A winning approach . . . Such a thing?

[SignUpKing]

There is a methodology, a thought process if you will, that, honestly, has very little to do with number-crunching, speed figures, pace figures and all of the other conventional handicapping BS that puts you on low-odds horses more often than not. (At least the way I approach the game has very little to do with number-crunching. Who needs a computer? I have programmed the one between my ears just fine.)

For me, it's two words when it comes to beating the horses: "pattern recognition".

But what patterns, you ask?

That is for me to know.

Horse racing is like a scaled test -- you are graded against everybody else, so there is no value in sharing your skill with strangers. (Plus, they wouldn't understand or believe a methodology that went against "good handicapping sense". By the way, "good handicapping sense" will send you to the poor house.)

I will, however, offer this advice: Read all of the books by the so-called "experts", Quinn, Brohamer, Meadows, Free, Liftin, and by whomever else, because you need to know how most horse players ("sharpies included") read a Racing Form, you need to know how they think. (My motto at the track: "Know how they think, and then boldly act when you know they're thinking wrong.")

Then, for the next few years study the Racing Form and the correlative results. Study the situations when conventional handicapping is wrong. Study the way prices horses look. Study the way beaten favorites look. Hell, study the way losing 3-1 shots look. If you study long enough, you'll find patterns that most players will not see and would not be able to bet even if they saw them. (Experts, usually, are looking for horses that look real good on paper. But horses that look "real good" on paper are automatic underlays.)

I get my greatest satisfaction hearing the amateurs and "sharpies" mumble, "How could you bet that horse?" when I am standing in the IRS line.

Yesterday, Saturday, the 23rd, at Fairplex Park (FPX), I hit the late Pick 4 for over $11,000.00. In the 11th race, I singled the 2 horse -- 30-1 on the morning line. Track down Saturday's form at FPX. Can you see after-the-fact what I saw before-the-fact? Without more, the 2 horse was one of my "pattern recognition" plays, and it was a Pick-4 singleton. (If the cynics need me to scan in my W-G form, just let me know.)

If you are skilled enough, you can consistently pull money out of the race track. Of that, I am living proof. And I do not write this to impress you; rather, I write it to inspire the people in this group who think beating the horse races is impossible.

And to answer Bad Company: betting the horses for a living, or in my case for significant extra income, IS A BEAUTIFUL THING. No boss, no cubicle, no time clock to punch.

On that note, I am a law professor in the private sector. Like many of you, I share disdain for most attorneys. But I did learn in law school -- another hint -- how to look at a static set of facts in a number of ways. One of my own law professors used to say, "The key is multiple interpretations of the same set of facts. That's what makes a good lawyer." And that's what makes a good horseplayer.

[jma]

After all that sound and fury, signifying nothing, I'm most wondering what your screenname means.

[jma]

After all that sound and fury, signifying nothing, I'm most wondering what your screenname means.

Oh, it's for all the times you've had to sign. We call those "signers", while someone who gets people to sign up would be a telemarketer or something. Oh well...at least you've got a winning approach, whatever you call it.

[The Judge]

Do you mean Sunday the 23rd?

He did explain how he got his name Signup King in an earlier post. I know it burns some peole to heaaare about big scores of others especially because there is now way to check them out unlesss they are posted before hand but it doesn't bother me.

[nobeyerspls]

There is a methodology, a thought process if you will, that, honestly, has very little to do with number-crunching, speed figures, pace figures and all of the other conventional handicapping BS that puts you on low-odds horses more often than not. (At least the way I approach the game has very little to do with number-crunching. Who needs a computer? I have programmed the one between my ears just fine.)

For me, it's two words when it comes to beating the horses: "pattern recognition".


We might have a similar approach as I have found seven angles that produce live longshots, not always winners but with exotics sometimes just hitting the board is fine. In your pick 4 score you treated a 30-1 the way others use a heavy favorite. That to me is the key.
When I get that question - "how could you bet that horse" I politely show the person how even though I know that they will never try to use that type of handicapping.
As you can tell from my name, I hold that the beyer speed figures lead people astray and so I am grateful that they're in the form and that many of the public handicappers quote them. Pace handicapping is different though. Even though for me it puts too fine of a quantified point on an analog event, I think that there is value in it. That value is twofold: it can sometimes locate a winner at a decent price and, perhaps more important, it can identify a favorite that has no chance of winning.
You might not believe this, but horses that you find though pattern recognition and I find from certain angles may also be located by other handicappers using different methods.
When you hit that pick4 you had to handicap the other three races. If there were no "patterns" to recognize in those, then you needed other handicapping skills. I look at pace in a very crude and non-quantified way and there have been several instances when its use helped to complete a trifecta. So keep an open mind as there is more than one path to the winners circle.

