PDA

View Full Version : Top 10-Why People Lose


Niko
03-18-2008, 11:37 AM
Here's a list I put together for an old book. Anything I missed? Helpful?

Here are some of the reasons people continue to lose:

1. They don’t have a time tested and proven strategy that wins. A winner will take the time to research and test a method to make sure it can show long-term profits. If it looks promising they’ll test their method with real money making small wagers to learn and understand it before betting seriously.

2. If they have a successful method they don’t have the discipline or confidence to follow it. Losers don’t put in the proper time to practice and study their method, thus they lack the confidence to properly use it in the correct situations. As soon as a losing streak takes place they abandon the method searching for the next method that promises them riches. A winner takes the necessary time to learn and understand a method and sticks with it through the inevitable losing cycles.

3. They make too many bad bets: In contrast most but not all winning handicappers limit themselves to a couple prime bets per day per track. Some days they may not bet at all. Again, I can’t stress this enough, if you want to win long-term don’t bet unless you have an edge! There’s plenty of stuff you can do at the track when you’re not betting. Try to get better at visual handicapping. Try a new handicapping approach that’s worked for others and see what you can learn. I can handicap a card and not have any bets for the day. The next day at the same track I might have 4-5 qualifying bets. Don’t determine beforehand how many races you’ll bet, let the bets come to you. There’s always another day.

4. They can’t stand being wrong. It is more important for the majority of people to select and be on the winner of a race than it is to win money. They’ll bet on the favorite even if it’s over bet just to make sure they cash a ticket. They’ll hedge their exotic bets with multiple horses even if it costs them money in the long run. Do the opposite if you want to win. Ron Cox a noted handicapper observed that it wasn’t until he started asking himself how or if he could make money on the race instead of asking who the winner was that he really began winning at the races. Instead of spending all your time trying to figure out who the winner will be, try to figure out if there’s a way you can make money in the race. If you can’t, pass the race and avoid wearing the losers suit.

5. They blame somebody or something else for their losses. When you blame something or somebody other than yourself for your losses you will continue to repeat the same mistakes. If you say you lost because of the jockey, the trainer or the track you will repeat the same mistakes over and over because their actions are outside of your control. If you don’t control your outcome your actions don’t have any consequences. (There are some things out of your control in the short term but we’re talking long term here). Also, if they’re responsible for your losing they’re also responsible for your winning! You never hear someone give credit to the jockey or the trainer after they win a bet. The winning is always due to good handicapping; the losing is almost always blamed on something else. Start taking responsibility for your bets; you’re the one that placed them.

6. They blame bad luck on themselves. Losers will blame themselves for results that are part of the game but beyond their control. If their horse goes 4 wide and loses by a neck or their horse gets trapped and doesn’t get the racing room it needs to win they blame it on bad luck. (But when their horse wins because another horse gets into trouble it’s quickly forgotten.) This is part of the game in the short term. Understand what’s beyond your control and the things that you can control. Pay attention to the long-term results.


7. They don’t cut back during long losing streaks. The most important part of money management is not to let your losses get out of hand. You have to learn how to preserve your betting capital. Most people start making bad decisions when they’ve lost too much money for their comfort. They increase their bet size or start betting on marginal horses trying to make their money back immediately. Why? They can’t accept losing or missing a bet on a winning horse. You’re going to lose races and pass on winners that you could have bet. Accept that and make sure you have a good money management system in place and a large enough bankroll to withstand a losing streak.

8. They’re a slave to their ego. They only focus on how many winners they’ve picked. Remember the goal shouldn’t be how many winners you picked but how much money you have in your pocket at the end of the day, the week and the year. This will change your entire perspective on picking horses and betting.

9. They’re comforted by all the losing horseplayers around them. Losers know how to handle failure because they’ve done it before. Other losing horseplayers share their losses and sympathize with them creating camaraderie between the group. This leads them to more losses in order to be a part of the group (their friends of losers). It may sound silly but the psychology behind being part of a group and having a sense of acceptance and belonging has lead to a lot of irrational behavior in history and in today’s society. Do your own thing and find others who are also dedicated to winning. Stay away from the whiners who blame everything bad that happens to them on someone else.

10. They believe the outcomes are fixed against them. If you’re in the game long enough you will read from time to time about some questionable instances in horse racing. Overall though it’s as honest as about any other sporting event. If you don’t think it is, why are you betting? Horsemen have too much to lose by not running as honest a game as possible.

If you’re currently losing do yourself a favor. Discard any pre-conceived notions you have about handicapping and start over. Throw away all your non-essential handicapping material. I did this and I believe it’s the only reason I’m able to win today. I was filled with information from losing horseplayers and outdated books. If you have some concepts that are winning keep those, but get rid of the rest.

*Some of the above information doesn’t apply to people who play the horses a couple of times a year. If you’re one of those players you can learn from the information in this book but tailor it to your needs. Concentrate on the handicapping sections and have some fun.



Traits of losing handicappers

Here’s the ultimate loser’s profile (do the opposite if you want to win):

• They have a negative outlook and always expect the worst to happen to them.
• They blame others when things go wrong and only accept responsibility when things go right. If the five horse loses it’s the jockeys fault. If the horse wins it’s because it was a good bet.
• Instead of relying on their own opinions they follow the crowd, look for tips and are easily swayed from their own opinions. (Don’t take this to the extreme though. There are different approaches and opinions that are valid. Each of us is not smart enough to know all the answers. Keep an open mind and learn but don’t be swayed from your own opinions if you have solids facts and data to back it up.)
• They are impatient and have little control.
• They need constant action regardless of the outcome.
• They don’t put in the necessary time and study to understand their handicapping method, their own strengths and weaknesses, risk control, money management and the process of winning.
• They always look for a shortcut. Success is found in simplicity only after you have waded through complexity.
• They don’t follow a system or method long enough to see if it works. They’re constantly searching for the magic bullet that will lead to riches.

cj
03-18-2008, 11:53 AM
#1 has to be that it is a very tough game to beat and you have to work very, very hard to win. Even if you do that there is no guarantee of success.

46zilzal
03-18-2008, 12:01 PM
Amidst all of that is finding venues that pay you to play there. I find that Sartin works a lot of places, but some far better than others: usually smaller, off the beaten path venues.

Marshall Bennett
03-18-2008, 12:17 PM
Odds are stacked against you from the beginning . Many go in underestimating those odds and fail to do their homework . :mad:

whyhorseofcourse
03-18-2008, 12:17 PM
Action bets is why I am a loser. :bang:

njcurveball
03-18-2008, 12:56 PM
11.) They have no concept of a jockeys value, pinning the blame for their losing bets on them. People walk around the track saying _______ (fill in the blank) NEVER wins when I bet on him. Their own opinions overrule what is actually happening at the track.

alysheba88
03-18-2008, 12:56 PM
Another huge reason is being afraid to win

Grits
03-18-2008, 01:46 PM
#1 has to be that it is a very tough game to beat and you have to work very, very hard to win. Even if you do that there is no guarantee of success.

