..and play Woodbine.


Wasn't it you who wanted proof? I've posted mine here. How about you?

[alexander99]

You guys cannot comprehend someone like myself...obviously.

You think its "easy" and nothing exceptional..to even produce a 19% return long-term.

But you have no basis for judgement.

What is your success rate?

Are you keeping records of your wagers?

If you were, you would appreciate even a 19% return.

You clowns just remember your lucky $2,000 $3000 trifectas, etc.

Ignore your losses.

If you kept careful records, ..the glaring reality would hit you like a ton of bricks.

Its easy to try knocking someone...but, i don't see anyone else starting up an intelligent thread....with 100's of views & replies.

[raybo]

You guys cannot comprehend someone like myself...obviously.

You think its "easy" and nothing exceptional..to even produce a 19% return long-term.

But you have no basis for judgement.

What is your success rate?

Are you keeping records of your wagers?

If you were, you would appreciate even a 19% return.

You clowns just remember your lucky $2,000 $3000 trifectas, etc.

Ignore your losses.

If you kept careful records, ..the glaring reality would hit you like a ton of bricks.

Its easy to try knocking someone...but, i don't see anyone else starting up an intelligent thread....with 100's of views & replies.


You might want to look in the archives before making statements like the above. Everything you just mentioned has been covered many times over on this board. And this thread isn't anywhere remotely close to having many views and replies.

[DanG]

I have not had a losing year since 1994.

In the last 4 years, i have not had one losing month.

And keep in mind, i'll make on average only approx. 12 bets monthly.


I can’t figure out what’s more ironic.

The fact that you can’t tell the difference between software and a "system", or the fact that you represent what you’re attempting to vilify.

Step right up folks...


“48 straight winning months” with a 12 wager margin of error!…:liar:

[PaceAdvantage]

The funniest part of all is that alexander's IP addresses trace back to Austria and Romania. Ol' Alex is trying extra hard to cover his tracks (no pun). I wonder why....

Moderators, get your "Edit" buttons ready. I smell a sales pitch or website link coming soon....

Isn't it shocking how easily you can see these guys coming? I knew before his FIRST post! LOL

[BillW]

The funniest part of all is that alexander's IP addresses trace back to Austria and Romania. Ol' Alex is trying extra hard to cover his tracks (no pun). I wonder why....

Moderators, get your "Edit" buttons ready. I smell a sales pitch or website link coming soon....

Isn't it shocking how easily you can see these guys coming? I knew before his FIRST post! LOL

cyberstench :p

[m001001]

The funniest part of all is that alexander's IP addresses trace back to Austria and Romania. Ol' Alex is trying extra hard to cover his tracks (no pun). I wonder why....

Moderators, get your "Edit" buttons ready. I smell a sales pitch or website link coming soon....

Isn't it shocking how easily you can see these guys coming? I knew before his FIRST post! LOL

Please do not stop this thread. It's very amusing in its own way.

You don't see someone so arrogantly ignorant often.

[PaceAdvantage]

Nobody said anything about stopping.

[cj]

Bets $100 a day on 50 races????

You can find 50 playable races a day?

How many tracks u playing?

All of them.

[alexander99]

CJ,


Even playing all tracks....still very hard to find 50 bets daily.

And why make 50 wagers?

This is rediculous to me.

From the 50...surely....you will focus on the 5 or 10...that offer the biggest overlay,

and bet big.

Bigger the overlay...bigger the bet.

[alexander99]

The funniest part of all is that alexander's IP addresses trace back to Austria and Romania. Ol' Alex is trying extra hard to cover his tracks (no pun). I wonder why....

Moderators, get your "Edit" buttons ready. I smell a sales pitch or website link coming soon....

-------------->Sales Pitch? Website Link?

You are talking to the wrong guy.

I am here to speak my mind...and to educate.

But, seems like too many people on here are already brain-washed...

and have their own hidden agendas.

[alexander99]

DAN G,

48 straight winning months, with a 12 race margin of error?

This seems imposible to you?


With a selective approach, it is very likely.

Nothing exceptional.

I am only wagering on clear overlays. (I have my own criteria).

Guys like you...get excited over those 5% overlays.

Great. Good for you.

I choose to pass those races.


"Only bet the obvious"

Maybe you can learn a few things, and improve your results.

From a negative return of 15%...you may actually break even.

Good luck

[cj]

CJ,


Even playing all tracks....still very hard to find 50 bets daily.

And why make 50 wagers?

This is rediculous to me.

From the 50...surely....you will focus on the 5 or 10...that offer the biggest overlay,

and bet big.

Bigger the overlay...bigger the bet.