[The Judge]

The winner of the 11th race at FPX on 9/23 was the #4 horse Quillota it paid $42.20. The #2 horse was scracted ,maybe you got lucky and was placed on the winner because your horse scratched.

If so the money still spends but you got lucky.

[cj's dad]

I would think he would be placed on the post-time favorite, if his selection was scratched:confused:

[The Judge]

I don't know all the rules for a scratched horses in pick3's or 4's after the first leg of the race has started. There wouldn't be a refund but a bettor could be placed on the favorite or given a consolation pool win. I don't know but I think you can get more then just the posttime favorite when the first leg has run.

You are correct, never heard of a person being placed on a 40 dollar horse so something is not correct in the Signup Kings statement, I assume just a simple mistake.

[ryesteve]

Apparently he's talking about 9/22... the 30-1 ML horse that won the race went off at only 8-1. Bad ML, or perhaps many people saw the same thing?

[Grits]

SignUpKing wrote:

On that note, I am a law professor in the private sector.

Hence, posts that are equivalent, in length and drama, to courtroom closing arguments.

[cnollfan]

Kimmy'sklassylady was moving from poly to dirt. The last time she went from artificial to dirt she ran second at 54-1. In both cases she got beat by 9 lengths on the artificial surface but gained a smidgen of ground in the stretch. In both cases she switched to Matt Garcia from another rider.

This is not a sophisticated pattern, but she did work a sizzing 57 2/5 six days before.

[SignUpKing]

Kimmy'sklassylady was moving from poly to dirt. The last time she went from artificial to dirt she ran second at 54-1. In both cases she got beat by 9 lengths on the artificial surface but gained a smidgen of ground in the stretch. In both cases she switched to Matt Garcia from another rider.

This is not a sophisticated pattern, but she did work a sizzing 57 2/5 six days before.

Love your attempt to be condescending: Who says the pattern has to be "sophisticated" -- it simply has to make money?

But you missed it anyway.

Two races back the horse raced up close to the M/L favorite of today's race (the 11th at FPX on 9/22), and then ran an absolutely horrible race (which I love=automatic overlay) that was followed up by a sizzling workout.

One of the plays I look for is when horses come out of the same race (a previous race). You'll find automatic overlays in the horses that ran behind the other horses in today's race.

This was such a play. Two races back, the 2 horse ran close behind the 6 horse (the M/L) favorite. Since the 2 ran behind the 6, the 2's odds would likley be higher than the odds of the 6. And they were: the 6 was a 5/2 ML shot, and the 2 was a 30-1 morning line.

When the 6 OPENED AT 7/2 (from a 30-1 morning line), I knew I had bet the right horse.

In any event, the trick is to make the bet and not see such scenarios after-the-fact.

My analysis had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with a move from poly to dirt. That is conventional thinking.

[SignUpKing]

After all that sound and fury, signifying nothing, I'm most wondering what your screenname means.

"Signifying nothing"? Then, do not bother trying to read a Racing Form. Much of that is done between the lines.

[SignUpKing]

Do you mean Sunday the 23rd?

He did explain how he got his name Signup King in an earlier post. I know it burns some peole to heaaare about big scores of others especially because there is now way to check them out unlesss they are posted before hand but it doesn't bother me.

Fairplex Park, the late pick 4, Saturday, the 22nd.

Did not think my post would rub people the wrong way.

Just trying to get the self-proclaimed losers in the group to think differently, is all.

[SignUpKing]

We might have a similar approach as I have found seven angles that produce live longshots, not always winners but with exotics sometimes just hitting the board is fine. In your pick 4 score you treated a 30-1 the way others use a heavy favorite. That to me is the key.
When I get that question - "how could you bet that horse" I politely show the person how even though I know that they will never try to use that type of handicapping.
As you can tell from my name, I hold that the beyer speed figures lead people astray and so I am grateful that they're in the form and that many of the public handicappers quote them. Pace handicapping is different though. Even though for me it puts too fine of a quantified point on an analog event, I think that there is value in it. That value is twofold: it can sometimes locate a winner at a decent price and, perhaps more important, it can identify a favorite that has no chance of winning.
You might not believe this, but horses that you find though pattern recognition and I find from certain angles may also be located by other handicappers using different methods.
When you hit that pick4 you had to handicap the other three races. If there were no "patterns" to recognize in those, then you needed other handicapping skills. I look at pace in a very crude and non-quantified way and there have been several instances when its use helped to complete a trifecta. So keep an open mind as there is more than one path to the winners circle.

