A controversial opinion... maybe?

[Maji]

Hi,

I think I may get skewered because what I am going to write. However, being new at this game, I am hoping to learn from the experienced people here and am not afraid to take a few gulps on that road.

I think if you properly handicap a horse, more often than not you will end up picking the chalk or another horse with lower odds. In most races, a good portion of the bettors try to do their best handicapping. However, as most handicapping looks at horses with speed, pace etc., the ones that stand out are the ones that most systems pick up. Hence the reason for lower odds. Atleast that is my opinion. However, for races where there is a lot of hype and a lot of John q. Public bets without doing their homework, there is a good number of overlays. For example, in the Kentucky Derby, the favorite had very nice odds. There were people like some KISS's lead singer's girl friend betting 100k on a horse whose jockey's colors caught her eyes.

The reason I say this is because I have a system that boxes 3 horses to play an exacta. It can't make up its mind really after it picks those 3 up. Most of the time, they are very competitively close. In cases like Kentucky Derby or Preakness, the returns are nice. However, in other cases, in spite of a large percentage of wins, the bets usually end up on underlays and hence unprofitable overall.

Now question is, for people who cannot watch the toteboard and need to place their bets a few hours before post time, how can they determine if certain horses will end up being underlays? Is the Morning Line a good indicator of this?

Thanks for all your comments.

[Robert Fischer]

If you can't watch the odds , its really tough to be picky about the odds...

The public (over)plays certain factors (trainers, jockeys, fanFavorites), and the ML is usually in the ballpark. Smaller fields mean less payout.

[kevinper]

IMO he is correct that the ML usually is a good indicator. Every now and then the ML will be at 2.50 to 1 and at post time the horse goes off at 9-1. One way to solve this is to wait until 2 or 3 of your picks have morning line odds of 3-1 or better. You won't have as many plays but you may have a bigger bankroll as a result. Another may be to add some spot plays to your method to find undervalued picks that you could group with.

[ranchwest]

It's not as difficult as you might think. Find the phoney favorite. All of the other horses will have good odds. If you're patient you'll find a race where a horse looks good on paper and after a while you can spot the horse that the public is likely to not bet hard. I love those horses that have a M/L of 3/1 to 10/1 (and go off at 5/1 to 12/1) when another horse looks like it will go off at 6/5 or less and lose.

Now, if you're intent on betting every race, you're going to have to play quite a bit of chalk on a fast or firm track.

[ELA]

I think the "false" or "bad" favorite, and the overlay, value play, sleeper, etc., go hand in hand; and many don't see this dynamic. Too many times I have seen people just look for a way to beat the favorite or who can beat the favorite, or something along those lines. Looking for an angle to beat the favorite, for me, is second. What I look for first is the bad favorite. If there's a bad favorite, then, for me, I know there is an opportunity.

Now, I don't play every race, which I know many hard-core gamblers, professionals, etc. say is not a good move. So be it. But I am always going to jump on a bad favorite who is lame, off, not up to his/her norm, coming off or heading into something (bad works, cycle, being off his feed, etc.) -- anything I can. I understand that most people might not be able to play this way, but looking for the bad favorite can be accomplished in a variety of ways.

Great thread.

Eric

[46zilzal]

best false favorites have begun to tail off while still looking (positionally) good.....See at least one a day

[spilparc]

About 50% of the races are won by the favorite and second favorite. About 50% of the races are not.

Concentrate on the not.

[Maji]

Thanks everyone for your posts. Nice discussion.

Now, what are your ways of finding the false favorites? What are you looking for in the PP to detect that?

Thanks again.

[spilparc]

Thanks everyone for your posts. Nice discussion.

Now, what are your ways of finding the false favorites? What are you looking for in the PP to detect that?

Thanks again.

A few examples of false favorites:

Negative class drops.

Need to lead speed horses that won't get a clear easy lead.

Off the pace horses against a solid lone early.

Deep closers in a paceless race.

[ELA]

Thanks everyone for your posts. Nice discussion.

Now, what are your ways of finding the false favorites? What are you looking for in the PP to detect that?

Thanks again.