I believe this post. I believe it more than any other I have read at any website in some time and I don't think it can be overemphasized. It is simply stated. It is as honest, and as realistic, as one could possibly convey. It is the truth.

I do not know you CJ, but I know your reputation and skill--through the grapevine. Nor do I know The Little Guy, but again, I know his reputation and skill--not only through the grapevine, but through his internet show at DRF, and the seminars he sits on at Siro's. You both are known as excellent handicappers.

The above post is why I stated recently, I felt this was an extremely difficult way to make a living. Along with noting again, I believe the stress factor must be close, at times . . . and I don't care how good one says they cope or function amid the losing streaks . . . to bordering on pure brutality.

I have come to feel that online--people are not as honest, nor are they as candid regarding their struggles, their beats, their difficulties at showing profits in this game. Its human nature to not reveal our weaknesses. We have no idea how much one another is putting through the windows, and how much is lost--and I'm speaking over long periods of time, not simply a few months, or a couple of years.

Pace Advantage, because there is, more commonly, an advanced level of player found here, has so many threads, so many posts that deal with every aspect of the game, its enabled me to see this. Though, honestly, one here, reads more of the positive aspects--which one must have, which therefore fuels the successes. There are endless how-tos and that's as it should be. One doesn't read as much honesty and admission of the struggles, unless one is brave enough to start a thread entitled, "slumps". A thread I found to be, not only beneficial, but brave even.

When writing about horseplaying, I say the same regarding the many who are authoring books. They write of the time involved, the knowledge needed, the anecdotes. One can achieve according to those writing, success at the windows. Dave Litfin, who seems to me to be one of the, absolute, most honest individuals ever to watch a horse race notes restraint. Selective play. I get the feeling from Litfin that passing, sitting on one's hands is a good decision, more often than not--I see that as a positive.

I'm not convinced that software will help me have more success at this game than the DRF or the Bris past performances. Years ago, I had more success when subscribing and purchasing Jim Mazur's handicapping specific meet tomes.

I have a difficult time determining how a race will unfold--attempting to view all entries as piece of the picture. Granted, the obvious front end runners, the pace horses and the closers are not difficult to discern, still all the books have not improved my skill in this regard.

I could be one of the losers that's weary of it all and throws in the towel, hence this longwinded screed. But it won't be because I didn't damn sure try--even, if only, recreationally.

Maybe it has something to do, as well, with sitting and wagering online, watching races run, here, at my desk.

The love of horses brought me to it. Mornings at Keeneland, actually. Many of them. Loved it so much my former spouse bought me a home there. With that said, I can state with profound assurance, watching horses racing and wagering on them, online, will never, EVER, give me the rush, the joy of watching live racing, whether its Saratoga, Belmont, Aqueduct, Keeneland, Churchill or anywhere else.

Just gambling is boring. It eats money like rain eats snow. And I like money, and a comfortable living far too much for that.

Thanks for the honesty CJ.

Niko
03-18-2008, 02:34 PM
I have come to feel that online--people are not as honest, nor are they as candid regarding their struggles, their beats, their difficulties at showing profits in this game. Its human nature to not reveal our weaknesses. We have no idea how much one another is putting through the windows, and how much is lost--and I'm speaking over long periods of time, not simply a few months, or a couple of years.

I believe that some people are afraid that if they expose a losing year etc, they feel like they'll be kicked out of the club. I know I've had my ups and downs.


When writing about horseplaying, I say the same regarding the many who are authoring books. They write of the time involved, the knowledge needed, the anecdotes. One can achieve according to those writing, success at the windows. Dave Litfin, who seems to me to be one of the, absolute, most honest individuals ever to watch a horse race notes restraint. Selective play. I get the feeling from Litfin that passing, sitting on one's hands is a good decision, more often than not--I see that as a positive.

I think that for 95...98...99.5% of the people that get involved in horse racing, it's not as easy as authors and some internet posters make it out to be. Otherwise everyone who picked up Pace Makes The Race or similar books would do as well as Dick Schmidt, Brohamar and others. I struggle with paceline selection so I'm included in that group. There was the story floating around of somone who sent in example races with the race results (told by Pizzolla). Pizolla said he honestly didn't think he would have picked the winners. Others replied that it was easy because...There was one catch though. The results charts he sent were made up. It's always easy after the race. I'd love to know what happened behind the scenes with the whole Pirco group. Seems like some people don't like others and there's a lot of stories and some mud that was slung. Brohamars book on pace did help me out though-it's excellent.

I'm not convinced that software will help me have more success at this game than the DRF or the Bris past performances. Years ago, I had more success when subscribing and purchasing Jim Mazur's handicapping specific meet tomes.

Some Sheets players and Thorograph players win without computers. It's how good your tools are and how well they match your personality (talent) strengths, not the shape they come in

I have a difficult time determining how a race will unfold--attempting to view all entries as piece of the picture. Granted, the obvious front end runners, the pace horses and the closers are not difficult to discern, still all the books have not improved my skill in this regard.

That's because some of the trainers and jockeys read the form too which can change the pace scenario, not too mention a horses condition that day and how they break. Still spotting an EEE, EEEE or no E race shape can be beneficial. Most people are only really good at it after the race. I've never seen Bradshaw in action but I'd like to, it'd probably help me quite a bit. I can't do what he does in his book--a lot of gray in there.

I could be one of the losers that's weary of it all and throws in the towel, hence this longwinded screed. But it won't be because I didn't damn sure try--even, if only, recreationally.

Maybe it has something to do, as well, with sitting and wagering online, watching races run, here, at my desk.

The love of horses brought me to it. Mornings at Keeneland, actually. Many of them. Loved it so much my former spouse bought me a home there. With that said, I can state with profound assurance, watching horses racing and wagering on them, online, will never, EVER, give me the rush, the joy of watching live racing, whether its Saratoga, Belmont, Aqueduct, Keeneland, Churchill or anywhere else.

Just gambling is boring. It eats money like rain eats snow. And I like money, and a comfortable living far too much for that.

Thanks for the honesty CJ.

Well said Grits--very pertinent to the majority of players.

Niko
03-18-2008, 02:35 PM
This part of the book addresses two of the posts above and maybe should have been included.

We’ll start with four fundamental truths that apply to winning money at the races.

1) The majority of winning horseplayers are not immediately successful.

Horse racing is a hard game to beat. It usually takes a few years for people to really understand how to bet and be successful. Just as it takes many years for people to master their professions it can take many years to master successfully betting on the horses. I mention this so you don’t become discouraged during the learning phases. It’s only through experience that you’ll learn how to beat this game. Luckily for you, the learning curve can be greatly shortened if you get the right advice early on.