Points well taken. I agree, but I go with my strengths. "The better the toolbox, the better the carpenter can be."

[SignUpKing]

The winner of the 11th race at FPX on 9/23 was the #4 horse Quillota it paid $42.20. The #2 horse was scracted ,maybe you got lucky and was placed on the winner because your horse scratched.

If so the money still spends but you got lucky.

Saturday, the 22ND, for chrissakes. Most people were able to figure that out !!!

[SignUpKing]

SignUpKing wrote:

On that note, I am a law professor in the private sector.

Hence, posts that are equivalent, in length and drama, to courtroom closing arguments.

Thank you !!!

[riskman]

Do not bet FPX but downloaded the race and put it through my program. The race was the 11th on 9/22 a 6.5 dirt sprint for 3yrf--Alw-oclm 40 1x
The #2 Kimmy S listed 30-1 morning line. The race shape indicated good amount of early speed. The #2 was tied with the # 3 for best late pace rating.Running style P2. Good record at dist. with good recent W/O --best of day at distance indicating fitness.My betting line showed 6-1 an overlay. Closing odds-- 8.6. Horse rated fourth out of field of 9. Trainer does well in Allowance races.
A single in a P4--- not for me. Would have used 8-2-9 Would have been in my exacta bet with the 8. Exacta 2/8 paid 57.00 FOR A 1.00
So tell me--what is the angle?

[The Judge]

How could a person "figure" that out if they don't play FPX? You put down the wrong date professor ,you made a mistake, it could just as easily the wrong track or the wrong race.

By the way its called the Tandem Concept been around a long time, sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't always good check out. "The Tandem Race, How To Win It" by Howard Sartin added bonus trip Handicapping via the Racing Form.1985 concept around long before then.

[GaryG]

I get my greatest satisfaction hearing the amateurs and "sharpies" mumble, "How could you bet that horse?" when I am standing in the IRS line.:lol: :lol: :lol:

[DanG]

SignupK: Anyone leaving with more cash than they arrive with is to be commended. I agree with much of what you say and you obviously have a great handle on what works for you.

I am curious about this however…Being a law professor, how would these statements work together in a closing argument?

This…



Just trying to get the self-proclaimed losers in the group to think differently, is all.
Followed by this…


But what patterns, you ask? ~ That is for me to know.


There is no value in sharing your skill with strangers.


They wouldn't understand or believe a methodology that went against "good handicapping sense".
:confused:

[headhawg]

My comment is not aimed at any one person in particular, but it sure seems that we have had an inordinate amount of people talking (posting) out of both sides of their mouth and another orifice lately.

[racko]

Signupking, what is your deciding factor to play the horse? I also have noticed this angle and play it regularly. It seems a jockey switch is important. Is the good workout mandatory or just a plus? I am so close to having a positive R.O.I. but just fall short.

[Niko]

SignupK: Anyone leaving with more cash than they arrive with is to be commended. I agree with much of what you say and you obviously have a great handle on what works for you.

I am curious about this however…Being a law professor, how would these statements work together in a closing argument?

This…



Just trying to get the self-proclaimed losers in the group to think differently, is all.
Followed by this…


But what patterns, you ask? ~ That is for me to know.


There is no value in sharing your skill with strangers.


They wouldn't understand or believe a methodology that went against "good handicapping sense".
:confused:

I see this from time to time on this board and it always puzzles me, thanks for pointing it out Dan. It's like someone telling you they have a secret and then refusing to share it. Usually there's an alterior motive or psychological reason for peope to behave in such a way (not saying there is here though).

[TimesTheyRAChangin]

My take on this was that he said he wanted them to start thinking differently,but never mentioned anything about teaching them how he does it.

[WJ47]

I don't play professionally, I barely pay recreationally anymore. I have played more in the past, but I'm back to college full time to finish my degree and I don't have the time or money right now to play often. Years ago, when I was more committed and read the form from cover to cover daily, I did win a couple of pick 6's, but they were both under $10,000. Nothing life changing, but still nice. :)

I agree about the patterns. Sometimes when I'm handicapping a race, I just get an strange feeling about something I see in a past performance. Its like a "little voice in your head" kind of feeling, LOL. For me, this is usually something that seems illogical. Like a horse who performed like a filthy pig in his previous 2 races at huge odds (like 20/1) then suddenly the odds dropped in his last race (like 5/1) and he lost that one as well. Assuming the class levels, surface, and distance were similar in all the races, I think of this strange odds drop as inside information and an effort that went awry and alot of times, the horse performs well in the next race.