I can't specify the %'s, but I would venture to say that more often than not the evidence is not in the PP's. I use and watch replays a great deal. I also put a much validity in the physical aspect. Depending on the meet, weather, my playing, and other factors, I may go look at the horses in the paddock, watch them as they walk onto the track, and then watch them warm up. I also look at trainer/work patterns. There are big tells here and people often don't pick up on it. Trainers -- good trainers -- know what works, what doesn't, etc. 25% trainers know what they are doing and they know what it takes to win races. More often than not it's because they are placing their horses aggressively and picking the right spots, thus, most often there is no price, value, etc. But watch -- you'll see it.

If I am looking at the PP side -- I am looking for extremes, anomalies, and the like. I might be looking for an extreme day where the #'s came back big, the races went super fast, etc. I might be looking for horses who benefited big time from a big bias, weather, wind, something -- anything, LOL. I want to find a horse who on paper looks like an easy walk-over where they lay over the field . . . but they don't because of the above mentioned items.

Eric

[Kelso]

Deep closers in a paceless race.


By "paceless race," do you mean a race with no speed horses?
Thank you.

[ranchwest]

Thanks everyone for your posts. Nice discussion.

Now, what are your ways of finding the false favorites? What are you looking for in the PP to detect that?

Thanks again.

I'm not going to give you the mint. You'll have to earn that.

I will give you the process.

The public bets horses that seem good. They bet horses that should be able to finish in the superfecta, but they bet them to win.

So, you start by looking for the OPPOSITE of what you're really looking for. Does this 4/5 (or whatver) horse look like it can CROSS THE WIRE FIRST (BEAT EVERY HORSE) IN THIS FIELD? If the answer is yes (very often the case), you have a pass. If the answer is no, you look to see if you can find the horse that can BEAT THE HORSES IN THIS FIELD.

Don't worry about being right every time. You can be wrong quite a bit and still come out ahead as long as you are often right about the favorite losing.

[46zilzal]

By "paceless race," do you mean a race with no speed horses?

No, if most are going 1:11 and change in routes of 8.5 and no one wants the lead today in 1:13 and change, that is paceless. Just because one is out front does not qualify it as speed.

[spilparc]

By "paceless race," do you mean a race with no speed horses?
Thank you.

Yes. No early horses. A horse who likes to be in front at the quarter pole.

[K9Pup]

Some people attempt to estimate what the crowd odds will be programatically. First cuts at it might use published speed numbers, etc. A more sophisicated method might include other "crowd" factors. Then using YOUR system you generate YOUR odds and compare.

[Maji]

Thanks again everyone for the great discussion. I am still trying to find what makes a false favorite from just the information available on the Past Performance sheets. It may as well be the Holy Grail of handicapping!!!!

Perhaps just using Angle or Spot Plays is the way to go... just a random thought that is crossing my mind reinforced by another poster a few messages above.

[ranchwest]

Look at the 4/5 horses that lose and see what you see.

[Maji]

Look at the 4/5 horses that lose and see what you see.

Thanks for that suggestion. Actually, I have been trying that for the last few days after I realized that if I do what is traditionaly handicapping, I will be picking up chalk or some horse with low odds. Of course, everyone, including me, are looking at the speed figures, wins, pace etc.

I just feel that some races are used by the trainers to condition their horses and to keep the odds high when they really intent those horses to win. The clue is find out when they are doing it from the PP figures. That is what I am looking for.

Many horses that lose seem to lead a call or two and then give up. To me, those maybe the hidden gems. There are some hidden class drops that I have read about, but have not been able to put my finger on anything concrete.

Hope we have an exchange of ideas on these angles.

Thanks.

[ranchwest]

Sounds like you're beginning to get the hang of it.

Don't worry about picking winners yet. Concentrate on picking losing favorites.

[Jeff P]

I'm a big believer in evaluating the strength of post time favorites numerically.
http://www.jcapper.com/HelpDocs/DBFoundations.htm?FAVS
(Scroll down to the heading labelled "JPR and Post Time Favorites")


The same thing can also be done with numbers that are more widely available.