There is some truth to what you say. I absolutely could do better if I restricted my plays a little. However, I don't want to spend 16 hours a day sitting in front of a computer monitoring the tote board at 20 tracks at a time.

I'm content to bet at around 4pm, and check the results once or twice a day, or even the next morning.

[Tom]

Hey 99... to quote a great man, "All talky, no ballsy!"

Post some picks.:lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

I am here to speak my mind...and to educate.

Welp, the "spoken your mind" part is certainly overdone compared to the "educate" part.

How about some MORE edumacation and LESS mindspeak....

Let me know when class is finally in session....

[alexander99]

CJ,

Wake up.

Of course you can do better if you restrict your plays.

Here's an exercise:

Narrow down your selections...to 3 races. 3 winners.

BIggest overlays.

Instead of making 20 bets +....look for 3 very solid overlays.

Have patience.

This will improve your bottom line.

[cj]

I already said I don't choose to spend all day in front of a computer monitoring odds. Without that, there isn't really any way to know if you are getting an overlay or not.

I know some guys here have a program to do conditional betting, and I'm working on that, but for now I'll stick with what work for me. If, of course, that is OK with you.

[sjk]

CJ,

Wake up.

Of course you can do better if you restrict your plays.

Here's an exercise:

Narrow down your selections...to 3 races. 3 winners.

BIggest overlays.

Instead of making 20 bets +....look for 3 very solid overlays.

Have patience.

This will improve your bottom line.

Why not bet the other overlays?

[alexander99]

Why not bet the other overlays?


You must always go for maximum value

[sjk]

Doesn't make sense to me. An overlay is a profitable opportunity. Why let it pass by?

[alexander99]

An overlay is a profitable opportunity.

But there are different levels.

Are you happy with a 2% overlay?

This is horseracing.

Anything can happen.

I need extra motivation, 2% won't cut it for me.


Why not only look for PRIME situations?

This is my approach. Works for me.

[cj's dad]

Dan,

Time for another coffee.

you state:

You stated “At least when I purchase a racing form I know what I’m getting”. This statement proves you either don’t know what you’re attempting to discuss, or you’re posting because you’re trying to fill a void in yourself.

All of the software that sponsors this board and my personal choice of HTR are tools that are no different in intent than the DRF / formulator in anyway.

------------>DRF Formulator?

I purchase the racing form for the p-a-s-t p-e-r-f-o-r-m-a-n-c-e-s

The only handicapping approach or system i use is my own.

You've been a member since ???? MAY 07 ???? You're making friends FAST !!:D :lol:

[alexander99]

You've been a member since ???? MAY 07 ???? You're making friends FAST !!:D :lol:


--------> Someone had to add a little excitement to this place.

[Greyfox]

I am here to speak my mind...and to educate.
.

I'm here to learn and share.
There are still Church's that need missionaries.
Might be a good fit for you.

[DanG]

DAN G,

Guys like you...get excited over those 5% overlays.

Great. Good for you.

"Only bet the obvious"

Maybe you can learn a few things, and improve your results.

From a negative return of 15%...you may actually break even.

Good luck
My new friend,

Let’s compare the only meaningful measure to keep score in this game.

Net Profit.

You can have a 50% edge and a 5% player can buy and sell you. You are aware of this correct?

Even with your “claim” of zero losing months considering your bet size and average price your best case scenario is very low 5-figures annually. I have no where near your hit rate and I was well into 6 figures last year and I’m probably the low earner of my group.

Now, I do have more exposure and I would NEVER claim each month is a winning one, but I would love to compare ledger sheets at Saratoga this year. I’ll be there (As of now) the first two weeks of the meet and the 1st round at Siro’s is on me. See if your mom will let you go, it should be fascinating. ;)

[alexander99]

Dan G,

Once again you show your ignorance.

5% vs 50% return?

Dan...don't you think anyone with a 50% return would eventually be betting huge, and earning a very nice net profit.

I happen to also run an international business, this is more of a part-time venture for me.

You earn 6 figures?

What is your average staking amount?

$20 $200 $2000>?

I am curious.

Of course, net profit is important.....

but this is achieved through a high ROI. % return.

[GaryG]

You must be a very rich teenager then....

[DanG]

Dan G,

Once again you show your ignorance.

110% correct, by responding…

I feel like I’m in Glengarry Glen Ross and Alexander is playing the Kevin Spacey character of “Williamson”. :bang:

Where is Ricky Roma when you need him?;)
http://www.port.hu/picture/instance_2/15964_2.jpg

“You never open your mouth until you know what the shot is. You ‘blanking child” :cool:

[alexander99]

DAN,

I was just reading about this Bill Bunter, Butter guy in Hong Kong.



Can't believe all i read, but still interesting.