Other than that, its usually just a feeling that something is odd or irregular in the past performances of a certain horse. I think that if you spend enough time staring at a racing form you will start to notice different patterns. Nowadays, I handicap a form in like 10 minutes just to get some action and this doesn't really work too well. :) Someday I'll have more time and get back to more serious handicapping.

I envy people that can be professionals in this game. I'm far too impulsive. On a card, there may be only one or two horses that I really love and I really want to play all the races. I need to get some self-control!

[riskman]

How could a person "figure" that out if they don't play FPX? You put down the wrong date professor ,you made a mistake, it could just as easily the wrong track or the wrong race.

By the way its called the Tandem Concept been around a long time, sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't always good check out. "The Tandem Race, How To Win It" by Howard Sartin added bonus trip Handicapping via the Racing Form.1985 concept around long before then.


If you would bother to read what I said is that I downloaded the race from my files--I can down load any race run-- since I pay a monthly subscription for all tracks.I do not play FPX but was curious to see what was going on. There was a typo on the date --- I had the right race --you should think before you pop off , Dude.
Thanks for the other info-

[Greyfox]

My take on this was that he said he wanted them to start thinking differently,but never mentioned anything about teaching them how he does it.


Not all teachers teach directly.
Sometimes by having learners puzzle over a task and work it out for themselves the greatest skills are gained.
I found Signupking's initial post to be a very positive suggestion. He reminded me that perhaps there are days when I do spend too much time on my privately developed figs and not enough on pattern recognition ( akin to Ray Taulbot.)

Signupking specifically said:

"Study the situations when conventional handicapping is wrong. Study the way prices horses look. Study the way beaten favorites look. Hell, study the way losing 3-1 shots look. If you study long enough, you'll find patterns that most players will not see and would not be able to bet even if they saw them. (Experts, usually, are looking for horses that look real good on paper."

I don't want him spoonfeeding me my angles. Studying a race your beaten in somewhat unexpectedly is something most of us do. But perhaps we should be writing it down more for future reference if we see why we were beat.
In that regard, my thinking has changed already. Thankyou SKing.

[The Judge]

I don't care how you found the race my comment was to the professor. Of course I could have searched and ran the race down even if it was at another track. I don't play Fpx why would I want to spend my time searching for a race when the poster can simply look see that he made a mistake and "give" me the correct information after all its a 11 thousand dollar score and he posted the wrong information what's the big deal of asking the poster to post the correct information ? I checked what he said and what he said was wrong. He didn't give the horses name just the 2 horse he didn't give the odds that the horse went off at he said the #2 horse which wasn't in that race. So 'what race are you talking about" seems a logical next question to me.

And then after all the mystery "how did I singled a 30-1 shot" I find out he used the Tandem Concept. A concept that I first heard about from the Sartin Group including Pizzola years ago. Do a seach of Tandem Races on this board and see what you come with. We have talked about tandem races a lot on this board. The Professor thinks it new "here" because he just joined.

[Capper Al]

There is a methodology, a thought process if you will, that, honestly, has very little to do with number-crunching, speed figures, pace figures and all of the other conventional handicapping BS that puts you on low-odds horses more often than not. (At least the way I approach the game has very little to do with number-crunching. Who needs a computer? I have programmed the one between my ears just fine.)

For me, it's two words when it comes to beating the horses: "pattern recognition".

But what patterns, you ask?

That is for me to know.

Horse racing is like a scaled test -- you are graded against everybody else, so there is no value in sharing your skill with strangers. (Plus, they wouldn't understand or believe a methodology that went against "good handicapping sense". By the way, "good handicapping sense" will send you to the poor house.)

I will, however, offer this advice: Read all of the books by the so-called "experts", Quinn, Brohamer, Meadows, Free, Liftin, and by whomever else, because you need to know how most horse players ("sharpies included") read a Racing Form, you need to know how they think. (My motto at the track: "Know how they think, and then boldly act when you know they're thinking wrong.")