2) You must take responsibility for your results.

You bet on horses because you choose to do so. If you’re losing stop making excuses and blaming your losses on other people. If you blame other people for your losses you have to give them credit for your wins! Ever see that happen? Once you blame your results on factors other than your actions you have given up being able to control your outcomes. If you give up control of your outcomes than you are participating in gambling and a game of chance. It won’t matter what you do because you don’t have control over your results. Reality is different. You do have control over your decisions. If your results are not what you want them to be it’s because you are making bad decisions (or in the short-term, experiencing a bad cycle). You are responsible for placing those bets; no one else did it.

3) The difference between a winning and a losing handicapper is not learning how to pick more winners but knowing how and when to bet. This includes playing to the strengths of the method you choose and your personality.

4) You must believe that you deserve to keep your winnings.

If you don’t believe on an inner level that you deserve your success and the money that goes with it you will subconsciously sabotage yourself. You will find a way to give the money back by playing foolishly or making bad decisions. Ask yourself; do I really
believe deep down in my soul that I deserve to win at the races? If you don’t you’ll find a way to give your money back. If you’re having trouble in this area I would suggest reading some self-help books. The subject is beyond the scope of this manual.

I'm not a writer and I'm not a professional-so take what I say for what it's worth to you

Dave Schwartz
03-18-2008, 02:48 PM
This part of the book addresses two of the posts above and maybe should have been included.

What book?

bigmack
03-18-2008, 02:49 PM
Most don't realize how much work you have to wield to succeed and even if they did they're unwilling to cough up the effort.

On a side note:
Loved it so much my former spouse bought me a home there.
I've never heard former spouse. I had a friend who filed for divorce and would introduce his wife as "my future ex-wife". Push comes to shove, I think I like "my future former spouse".

1st time lasix
03-18-2008, 03:56 PM
I have a close friend who is an experienced and highly capable handicapper. He is astute finding closers and pressers who finish well. Particularly in grass races and routes. He is a good guy ...very sharp......but I sometimes don't like being next to him because he gets very upset and frustrated because he doesn't win. At times he gets so upset that he losses his perspective. He isn't loud, rude or demonstative....he just boils up inside and it can cloud his judgement. He might get short with his demeanor. It ruins his attitude. Here is my opinion why he doesn't win......he is too tight with his bankroll $$$. He doesn't play enough contenders with his key horse in the exactas. He doesn't play enough Pick fours. He never plays tris or supers. Can't count how many times he has been right yet failed to cash. He also catches second alot with his win plays. "Scared money" never wins in gambling.

Turfday
03-18-2008, 04:12 PM
nm

prospector
03-18-2008, 04:21 PM
Action bets is why I am a loser. :bang:
ditto..
boredom = action bets

cmoore
03-18-2008, 04:24 PM
Parimutuel betting is something I've never been able to succeed at. Years ago I've tried systems that I created on paper. Did the data for over a year and when I tried it with real money. The bottom dropped out. I've come to realize years ago that systems don't work in the long run. So about 2 years ago I turned to playing contests online. Since that time I've become a profitable player in contest play. I'm not going to lie. Last year I tried cash betting again. Thinkng I can transfer my contest success over to the parimutuel game. Lost again. I think contests are already set in stone for the day. A set entry fee and usually 12 wagers per day and that's it. So there's no decisions to be made except what horses to pick and to always save a pick for the last race in a contest. I think action bets is what does me in when parimutuel betting. Also never consisently betting the same amount. I think I'm a very good handicapper most of the time. Just yesterday and I made a few wagers and fked it up. I played a double using 3 over 3. A 16-1 won the first leg and I ran 2nd in the 2nd leg. Did I have any money on the head of that 16-1...Hell no..Another good move. LOL..This game is tough and will not let you off easy. A game that's already 20% against you at the start will need some serious focus and control to conquer. I'm not there yet but will keep at it.

Spendabuck85
03-18-2008, 07:33 PM
So about 2 years ago I turned to playing contests online. A set entry fee and usually 12 wagers per day and that's it. So there's no decisions to be made except what horses to pick and to always save a pick for the last race in a contest.

What site(s) do you play at? Email me or PM if you prefer not to answer through this forum. Thanks.

Grits
03-18-2008, 08:30 PM
Niko, you have an excellent book in your hands. Fine wisdom for someone who states he is not a professional or a writer.

I have a mentor, who at 65 has been playing this game for over 40 years. Doing so with only a DRF, and a mountain of past DRF's that were all necessary before the advent of Formulator and race replays, both of which he swears by today. I've never met him, face to face. But he has taught me so much. All of our conversations, all of his mentoring and all of my questions have been done online. We've had knock-down, hellacious, arguments when I'd go off on a tangent, and do something he knew would be detrimental--still he'd have patience, knowing each time, I'd come back.

Like I said though, sometimes one simply can get weary.

Here, above my desk is the copy of an exchange we had in 2006 after the Derby. I did ok that day, but I didn't do good enough to suit myself. I wanted boxcars that I didn't attain.

And guys, please, excuse the language, but its word for word.;)

He wrote:

"It's a day, Grits. It's one day. And it is therefore meaningless.

Two things:

(1.) If we were to pick winners in lockstep for 100 consecutive race days, I would kick your ass. If I didn't, I ought to be ashamed of myself.

(2.) Nonetheless, you should play your own picks, so as one day to be the kicker of a new generation instead of the kickee."


In reply I wrote back:

"And that sir, is all I can work towards. And kicking your ass is a pretty damn good goal. That's, IF my nerves can hang through the long haul and I don't end up aging my brain and my body from the stress of it all.

It's a most difficult game--but still, by far, the best one going. He continues to have patience with me.

And BMack........that former spouse, I'll never call him X. Not ever. Every divorce doesn't give rise to lifelong anger and animosity. This one ended well, we're close, still today. We're in business together, still, as well. Residing in the same city.

Life goes on.......and its real short. Much too short for ugliness.

Cangamble
03-18-2008, 08:36 PM
Track takeout.
You can be an exceptional handicapper and an above average bettor and still most probably lose money because you have to try to beat a 28.3% takeout on Woodbine triactors.:faint:

Imriledup
03-18-2008, 09:38 PM
Great post!


Even if you have the ability to follow your ten rules, you still have to have the 'talent' to 'see' things that other people do not see. I feel a lot of this game is an art form and if you can't paint, you probably can't win.

Niko
03-18-2008, 09:54 PM
What book?

It's a book I wrote and tried to sell in 2003 with little success. Not good at the marketing part. Thought about giving it a go again but two professionals gave it marginal reviews. Too structured for serious gamblers and not enough new data, but it's made money for me. Horse racing has paid for me and my wifes college and a couple other things, but I can't turn the corner to something bigger. And not every year is a winning year which most people can't accept from a writer. I've had some good years and two knock down years when I had a lot going on and pressed due to past success (no I don't always follow my own advice :blush: . It's hard when you're handicapping on Friday nights with a couple drinks after the kids are down...lol. But it's about the only free time I have and I have to place my bets in advance for the most part nowadays except for the occasional venture to the track. I doubt I'm the only one.