His computer program takes into account 120 factors???

120?

Lets get serious.

Also..his net profit yearly is estimated at 30 - 50 million???

I know the chinese are degenerate gamblers...who look to the stars to pick winners, but 30 million?

You believe all the s**t ???

[sjk]

Dan G,


Dan...don't you think anyone with a 50% return would eventually be betting huge, and earning a very nice net profit.



He is already earning a very nice profit. In my book he is doing everything right so what is the issue.

[alexander99]

Glengarry Glen Ross

Good movie.

There's hope for you.

[alexander99]

Originally Posted by alexander99
Dan G,


Dan...don't you think anyone with a 50% return would eventually be betting huge, and earning a very nice net profit.




He is already earning a very nice profit. In my book he is doing everything right so what is the issue.

------------> Ahhhh wish i had more free time.

I'd write a book. Would be a best seller.

[sjk]

You need to work on your sales skills.

[GaryG]

I'd write a book. Would be a best seller.I KNOW!!! This guy is Forrest Gump!!!

[Greyfox]

Dan...don't you think anyone with a 50% return would eventually be betting huge, and earning a very nice net profit.

.

Your self described betting pattern will place a limit on your bets.
You don't bet often. You pick your spots.
There is a point of diminishing returns.
You will make your huge bet, the odds will fall at some point.
Doesn't hurt to dream big though.

[alexander99]

Sure you are limited ...

but, the major tracks can absorb some very good sized bets.

ex. $2000 win....no problem.

My rule of thumb...maximum amount that can be wagered safely....

5% of total pool.

Ex. 50,000 WIN pool..............$2,500 WIN Bet

[cj]

Sure you are limited ...

but, the major tracks can absorb some very good sized bets.

ex. $2000 win....no problem.

My rule of thumb...maximum amount that can be wagered safely....

5% of total pool.

Ex. 50,000 WIN pool..............$2,500 WIN Bet

You said earlier you bet between $500 and $1000 per race. Now it is $2,500?

[Tee]

You said earlier you bet between $500 and $1000 per race. Now it is $2,500?

$500-$1000 is just his "standard wager." :)


My standard wager is $500 - 1000 WIN.

On average, i'll find 3 bets weekly.

Even if i had ONLY one bet weekly, i would not complain.

My largest bet to-date was $2000 win.

Wire to wire at 12.40 Absolute lock.

[xtb]

Anyone else think Alexander99 is PriceAnProbability reincarnated?

[cj]

Yes.

[cj's dad]

We are spending way too much time on a complete F---ing idiot !!!

Get lost di--head !!!!

[46zilzal]

Glengarry Glen Ross

Good movie.



One of the least imaginative and poorly presented movies I have EVER suffered through.

[DanG]

One of the least imaginative and poorly presented movies I have EVER suffered through.
Why am I not surprised? :D

[46zilzal]

Why am I not surprised? :D
as a movie expert and owner of over 5,500 movies, this one had NO cogent story, no empathy, poor characters.

What did you find about it that captured your interest?. Listed as a comedy? Corporate a-holes yelling at one another over nothing?...Even that cast couldn't save this schlock.

Oh then I'll bet you may have liked My Dinner with Andre too.

[PaceAdvantage]

We are spending way too much time on a complete F---ing idiot !!!

Get lost di--head !!!!


Ahhh....an intelligent voice emerges from the din! Do not fear, your words do not fall on deaf ears!

[ranchwest]

Ahhh....an intelligent voice emerges from the din! Do not fear, your words do not fall on deaf ears!

After all, that was the most tasteful and endearing part of this thread. Not to say that it deteriorated or anything.

[DanG]

as a movie expert and owner of over 5,500 movies, this one had NO cogent story, no empathy, poor characters.

What did you find about it that captured your interest?. Listed as a comedy? Corporate a-holes yelling at one another over nothing?...Even that cast couldn't save this schlock.

Oh then I'll bet you may have liked My Dinner with Andre too.
My apologies to the board for this off topic response;

I’m going to answer this as if you’re serious.

A “self proclaimed movie expert” and you saw no redeeming value in David Mamet’s brilliant screenplay and dialogue. Not to mention world class performances by Jack Lemmon, Al Pacino, Ed Harris, Alan Arkin, Kevin Spacey and while a brief scene it was BY FAR the best work Alec Baldwin ever turned in.

It’s one of two things. Either you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, or you’re just desperate for someone to respond….or both. Well, I went for the bait, so mission accomplished I guess.

Severely off topic, but as with many of your statements I found this outrageous. It’s official ZZ; we agree so infrequently it’s almost frightening.

As I said…Why am I not surprised…OK, back to Hollywood and sorry to all for the cinematic diversion.