Then, for the next few years study the Racing Form and the correlative results. Study the situations when conventional handicapping is wrong. Study the way prices horses look. Study the way beaten favorites look. Hell, study the way losing 3-1 shots look. If you study long enough, you'll find patterns that most players will not see and would not be able to bet even if they saw them. (Experts, usually, are looking for horses that look real good on paper. But horses that look "real good" on paper are automatic underlays.)

I get my greatest satisfaction hearing the amateurs and "sharpies" mumble, "How could you bet that horse?" when I am standing in the IRS line.

Yesterday, Saturday, the 23rd, at Fairplex Park (FPX), I hit the late Pick 4 for over $11,000.00. In the 11th race, I singled the 2 horse -- 30-1 on the morning line. Track down Saturday's form at FPX. Can you see after-the-fact what I saw before-the-fact? Without more, the 2 horse was one of my "pattern recognition" plays, and it was a Pick-4 singleton. (If the cynics need me to scan in my W-G form, just let me know.)

If you are skilled enough, you can consistently pull money out of the race track. Of that, I am living proof. And I do not write this to impress you; rather, I write it to inspire the people in this group who think beating the horse races is impossible.

And to answer Bad Company: betting the horses for a living, or in my case for significant extra income, IS A BEAUTIFUL THING. No boss, no cubicle, no time clock to punch.

On that note, I am a law professor in the private sector. Like many of you, I share disdain for most attorneys. But I did learn in law school -- another hint -- how to look at a static set of facts in a number of ways. One of my own law professors used to say, "The key is multiple interpretations of the same set of facts. That's what makes a good lawyer." And that's what makes a good horseplayer.

Right on. One needs the books so they won't spend too much time re-inventing the wheel. After that, they need to determine what works and what doesn't, checking the premise. We can't just ape the authors to be successfull or blindly use somebodies software. If these people had the answer, they wouldn't be sharing it.

[The Judge]

On this very board people give out horses that they think will win. Some very serious handicappers that sell their products give away free printouts of certain races or whole tracks. They willl tell you how they play and beat thea races. Some write books teach seminars etc.

There is no secret so why shouldn't they teach what they know. I am of course not alking about anything proprietary. I have been to seminars where the host shows you their tickets and announces it over the mike and its filmed and taped ,they win the race yet not everyone in the siminar has bet that race and not everyone has bet the horse or horses in the manner of the siminar instructor.

[SMOO]

I see this from time to time on this board and it always puzzles me, thanks for pointing it out Dan. It's like someone telling you they have a secret and then refusing to share it. Usually there's an alterior motive or psychological reason for peope to behave in such a way (not saying there is here though).

BINGO

[NYPlayer]

Do you mean Sunday the 23rd?

He did explain how he got his name Signup King in an earlier post. I know it burns some peole to heaaare about big scores of others especially because there is now way to check them out unlesss they are posted before hand but it doesn't bother me.

Judge,

Did you go to law school with Professor Signer King?

[NYPlayer]

Love your attempt to be condescending: Who says the pattern has to be "sophisticated" -- it simply has to make money?

But you missed it anyway.

Two races back the horse raced up close to the M/L favorite of today's race (the 11th at FPX on 9/22), and then ran an absolutely horrible race (which I love=automatic overlay) that was followed up by a sizzling workout.

One of the plays I look for is when horses come out of the same race (a previous race). You'll find automatic overlays in the horses that ran behind the other horses in today's race.

This was such a play. Two races back, the 2 horse ran close behind the 6 horse (the M/L) favorite. Since the 2 ran behind the 6, the 2's odds would likley be higher than the odds of the 6. And they were: the 6 was a 5/2 ML shot, and the 2 was a 30-1 morning line.

When the 6 OPENED AT 7/2 (from a 30-1 morning line), I knew I had bet the right horse.

In any event, the trick is to make the bet and not see such scenarios after-the-fact.

My analysis had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with a move from poly to dirt. That is conventional thinking.

Okay, Okay! What's your web site? Whad'ya sellin? Or are you shilling for PTC as well?

[JavaPro]

There is a methodology, a thought process if you will, that, honestly, has very little to do with number-crunching, speed figures, pace figures and all of the other conventional handicapping BS that puts you on low-odds horses more often than not. (At least the way I approach the game has very little to do with number-crunching. Who needs a computer? I have programmed the one between my ears just fine.)

For me, it's two words when it comes to beating the horses: "pattern recognition".

Well said. It seems it may not be enough to just recognize the patterns. You also need to have enough faith in your ability to recognize the patterns to use them in betting.