Here's that same sample of post time favorites broken out by Bris Prime Power Rank:
By: Prime Power Rank

Rank Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct Impact
1 -4096.00 30426.00 0.8654 5961 15213 .3918 1.1205
2 -2076.80 10620.00 0.8044 1665 5310 .3136 0.8967
3 -948.90 4896.00 0.8062 711 2448 .2904 0.8306
4 -720.80 2634.00 0.7263 348 1317 .2642 0.7556
5 -417.70 1416.00 0.7050 177 708 .2500 0.7149
6 -243.00 906.00 0.7318 112 453 .2472 0.7070
7 -91.20 460.00 0.8017 64 230 .2783 0.7957
8 -178.30 376.00 0.5258 34 188 .1809 0.5172
9 -35.20 162.00 0.7827 22 81 .2716 0.7767
10 -69.40 96.00 0.2771 5 48 .1042 0.2979
11 -22.80 40.00 0.4300 3 20 .1500 0.4290
12 -20.00 20.00 0.0000 0 10 .0000 0.0000
13 -3.60 10.00 0.6400 1 5 .2000 0.5719
14+ -2.00 2.00 0.0000 0 1 .0000 0.0000

Notice how those that rank 3rd or worse in Prime Power have lower win rates? Focusing on just those races might make a good start towards fishing in the right pond.



-jp

.

[kenwoodallpromos]

If the horse in question is a regular at the same track, maybe looking at the PP's for that horse's odds under similar race conditions may tell you if the horse is a crowd favorite and will keep low odds.

[raybo]

QUOTE "Now question is, for people who cannot watch the toteboard and need to place their bets a few hours before post time, how can they determine if certain horses will end up being underlays? Is the Morning Line a good indicator of this?"

It is difficult to determine who will be underlays/overlays prior to about 5 minutes to post.

As you know, favorites win about 30% of the time if over 1/1 and about 50% of the time if 1/1 or less. These are "post time" favorites. M/L favorites win less than that. Even if you can weed out M/L favorites as unable to win, you still haven't solved the problem. Post time favorites are much more likely to win than M/L favs.

Most of the above responses, concerning determining "false" favs, are good methods. If you are serious about wagering without the aid of knowing who, among your contenders, will be underlays/overlays and establishing, in your own mind, if the underlays are "false", you will need to use most, if not all, of the methods above, plus some more that haven't been listed.

This will be difficult and time consuming but is not impossible.

This is not "the holy grail" as you mentioned above, however. IMO, "the holy grail" of handicapping is the ability to determine "current" condition, for every horse who is a true contender in the race. This is much harder to do than finding false favorites.

[cnollfan]

Aging horse, declining winning percentage
3 years old, failed to improve on 2 year old form
Front runner with low winning percentage
Previous performance aided by bias
Front runner facing increased pace pressure
Previous multiple low-odds losses vs. similar
No early speed
Shipper from better circuit to lesser circuit
Very expensive yearling
Hardly ever runs
Layoff after sharp effort
N1X winner trying N2X for the first time
Other horses are better
Form getting stale

[Maji]

Great suggestions and discussions. Thank you everyone. Please keep on rolling in suggestions to find current form, and false favorites. :)

[ranchwest]

Great suggestions and discussions. Thank you everyone. Please keep on rolling in suggestions to find current form, and false favorites. :)

If you really want an extreme example of an unbettable favorite, see tonight (Sunday, 5/27) MNR race 1. #9's trainer is 0/48 in maiden claiming and the horse is an S 0 (sustained, no early speed). The horse closes for third.

I couldn't find the winner, so I passed. IMHO, there wasn't a bettable horse in the field.

[spilparc]

I'm curious:

How many horses were in the race?

What did the favorite go off at?

Perhaps you could have bet every other horse to win. Or, bet two or three horses to place.

I hate to pass a race like that especially when the favorite is even money or less.

[ranchwest]

It was a 10 horse race and the fav was 1.7/1. The winner was 3.9/1.

I'm currently restricting myself to a single win play only and this has been working out very well for me, so I was unable to play the race. YMMV.