Probably better info for beginner to intermediate players that haven't learned how to win consistently. And there's so much good information and sharp players on this board. Other than good figures, software or some sort of solid handicapping method this board is about all you need.

cmoore
03-18-2008, 10:14 PM
Dailyhandicappingcontests.com

There's a player that has a screen name spendabuck....I guess that's not you..They just posted today on their home page that they will only have contests on weekends and holidays. I played almost every day they had them. Hopefully the weekend contests will be bigger guarenteed pools. . I'll just have to concentrate on wagering on some of those days they don't have em.


What site(s) do you play at? Email me or PM if you prefer not to answer through this forum. Thanks.

Niko
03-18-2008, 10:15 PM
Dave;

Here's some money management advice from the book that your work helped me refine. This may help some folks also.

I have to put it into two posts

A Money Management Method.

There are 4 money management rules that every successful investor and really good horseplayer I’ve ever spoken to uses to maximize their winnings (unless they’re already betting the maximum into the pools). The rules are;
1. Minimize risk
2. Your average bet amount should be more on your winning bets than your losing bets. Don’t increase or decrease your bet size too quickly.
3. Let profits run.
4. The bigger the edge you have, the more money you should bet.

First we’ll explore some of the more common betting methods and how they stack up to the 4 rules. If you’d like to know more about them search the internet for the terms and free articles or you can even search for them on Wikipedia.org

Martingale-Due Column and every variation of them. Casino’s and Sportsbooks absolutely love people who use these systems. The reason these systems are so popular is that they give people a false sense of security because they work most of the time.

The goal of these methods is to bet progressively more on each bet until you achieve a small profit. The usual bet progression includes doubling your bet after every loss or using a slight progression. For example: your first bet is 1 unit-you lose. You’re now down 1 unit so you bet 2 units to make a profit. If you lose this 2nd bet you’re now down 3 units so you need to bet 4 units to come out ahead. If you win you’ve risked 10 units to win 1 unit. Now what happens if you start with a small base bet of $5, a goal of $5 each betting sequence and you lose 10 in a row? You bet 5-10-20-40-80-160-320….you get the idea. Your palms will be sweating very quickly and unless you have an unlimited amount of money eventually you’ll lose your bankroll and be wiped out.
To get around that you’ll see variations similar to this; 10-10-15-15-20-20-20 and you keep betting progressively higher until you have a profit.

Martingale and Due Column violate many of the rules of successful betting and money management. They have you wagering a lot more on losing bets than winning ones, instead of minimizing risk, they maximize your potential to lose your entire bankroll and it doesn’t let your profits run. Sports Books and Casino’s are not afraid of people using these methods and will welcome them with open arms-what does that tell you?

Flat Betting. The only time someone should use a flat betting system (bet the same amount each time) is when you are betting the maximum amount allowed. For horseracing this means you’re betting so much, that if you bet anymore you would be negatively impacting your return on investment. This is determined by the amount that’s in the betting pool and your edge. I won’t go into the details here.

Kelly. The biggest contribution Kelly gave was the following insight; the bigger the edge you have, the more you should wager to maximize your profit potential. However the reason Kelly doesn’t work in real life as is, is because it does not minimize risk and you end up betting more on average on losing bets than winning ones. And the biggest disadvantage is that your risk of ruin (losing your bankroll) is very high with Kelly-even after you’ve built your bankroll to a high level. Very bright people have tried to negate these limitations by betting ½ Kelly which works much better than full Kelly. By using ½ Kelly the bankroll fluctuations and risk of ruin are greatly minimized. Fortune’s Formula is a great book that exposes the good and bad points of using the Kelly formula for your money management plan.

Percentage of Bankroll and variations such as base bet plus square root of profits.
Percentage of bankroll is pretty basic. For example; bet 1% of your bankroll on every wager. This minimizes risk because you’re betting less as your bankroll decreases and during losing streaks. On the flip side it has you betting more while you’re winning and lets your profits run. But there are two big negatives to this approach also. You’re not betting more when your edge is greater than normal and it doesn’t have you betting more on average on you’re winning bets than you’re losing ones. Here’s an example of a percentage of bankroll that I used when I first started out and it worked pretty good. It was my favorite method of money management for recreational play that could build a good sized bankroll starting with a small amount of money. It had me betting less during cold streaks and I could run it up quickly when my betting is doing well. It’s a very simple method that can be easily adapted to your individual preferences. It’s not anything new and you should increase or decrease the race cycle and percentages based on your own handicapping records.

I had separate bankrolls for win, exacta and trifecta betting. We’ll use win betting as an example because it’s the easiest. The first thing you do is split your bankroll into four parts. For example if you start with $1600 your first bankroll will be $400. The $400 is then split into 20 bets. In this case your starting bet amount would be a $20 base bet. You divide your bankroll because you want the majority of your bankroll to still be in tact in case you happen to lose 20 or more races in a row. If you’re having a really bad string of luck you’re only betting 1.25% of your original bankroll on each race. You won’t be too concerned about losing this amount and that allows you to bet with confidence.

Your first bet is your base bet that was determined above. Then you add 5% of any profits during the 20-race cycle. When you do start winning your bets escalate rapidly. For example: You bet your $20 base bet on the first race and it wins paying $12. You get back $120. If you subtract your original $20 your profit is $100. Your next bet would be your $20 base bet plus 5% of your $100 in profits, which is $5. Your total bet for the next race is $25. You keep doing this each race for the 20-race cycle. Once the cycle is done you add your winnings (or subtract your losses) to your original bankroll, divide it by 4 and start all over again. This allows you to gradually build your money. If you increase your bets too quickly you have a good chance of giving all your winnings back when you do hit a cold spell.



BET AMOUNT PAYOFF RETURN TOTAL PROFIT 5% PROFIT
Bet 1 $20 $12.00 $120 $100 $5
Bet 2 $25 Lost (-$35) $75 $3.75
Bet 3 $24 $8.00 $96 $163 $8
Bet 4 $28

If you prefer to be more aggressive simply take a base bet of 2% of your bankroll and keep betting that amount plus 5% of all your profits. With a $1600 starting bankroll your base bet would be $32. 1600 X .2 = 32. One last note, if I was hot and hitting a lot of winners in my 20-race cycle I never quit that cycle until I had at least 4 losses in a row, you don’t want to limit your winnings during a streak

For exotic betting a different percentage is needed because of the low success rate. For exactas split the bankroll into 80 bets and only bet 2% of winnings in addition to your base bet. This reflects the potential for longer losing steaks and the higher
payoffs. Trifecta bets are split into 100 bets with .05% of winnings added. I personally don’t bet too many trifectas because of the high takeout and low hit rate.