[bigmack]

as a movie expert and owner of over 5,500 movies, this one had NO cogent story, no empathy, poor characters.

What did you find about it that captured your interest?. Listed as a comedy? Corporate a-holes yelling at one another over nothing?...Even that cast couldn't save this schlock.
Your a movie expert? As also an expert on Pulitzer Prizes I suspect you're aware that it was a long running play and won a Pulitzer in '84. There's no accounting for taste in fact with you there's little accounting for anything but the script is what shines in the film let alone the performaces of some of the finest actors of our day. JLemmon as Shelly "The Machine" Levine is an artful performance let alone that of APacino in his "great meals fade in reflection" speech.

Can I assume you didn't like Death of a Salesman either?

[46zilzal]

A “self proclaimed movie expert” and you saw no redeeming value in David Mamet’s brilliant screenplay and dialogue. Not to mention world class performances by Jack Lemmon, Al Pacino, Ed Harris, Alan Arkin, Kevin Spacey and while a brief scene it was BY FAR the best work Alec Baldwin ever turned in.

It’s one of two things. Either you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, or you’re just desperate for someone to respond….or both.


My goodness movies are, and always have been, a matter of differing tastes. I loathe many a movie (as others surely do) that the majority might find acceptable. If I like George Raft playing Enrico Scaffa, I am sure others may not. Maybe the majority don't care for Min and Bill, Grand Hotel or a myriad of other films I really like. So what, it is a matter of taste, just like wine.

John Ford always loved The Sun Shines Bright as his favorite movie, even with all the great ones he had made...It is a good one: good story, good characters, a bit corny, but good morals..

I regularly take many of the extensive collection to seniors homes for their movie nights. Classic movies that tell good stories of relevance.


When the subject matter is loathsome (salespeople) the characterizations have no relevance in the least to THIS person in the audience, the lines are irrelevant, etc etc. then No I do not care one iota for it........Lots of junk is called brilliant.

I have many friends in the movie industry both in front of and behind the cameras. I have read extensively on film, and if I dislike what others gush over, well too bad.

[Greyfox]

I have many friends in the movie industry both in front of and behind the cameras. .



46z ,,,Friends in front and behind the cameras.? You got my attention.
Yes. From the same industry, and still many friends.
My wife and I still have some old 8 mml's of the kids too, eh.(Canuck talk.) :lol:

[46zilzal]

Many movies are made locally and I have met many in the production crew over the years: mostly as patients and many at the track where I now work with the photo finish and camera crew. I went to school with many a lighting technician and grew up with the fellow who played Juan Peron in the original cast of Evita. You may have seen him as the warden in the Shawshank Redemption.

I had to go out to the set of First Blood and work on an infection that the "Sheriff" had contracted. The entire cast and crew (Stallone was not there that day) gathered round while I opened an abcess. The red-headed fellow from CSI- Miami was also on the set that day playing another law officer. That was a few years back.

[DanG]

Your a movie expert? As also an expert on Pulitzer Prizes I suspect you're aware that it was a long running play and won a Pulitzer in '84. There's no accounting for taste in fact with you there's little accounting for anything but the script is what shines in the film let alone the performaces of some of the finest actors of our day. JLemmon as Shelly "The Machine" Levine is an artful performance let alone that of APacino in his "great meals fade in reflection" speech.

Can I assume you didn't like Death of a Salesman either?
:ThmbUp::ThmbUp: Mack...

My last word on this terrific movie…

If anyone has yet to see it, here’s a very short clip that gives outstanding advice to all investors.

Enjoy the great Pacino…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p92iSnAMX6Q

[bigmack]

DG - To me it's a film about men living lives of quiet desparation as is found throughout our land. Odd how someone could dismiss it as a bad film because they have a hair up their keister about salesmen. Go figure. I'm not a big fan of genocide but I though The Killing Fields was a good film.

The hijacking of this dopey thread is long overdue.

[DanG]

DG - To me it's a film about men living lives of quiet desparation as is found throughout our land. Odd how someone could dismiss it as a bad film because they have a hair up their keister about salesmen. Go figure. I'm not a big fan of genocide but I though The Killing Fields was a good film.

The hijacking of this dopey thread is long overdue.
I agree 300% concerning the film Mack;

Maybe because my best friend of 35 years is a real estate developer and started in sales this film struck a 'diminished chord with me, but I think you hit the key point.

How the topic determines the ultimate quality…and that determination is at the hands of a self proclaimed film expert speaks volumes concerning the individual involved.

Not a good film…a GREAT film was just trashed by a “film expert”…:rolleyes:

PS: Again I apoligize, as I said it was my last word on the subject…