[BigJake]

I

Now, I don't play every race, which I know many hard-core gamblers, professionals, etc. say is not a good move. So be it. But I am always going to jump on a bad favorite who is lame, off, not up to his/her norm, coming off or heading into something (bad works, cycle, being off his feed, etc.) -- anything I can. I understand that most people might not be able to play this way, but looking for the bad favorite can be accomplished in a variety of ways.

Great thread.

Eric

I think most winning players will tell you the exact opposite. It is probably better to not play every race. If you pick out one or two races and bet the ever loving dog sh*t out of them. Your probably going to be lots better off. (This would fall under the catagory of "do as I say, not as I do". I am still trying to get a handle on this part of my game).

As far as the false favorites, I'll use an example from Hol this past Friday night. In a 20K claimer there was a horse being bet down to 1-2 or something like that. I ran my MPH program and it put this horse on top with another horse pretty close . I looked at the PP and agreed with MPH, that if this horse ran back to his last race that he would dominate this field, but still like the second choice too (especially since he was the second betting choice at 8-1). I bet the second choice and he won. The ML on the favorite was something like 8-5 and my horse was 3-1. If you don't watch the board you'll never pick up on these treats.

Lastly, to find lost favorites look for good horses that are declining. The Beyer figs are great for this. If you see the Beyer figs declining over the past 3 or more races, RUN FOR THE HILLS. Also one big Beyer fig decline and a significant drop in class in a big red flag.
Marathon Post Done.

Big Jake

[raybo]

I think most winning players will tell you the exact opposite. It is probably better to not play every race. If you pick out one or two races and bet the ever loving dog sh*t out of them. Your probably going to be lots better off. (This would fall under the catagory of "do as I say, not as I do". I am still trying to get a handle on this part of my game).

As far as the false favorites, I'll use an example from Hol this past Friday night. In a 20K claimer there was a horse being bet down to 1-2 or something like that. I ran my MPH program and it put this horse on top with another horse pretty close . I looked at the PP and agreed with MPH, that if this horse ran back to his last race that he would dominate this field, but still like the second choice too (especially since he was the second betting choice at 8-1). I bet the second choice and he won. The ML on the favorite was something like 8-5 and my horse was 3-1. If you don't watch the board you'll never pick up on these treats.

Lastly, to find lost favorites look for good horses that are declining. The Beyer figs are great for this. If you see the Beyer figs declining over the past 3 or more races, RUN FOR THE HILLS. Also one big Beyer fig decline and a significant drop in class in a big red flag.
Marathon Post Done.

Big Jake

Good post. The highlighted portion is unclear to me. By "run for the hills" do you mean stay away from this horse? In my experience, just the opposite is the case many times. A horse that has shown consecutive declines often shows dramatic improvement, often with no other indications.

[BigJake]

Yes Raybo I stay as far away from these declining horses as possible. I can definately forgive one race. Sometimes I can forgive 2, but never 3. What you and I 've just proved is: In horse racing you can have sucess with two polar opposite theories. I think it presents a problem for new players trying to gleen ideas from the board :bang: .

Big Jake

[raybo]

Yes Raybo I stay as far away from these declining horses as possible. I can definately forgive one race. Sometimes I can forgive 2, but never 3. What you and I 've just proved is: In horse racing you can have sucess with two polar opposite theories. I think it presents a problem for new players trying to gleen ideas from the board :bang: .

Big Jake

Agreed

[ELA]

I think most winning players will tell you the exact opposite. It is probably better to not play every race. If you pick out one or two races and bet the ever loving dog sh*t out of them. Your probably going to be lots better off. (This would fall under the catagory of "do as I say, not as I do". I am still trying to get a handle on this part of my game).

As far as the false favorites, I'll use an example from Hol this past Friday night. In a 20K claimer there was a horse being bet down to 1-2 or something like that. I ran my MPH program and it put this horse on top with another horse pretty close . I looked at the PP and agreed with MPH, that if this horse ran back to his last race that he would dominate this field, but still like the second choice too (especially since he was the second betting choice at 8-1). I bet the second choice and he won. The ML on the favorite was something like 8-5 and my horse was 3-1. If you don't watch the board you'll never pick up on these treats.