Niko
03-18-2008, 10:16 PM
Part 2...

A Better Money Management And Betting Method

If you look at Kelly and Percentage of Bankroll their strengths and weaknesses mirror each other. If you combine the two you come up with the best wagering method possible (that I’ve aware of). How does it work?

1) Split your bankroll in ½. Only play with ½ of it. This will allow you to play more aggressively while withstanding a losing streak.

2) Use a base percentage of bankroll to establish your base bet. This minimizes risk by having you bet less as your bankroll grows smaller and lets your profits run by betting more during your winning streaks

3) You don’t adjust your base bet until after a series of races to minimize fluctuations in results.

4) You limit the percentage by which your bankroll can increase or decrease during any betting sequence and take profits as you go along. The effect of this is that you are betting more on average on your winning bets and less on your losing bets compared to any of the methods presented. This negates the shortcoming of uses a pure percentage of bankroll.

5) You bet more than the usual percentage when your edge on the bet is larger than normal. So this way you’re taking advantage of your edge and maximizing your profit potential.

How to put it together.

Step 1) The first thing you do is bet a percentage of your bankroll on each race. I suggest using 2% for people that bet on high priced horses and 3-5% for others. If you’re winning at over 35% on 1 horse or over 50% on two horses you can use 8-10%. The right amount will depend on your winning percentage and return on investment. You can determine this by looking at your betting records and figuring out what percentage would work best for you.

Let’s use $1,000 bankroll as your starting point. You would split that in ½ and start with $500. If you’re betting 2% or your bankroll your first bet would be $10.

Step 2). Once you have doubled your bankroll in play take a profit and start over ($500 in this example). If you have lost 50% of your bankroll (25% of your total bankroll-$250 in this example) you also start over. Winning and losing streaks only last so long. You don’t want to be caught increasing your bets too quickly during winning streaks and giving your money back by betting more on losing bets or by betting too little on your winning bets during a losing streak (see percentage of bankroll).

Step 3) Use a step level progression by betting the same amount for a series of 4-10 bets. Then re-set your bet based on a percentage of your bankroll. If your winning percentage is very high you’ll use a low number (4 or so because you’re losing streaks aren’t as long) and if you’re betting longshots you’ll want to use a high number due to the long run-outs you can experience (10). This will have you betting more on your winners than losers compared to just betting a percentage of your bankroll. Don’t increase your bet amount by any more than 15% from one series of bets to the next. Don’t decrease your bets by more than 20% from one series of bets to the next. Now these amounts assume you have a positive win expectancy.
*If you’re betting and can’t adjust during the racing day you can simply just use a day or two of plays and then re-adjust as opposed to a particular number of bets.

Here’s some simple sequences using a pure percentage of bankroll to show why this works.

W W L W W W L L (W is for winning bet, L is for a losing bet)
$5 $6 $7 $6 $7 $8 $9 $8

Bet $56 Won $32 Lost$24 Profit $8 Won 5, Lost 3
Average bet amount per winning bet: $8
Average bet amount per losing bet: $8

L L W L L L W W (W is for winning bet, L is for a losing bet)
$5 $4 $3 $4 $3 $2 $1 $2

Bet $24 Won $6 Lost$18 Profit $-12 Won 3, Lost 5
Average bet amount per winning bet: $1.1
Average bet amount per losing bet: $3.6

The above sequence exemplifies the limitations and pitfall of a pure percentage of bankroll method. During winning streaks you tend to bet the same or more on losing bets than winning ones. During losing streaks you bet a lot more on losing bets than winning bets. Steps #3 negates this problem.

Step 4) Bet more when your edge is the greatest. If your expected edge is 50% greater than what you think it should be you increase your bet size by 20%. If your edge is 100% or greater than what you think it should be you increase you bet size by 30%. Look at your own records to help determine the proper amount. Keep in mind that history never repeats itself in exactly the same way.

But you should adjust your edge by combining your line with the public line. For example if you think (or your handicapping program says) a horse should be 4-1 and it’s going off at 8-1 your edge is not 100%. It’s 8-1 + 4-1 divided by 2 or 12/2 which is 6-1. Your edge is only 50% which calls for a 20% increase in your normal bet. The reason for this; the professionals who bet the majority of money at the horse track are very, very good. If you think a horse should be 4-1 which translates into a 25% chance of winning the race, and the public odds have the horse at 8-1 which represents a 12.5% chance of winning, your horse will not win 25% of the time. It will win at a closer percentage between the 2 depending on how good you are. You can and should verify this through your own records.

Steps 4 takes advantage of the Kelly principle; you bet more when your edge is greater. But by capping the amount you bet you minimize risk while also letting your profits run during winning streaks.

Overview and Example of our much improved money management (betting) method;

Let’s walk through this together. For safety reasons you should usually only put 50% of your bankroll into play at any one time to minimize risk. Let’s start with a $2,000 bankroll. We’ll play with ½ which is $1,000. Our starting bet will be 2% of our bankroll which is $20 (which is actually only 1% of my total bankroll). In this example we’ll use a session of 10 bets (you don’t have to be exact if you place your bets early and can’t recalculate at exactly the 10th bet-stay flexible and do what you can) which could take a day or three to complete depending on how many plays you have for the day. Let’s say we have 6 plays on Saturday and 3 on Sunday, so we’ll bet the same amount on each race. After the 9 races we’ll reset our bankroll because we’re near the 10 bet total for this sequence. In 3 of the races our horse is going off at odds 50% greater than our adjusted line (our projected odds plus public odds divided by 2). On those races we’ll bet a 20% premium or $24 to take advantage of our edge. 2 of the horses are going off at 100% higher than projected so we bet $26 on those horses.

We’ll continue betting this session until we either win 100% of our bankroll ($1000) or lose 25% of our bankroll ($250) at which point we’ll start over.

Let’s say in the above 9 bets we won $400 overall. Our bankroll is now $1400. 2% of our bankroll would be a new base bet of $28 for our next session of 10 bets. But our bet amount can only go up by maximum of 15% from session to session. Thus our base bet would be $23.

If we had lost $240 instead our bankroll would be $760. 2% of 760 would only be a $13 base bet. But we can’t decrease our bets by more than 20% from one series of 10 bets to the next. So our bet amount would actually be $16 (20 X .8).

Play around with this a bit and you’ll get the hang of it.

Dave Schwartz
03-18-2008, 11:02 PM
Niko,

I like your thoughts, although I do not agree with all of them. You articulate them well. I'd buy your book.

Is it for sale somewhere?