Lastly, to find lost favorites look for good horses that are declining. The Beyer figs are great for this. If you see the Beyer figs declining over the past 3 or more races, RUN FOR THE HILLS. Also one big Beyer fig decline and a significant drop in class in a big red flag.
Marathon Post Done.

Big Jake

Good to hear, and thanks Jake. I said that primarily because quite some time ago, there was a thread and lengthy discussion about playing every race, spot playing, etc. -- and many of the serious players seemed to go in the other direction. Of course this discussion has been bantered around for the ages, and the reasons always seem to be the same. Without question, I think there is some validity to the position you always tend to hear -- actual experience, with money at risk is the only experience that you can/will learn from, you must wager, even if it's a small amount in order to make sure you are playing what you decided to and wanted to play, the mental playing doesn't hold true, etc. and all of that.

Thanks for the info.

Eric

[alysheba88]

Yes Raybo I stay as far away from these declining horses as possible. I can definately forgive one race. Sometimes I can forgive 2, but never 3. What you and I 've just proved is: In horse racing you can have sucess with two polar opposite theories. I think it presents a problem for new players trying to gleen ideas from the board :bang: .

Big Jake


Alot depends on the trainer. And more importantly the reason for the apparent (and I say apparent because its easy to get fooled) "declining" form. Since the public usually just focuses on the last running line, you will end up betting the public horses if you cant look past apparent declining form

[GaryG]

Sometimes you need to read between the lines to identify declining form. Things such as previous patterns of races and works. If a horse that normally works regularly drops in class off a 30 day + layoff with no workks the red flag should go up. Trainers sure don't give anything away in this game. Sometimes the rider will be another clue. A switch to a low % rider from the regular jock also has a negative impact.

[Fastracehorse]

Hi,

I think I may get skewered because what I am going to write. However, being new at this game, I am hoping to learn from the experienced people here and am not afraid to take a few gulps on that road.

I think if you properly handicap a horse, more often than not you will end up picking the chalk or another horse with lower odds. In most races, a good portion of the bettors try to do their best handicapping. However, as most handicapping looks at horses with speed, pace etc., the ones that stand out are the ones that most systems pick up. Hence the reason for lower odds. Atleast that is my opinion. However, for races where there is a lot of hype and a lot of John q. Public bets without doing their homework, there is a good number of overlays. For example, in the Kentucky Derby, the favorite had very nice odds. There were people like some KISS's lead singer's girl friend betting 100k on a horse whose jockey's colors caught her eyes.

The reason I say this is because I have a system that boxes 3 horses to play an exacta. It can't make up its mind really after it picks those 3 up. Most of the time, they are very competitively close. In cases like Kentucky Derby or Preakness, the returns are nice. However, in other cases, in spite of a large percentage of wins, the bets usually end up on underlays and hence unprofitable overall.

Now question is, for people who cannot watch the toteboard and need to place their bets a few hours before post time, how can they determine if certain horses will end up being underlays? Is the Morning Line a good indicator of this?

Thanks for all your comments.

I take issue with your statement: "I think if you properly handicap a horse, more often than not you will end up picking the chalk or another horse with lower odds."

The more you study the game the less likely you will pick the chalk. Having said that, I know 33 % of faves win - and 70 % hit the tote.

Yesterday at Belmont a 60-1 won the 1st leg of the early p-4; the following legs were - 1:9 - 3/4 - 7/2. It paid about $2300.

Was that 60-1 a fluke?? He rolled home like he was meant.

Were there factors that lead to honeing in on the horse as a possibility?? Three were some subtle ones.

The game is more about trying to achieve a high profit/cost ratio. Not easy. But learning how to beat the chalk is of extreme importance.

fffastt

[ranchwest]

I take issue with your statement: "I think if you properly handicap a horse, more often than not you will end up picking the chalk or another horse with lower odds."

The more you study the game the less likely you will pick the chalk. Having said that, I know 33 % of faves win - and 70 % hit the tote.