If not, could you please just post it all right here one paragraph at a time? (I have mastered cut-and-paste.) <G>

Dave

Spendabuck85
03-18-2008, 11:06 PM
Dailyhandicappingcontests.com

There's a player that has a screen name spendabuck....I guess that's not you..They just posted today on their home page that they will only have contests on weekends and holidays. I played almost every day they had them. Hopefully the weekend contests will be bigger guarenteed pools. . I'll just have to concentrate on wagering on some of those days they don't have em.

Not me, thanks for the info.

zoobird
03-19-2008, 06:03 AM
Great top ten list. Almost exactly the same traits that are required for success in poker, securities trading, and even fantasy sports.

dav4463
03-19-2008, 07:06 AM
Stick with your strengths. Some of us look for low-priced overlays. Others look for longshots. Some are win only. Some are win/place. Some are show only. Some play exotics only. Find what works for you and stick with it.

betchatoo
03-19-2008, 09:34 AM
Stick with your strengths. Some of us look for low-priced overlays. Others look for longshots. Some are win only. Some are win/place. Some are show only. Some play exotics only. Find what works for you and stick with it.
Very much in tune with what I was going to suggest. The number 1 rule (IMO) is you must know yourself. It does no good to have a knack for picking longshots if you have the type of personality where you can't stomach long run outs even if you know that eventually you'll be a winner. It does no good to have a system where you can pick strong favorites if your need for action leads you to play mediocre favorites as well. Discipline and self awareness are the keys

jonnielu
03-19-2008, 09:35 AM
Choose carefully, that which you believe, because those beliefs will paint your world.

Read as much as you like, but study intensely all that happens from the wire back to the paddock. When you can spot the winner going into the far turn half of the time, you will know that you are learning something.

Understand that which is most significant about past performances, they are past, but they will usually reveal a horses ability to run.

The overwhelming percentage of winners have a couple of traits in common, they understand the game very well, they play it well, and yes.... some work very hard at it.

jdl

Niko
03-19-2008, 09:59 AM
Niko,

I like your thoughts, although I do not agree with all of them. You articulate them well. I'd buy your book.

Is it for sale somewhere?

If not, could you please just post it all right here one paragraph at a time? (I have mastered cut-and-paste.) <G>

Dave

Let me work on it, there's a couple things that need to be cleaned up. I'll take a break from handicapping this weekend. Cut and pasting 120 pages or so wouldn't work too well.... I'll probably post it on this site and pay paceadvantage the advertising fee and see how that works. Then I can hear first hand the good and bad :ThmbUp: :ThmbDown:

Dave Schwartz
03-19-2008, 10:37 AM
Perhaps I could suggest another alternative.

http://www.ec-software.com/products_hm_overview.html

Help & Manual is a great product. It will produce a wonderful eBook or webpage for you. Of course, you could always just output a pdf from your word processor.


Dave

Grits
03-19-2008, 11:52 AM
Fine work Niko!! I'm pleased that Dave is giving you ideas. That IS a lot of cut and paste.

Rest up, like I know you will with work AND small children. LOL

Then do some tweaking.;)

valueguy
03-19-2008, 01:05 PM
Great posts everybody.I will certainly try some of Niko,s money management tips.As a weekend warrior i don,t get too excited about making big bucks.If i can beat the track take over a given period i am quite happy.My down fall is usually too many bets per race card.

badcompany
03-19-2008, 02:53 PM
For the vast majority of horseplayers who want to stop losing, the best advice is that they never place another bet.

bigmack
03-19-2008, 03:17 PM
For the vast majority of horseplayers who want to stop losing, the best advice is that they never place another bet.
You're not exactly a mahatma on the subject. Don't you assume everybody loses?

badcompany
03-19-2008, 04:37 PM
You're not exactly a mahatma on the subject. Don't you assume everybody loses?

Apparently, I'm not alone in this assumption.

From an NY Daily News article:
When I read that OTB was in danger of closing because somehow out of $1.1 billion in revenue it wound up in the red, I just had to ask a retired Brooklyn (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Brooklyn) bookmaker I call the Gaming Guru for his handicap of the situation.

Back in the 1980s the Gaming Guru drove the head of the Brooklyn OTB operation nuts by opening a horse parlor in an apartment or storefront within a block of every OTB parlor. Here, with comfortable couches and armchairs, stealing satellite signals from the racetracks that played on nine big-screen TVs, and serving gratis pasta dishes and hot sandwiches and coffee and pastry all day long, he made more money than God's loanshark.

"Show me a horse-betting operation that's losing money and I'll show you somebody who's bleepin' stealing," says the guru.

"No way possible to lose money running a horse operation like OTB. I'll tell you why: Show me one degenerate horse player who has a luxury condo, yacht, summer home, exotic car. I wanna meet one because you got a better shot meetin' a bleepin' unicorn. That's why every casino in the world wants horse players. YOU CAN'T LOSE! Because they always do. Take it from me, nothin's wrong with OTB except somebody's gotta be bleepin' stealin'. Me, I could turn it profitable overnight."

Niko
03-19-2008, 06:05 PM
Perhaps I could suggest another alternative.

http://www.ec-software.com/products_hm_overview.html

Help & Manual is a great product. It will produce a wonderful eBook or webpage for you. Of course, you could always just output a pdf from your word processor.


Dave

Thanks. I'm giving it a look over and download it later tonight. My wife has a PDF creator at work so I may use that for now. I'm taking a day off work too because it works out-that'll help.

I think Help and Manual needs a new picture though. First thought was that it reminded me of a pile of crap on a rock? I tried to insert the picture but can't figure it out (All I got was a script prompt) so you'll have to click on the link above.

bigmack
03-19-2008, 06:20 PM
Show me one degenerate horse player who has a luxury condo, yacht, summer home, exotic car. I wanna meet one because you got a better shot meetin' a bleepin' unicorn.
Here's one. Where's your bleepin' unicorn?

I hadn't realized to be successful you needed a yacht, summer home & an exotic car. If that's the case, you're doomed in any endeavor.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/3_19_08_15_12_04.png

Gibbon
03-19-2008, 06:43 PM
Niko,

In my opinion, you've missed the most essential of ingredients....
Do you have the talent to win at this game. Can you think abstractly based on faulty data to prognosticate the future? If the answer is no, try baseball. High quality data much of it for free and no point spread.

1. They don’t have a time tested and proven strategy that wins. All strategies fail given adequate time.







_______________________________________
In most betting shops you will see three windows marked "Bet Here," but only one window with the legend "Pay Out." ~ Jeffrey Bernard

Robert Fischer
03-19-2008, 07:27 PM
#1 has to be that it is a very tough game to beat and you have to work very, very hard to win. Even if you do that there is no guarantee of success.

This is a pretty good synopsis.

It's a hard game. Few have the ability. Fewer still have an understanding of the game. And then overlapping back to ability, fewer still have the qualities that promote success.

If you have the ability and the skill it is a great opportunity to get to play the masses in a money game. It eventually becomes a game against yourself. The more you know, the more consistent and conservative you become. The gamble fades into work. The lottery fades into a grind. It's nice for the ego to have a winning expectation, but then you don't really have any peers. It's an individual discipline.

Grits
03-19-2008, 10:23 PM
Obviously, Gaming Guru/Know-It-All has never met ..........Degenerate Gambler No.1.--Andrew Beyer, who I believe, is vacationing with his wife in Argentina this month. Who, if I recall, has vacationed all over this world.

I don't know a single degenerate--I'm not acquainted with a soul who has squandered away his home, his car, eats cat food, stoops late in the afternoon, etc, etc.

Jerks that make generalizations like this one make me sick.


Apparently, I'm not alone in this assumption.

From an NY Daily News article:
When I read that OTB was in danger of closing because somehow out of $1.1 billion in revenue it wound up in the red, I just had to ask a retired Brooklyn (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Brooklyn) bookmaker I call the Gaming Guru for his handicap of the situation.

Back in the 1980s the Gaming Guru drove the head of the Brooklyn OTB operation nuts by opening a horse parlor in an apartment or storefront within a block of every OTB parlor. Here, with comfortable couches and armchairs, stealing satellite signals from the racetracks that played on nine big-screen TVs, and serving gratis pasta dishes and hot sandwiches and coffee and pastry all day long, he made more money than God's loanshark.

"Show me a horse-betting operation that's losing money and I'll show you somebody who's bleepin' stealing," says the guru.

"No way possible to lose money running a horse operation like OTB. I'll tell you why: Show me one degenerate horse player who has a luxury condo, yacht, summer home, exotic car. I wanna meet one because you got a better shot meetin' a bleepin' unicorn. That's why every casino in the world wants horse players. YOU CAN'T LOSE! Because they always do. Take it from me, nothin's wrong with OTB except somebody's gotta be bleepin' stealin'. Me, I could turn it profitable overnight."

Dave Schwartz
03-20-2008, 12:43 AM
All strategies fail given adequate time.

So, there are no long-term winners.

And you determined this by what method?

Gibbon
03-20-2008, 02:08 AM
And you determined this by what method? History is replete with carcasses of winners. Just ask someone from Bear Stearns.

So, there are no long-term winners. Dave, in your long career how many applications have you coded? Do you still use one of your earlier programs? I suspect HSH 5.607 is a culmination intertwining years of experience, theory and practical horseplay.

Our beloved game is ever changing. Last years' strategy is unlikely to continue its effectiveness this year or this week. Racing circumstances has an indelible manner in which to expose a winning strategy and lead us to even money favs.

Never said there are no long term winners. 'Tiger Woods' of horse handicapping are painfully few. Keep in mind, Andy Beyer never gave up his day job. Good theoretician, lousy gambler. I suspect many computer capper fall into aforementioned category.

Dave Schwartz
03-20-2008, 02:18 AM
Ah, I get it.

Sure, Babe Ruth hit some home runs but he just couldn't do it into his 70s (had he lived that long).

jonnielu
03-20-2008, 08:00 AM
Our beloved game is ever changing. Last years' strategy is unlikely to continue its effectiveness this year or this week. Racing circumstances has an indelible manner in which to expose a winning strategy and lead us to even money favs.

Keep in mind, Andy Beyer never gave up his day job. Good theoretician, lousy gambler. I suspect many computer capper fall into aforementioned category.

Gibbon,

You do a fine job of looking beyond the window dressing with regard to Beyer. With that in mind, I really don't see how you can substantiate a claim that horse racing is ever changing.

During the 70 some years of pari-mutuel wagering history, how much change has there been in the favorites win percentage?

How much change has there been in the average win payoff?

Would you say, that here in 2008, the logical choice is not often the best bet?

jdl

badcompany
03-20-2008, 08:21 AM
Never said there are no long term winners. 'Tiger Woods' of horse handicapping are painfully few. Keep in mind, Andy Beyer never gave up his day job. Good theoretician, lousy gambler. I suspect many computer capper fall into aforementioned category.

Like most touts, Beyer realized that giving out information is more profitable than acting on it.

Grits
03-20-2008, 09:10 AM
Like most touts, Beyer realized that giving out information is more profitable than acting on it.

Bad, you are convinced that this sport is made up of nothing but degenerate losers. So, I'm curious about something. Have you ever spent time at, or are you familiar with the myriad of folks that frequent casinos? Do you realize the ratio, in the country today, of casinos to racetracks? Excluding any racino.

How many card players have lost--and I'm not talking about the "world class dudes" that are celebrated as "Joe Cool" on tv's Texas Hold 'Em, or whatever game is being aired, nightly; I'm talking guys that have lost their homes, their marriages, etc.

I may be kidding myself, but I really believe these people exist, and I think more of them have taken the route of casinos, and back room poker parlors, than racetracks.

Maybe they dress better, maybe they're clean shaven. But sweetheart, they're just as damn broke. What's the difference?

alysheba88
03-20-2008, 09:32 AM
I never realized how many people here personally knew Andy Beyer and had access to his betting records and bank account. Have newfound respect.

nobeyerspls
03-20-2008, 09:55 AM
Here's a list I put together for an old book. Anything I missed? Helpful?


Success at this is a two step dance involving handicapping and money management. It's all about what you bet and how you bet it.
Handicapping mistakes:
1. Emphasizing the role of the jockey. I need these people at the track because it is the least sophisticated way to pick a horse. The leading rider often clicks at 20% despite getting live mounts in most races. Do the math - he loses 4 out of 5 and the odds on his mounts are often lower than warranted.
2. Using beyer speed figures to predict the outcome of a race. In brief, they are not predictive. Their value to me is that the false favorite who should be 5/2 loses at 6/5.
3. Not coming prepared. Many arrive at the track, buy a form, and start handicapping. You need a game plan well in advance of the first race.
4. Not recognizing races that should be skipped. Races with overlapping talent should be passed.
5. Putting too much weight on weight. In a few instances weight comes into play but, more often than not, it doesn't matter.
6. Not knowing your strengths and weaknesses. I'm a lousy golfer who for some reason can't hit the low irons. Because of that, they're not in my bag. I also know the tracks and types of races that are difficult for me so I avoid them.
Money management mistakes:
1. Playing too many races. This dilutes your capital.
2. Failing to leverage with exotics. I know that the takeout is higher but the payoffs are too large to ignore.
3. Being erratic in the amount you bet. If you bet more after a score because you're "playing with their money" you're wrong. It's your money.
4. Making large straight bets on low priced horses. Too much can go wrong.
5. Failing to keep records. You need to know the results of your efforts. Otherwise you'll remember the winners and forget the losers.

Tom
03-20-2008, 10:11 AM
Keep in mind, Andy Beyer never gave up his day job.

What is his day job?

Robert Fischer
03-20-2008, 10:45 AM
Ah, I get it.