Yesterday at Belmont a 60-1 won the 1st leg of the early p-4; the following legs were - 1:9 - 3/4 - 7/2. It paid about $2300.

Was that 60-1 a fluke?? He rolled home like he was meant.

Were there factors that lead to honeing in on the horse as a possibility?? Three were some subtle ones.

The game is more about trying to achieve a high profit/cost ratio. Not easy. But learning how to beat the chalk is of extreme importance.

fffastt

That's an excellent post.

I suspicion that where Maji is at is that if you combine all of the most common traditional handicapping factors you'll nearly always end up on the favorite. He may need to learn more contrarian thinking.

[Maji]

That's an excellent post.

I suspicion that where Maji is at is that if you combine all of the most common traditional handicapping factors you'll nearly always end up on the favorite. He may need to learn more contrarian thinking.

You hit the nail on the head. It is so difficult to think that way. However, winners can be found that way, so I will have to learn to do that.

Thanks again.

[46zilzal]

Was that 60-1 a fluke?? He rolled home like he was meant.

Were there factors that lead to honeing in on the horse as a possibility?? Three were some subtle ones.


If that was the turfer (#11 Big Daddy Rex) in the second, there was a reason, albeit long ago, for that one to win.

[ranchwest]

Try stepping out of your comfort zone.

Find a favorite you think is vulnerable. Then find a horse that you think has a shot. Find a situation where you can go with a horse that's at least 5/1. Then just put $2 to win on it. See what happens.

If you're always on the favorites you're going to need to be hitting over 50% to do very well.

With longshot winners you stretch your money a lot further.

[Fastracehorse]

That's an excellent post.

I suspicion that where Maji is at is that if you combine all of the most common traditional handicapping factors you'll nearly always end up on the favorite. He may need to learn more contrarian thinking.

I guess contrarian thinking is just understanding that there are more forces at work than the 'surfacely' logical.

The irony is that a player thinks differently because he has some experience and doesn't mind using that sponge between his ears.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

If that was the turfer (#11 Big Daddy Rex) in the second, there was a reason, albeit long ago, for that one to win.

You never gave me the reason :jump:

fffastt

[dav4463]

I like horses with declining figures that is dropping in class today if they are not the favorite.

Some of my reasons to bet against a favorite:

Jockey AND trainer both below 10%

Jockey OR trainer at 5% or lower

No distance wins while other horses in the race have wins at the distance

Too good to be true: dominant speed figures and is running at the same or lower level when horse looks like a much higher class horse.

Any negative or suspicious class move....lower or same level after a good race or win....same or lower level after a recent claim (last two or three races)

Low class in past and entered in a ROUTE today.

No early speed shown recently and entered in a SPRINT today.

[Dan H]

I found myself betting long shots on the last two races trying to make up for early losses. I'm sure I wasn't alone. Often wondered if favorites get better odds during the last races at our undisciplined expense.

[cnollfan]

I found myself betting long shots on the last two races trying to make up for early losses. I'm sure I wasn't alone. Often wondered if favorites get better odds during the last races at our undisciplined expense.

I have read that the favorite to show is a good bet in the last race. That was from the days when there were more than 12 people in the stands and more unsophisticated money was being bet, though.

[raybo]

I found myself betting long shots on the last two races trying to make up for early losses. I'm sure I wasn't alone. Often wondered if favorites get better odds during the last races at our undisciplined expense.

I love to load up a superfecta ticket (if the odds qualify the race for a bet) in the last race of the day, pool is the best of the day.

[ranchwest]

I guess contrarian thinking is just understanding that there are more forces at work than the 'surfacely' logical.

The irony is that a player thinks differently because he has some experience and doesn't mind using that sponge between his ears.

fffastt

I think some people embrace contrarian thinking more readily than others.

The biggest thing is to understand that while the public is often right, they can sometimes be dramatically wrong.

Horses that don't appear to be a fit for a specific race very often are not a good fit, even though the horse may be superior to the other horses in the race IF IT WERE SOME OTHER RACE (INCLUDING POSSIBLY ON SOME OTHER DAY, MAYBE EVEN A DAY IN THE PAST).