Sure, Babe Ruth hit some home runs but he just couldn't do it into his 70s (had he lived that long).

Dave

Babe Ruth could only hit about 25 Home Runs a season, in today's game.


Not bad for 113 years old... :D

ryesteve
03-20-2008, 10:47 AM
2. Using beyer speed figures to predict the outcome of a race. In brief, they are not predictive.
Then why does the horse with best last race Beyer win way more often than the one with the 5th best last race Beyer? You might say you can't find overlays with them, but you can't say they're not predictive.

jonnielu
03-20-2008, 11:01 AM
Success at this is a two step dance involving handicapping and money management. It's all about what you bet and how you bet it.
Handicapping mistakes:
1. Emphasizing the role of the jockey. I need these people at the track because it is the least sophisticated way to pick a horse. The leading rider often clicks at 20% despite getting live mounts in most races. Do the math - he loses 4 out of 5 and the odds on his mounts are often lower than warranted.
2. Using beyer speed figures to predict the outcome of a race. In brief, they are not predictive. Their value to me is that the false favorite who should be 5/2 loses at 6/5.
3. Not coming prepared. Many arrive at the track, buy a form, and start handicapping. You need a game plan well in advance of the first race.
4. Not recognizing races that should be skipped. Races with overlapping talent should be passed.
5. Putting too much weight on weight. In a few instances weight comes into play but, more often than not, it doesn't matter.
6. Not knowing your strengths and weaknesses. I'm a lousy golfer who for some reason can't hit the low irons. Because of that, they're not in my bag. I also know the tracks and types of races that are difficult for me so I avoid them.


Very sound points, on the races with overlapping talent, understand that this is the wrench that the racing secretary has thrown into your gears. It is also the single largest actual change in the game in the last 30 years. The longer the exotic menu is at a track, the more this problem will present itself.

It is difficult for a win bettor to pass all of these races and the horseplayer is challenged to consider factors that are more predictive of today's performance. Often, this is done best by taking your handicapping well beyond average PP analysis.

The modern racing secretary must supply many contenders in order to attract betting for a deep menu of wagers. Most major tracks have the horses to do it very well. You must address this reality better then you did twenty years ago.

jdl

DeanT
03-20-2008, 11:25 AM
All good points here. When I lose, or go on a bad streak, I can pretty much tick off each one of them.

But, as Cangamble has stated, the number one reason people lose, bar none, is high prices. Phil Ivey would be a losing poker player if 20% was raked out of each poker pool, too. The game is a mess.

1st time lasix
03-20-2008, 11:31 AM
I disagree with the premise that the longer the list of exotic wagers on the menu....the more difficult it becomes. I find that having the choice to play either a double, pick three, pick four, exacta, trifecta or superfecta where I can possibly combine two handicapping overly opinions makes it easier for me. In a perfect world ......i would like to see every venue have pick fours with a low takeout that start every two races or so rather than just the last four races. While i am at it......I wish I could ALWAYS identify the false favorite or the the false second favorite to wager around in the exotic pools. What a wonder paramutual world it would be! :ThmbUp: Good luck to all.

nobeyerspls
03-20-2008, 11:42 AM
Then why does the horse with best last race Beyer win way more often than the one with the 5th best last race Beyer? You might say you can't find overlays with them, but you can't say they're not predictive.

The beyers are a subjective snapshot accurate to within plus or minus ten percent. Keep in mind that they are frequently revised. The most defintive study I have seen shows that, on average, a winning horse improves his beyers by nine points. Some of my better scores increased by over forty points.
Take a six horse field with one horse coming off a 100 figure and another off a 92. The other four were never above 76. The first was bet down to 3/5 and the 2nd down to 4/5 and the best that either could do was third. Before the figures were published these horses might have been co-favorites at 2-1.
I need them to stay in the form and I want the public handicappers to continue to quote them.

Dave Schwartz
03-20-2008, 12:14 PM
NoBeyers,

I hope the significance of your post is not lost on people.

Very good logic.


Dave

njcurveball
03-20-2008, 12:23 PM
Take a six horse field with one horse coming off a 100 figure and another off a 92. The other four were never above 76. The first was bet down to 3/5 and the 2nd down to 4/5 and the best that either could do was third. Before the figures were published these horses might have been co-favorites at 2-1.
.

You are taking a big leap of faith here with a betting public of 80% or more who do not have access to these figures. A large majority of on-line players do not use the form these days. An even larger majority at the track do not buy it.

Take this same field and have the 100 beyer finish 5th and the 92 beyer finish 4th. The other four are coming off wins or seconds. NO WAY they are 3-5 and 4-5.

How bout if the 100 Beyer is ridden by a 5% jock? The best jockey agents read the form and therefore get the best Jocks on the best Beyer horses.

One thing you overlook is that the Beyer is based on finish and the crowd bases their opinions on finish as well. Horses that finish 1st or 2nd get the best jocks and the crowd bets the best jocks.

I doubt your scenario is as cut and dry as they use to both be 2-1 and now both are less than even money.

It is a self fulfilling prophecy for you if you concentrate on the Beyer numbers and overlook the information used by the crowd.

Curious from a guy who uses the ID NO BEYERS PLEASE. :bang:

Tom
03-20-2008, 12:44 PM
You might say you can't find overlays with them, but you can't say they're not predictive.

Isn't this just what ryesteve just said? But I still disagree that you can't find overlays with them. Of course you can. There is far more to using speed figures than playing the highest last out number.

Cangamble
03-20-2008, 12:59 PM
Gibbon,

You do a fine job of looking beyond the window dressing with regard to Beyer. With that in mind, I really don't see how you can substantiate a claim that horse racing is ever changing.

During the 70 some years of pari-mutuel wagering history, how much change has there been in the favorites win percentage?

How much change has there been in the average win payoff?

Would you say, that here in 2008, the logical choice is not often the best bet?

jdl

The logical choice is determined differently today than it was 70 years ago, or even 20 years ago.
Track Variant wasn't in the form around 30 years ago. 20 years ago, Beyer ratings weren't in the form.
Then came trainer angles etc.
In the 60's in Ontario there were 8 races a day, one daily double and two exactors...no tri's every race, no simulcasting, no lasix, etc.
Horses started a lot more often per year as well.
Purses were a lot less before slots, making the possibility for race fixing higher.
Now drugs have come into the picture big time and it creates erratic form on many horses.
There were no internet rebate shops either up until recently.
Crowds were high up until the mid 80's, now they are sparce in most tracks.
The game has changed immensely, and continues to change.

Robert Fischer
03-20-2008, 01:06 PM
Correlation does not imply causation
a horse who ran a good race, probably got a high speed figure
a horse who got a high speed figure, probably ran a good race
correlation does not imply causation


When a horse with a low probability for today's race, has earned eye catching speed figures in the past, speed figures help my edge.

jonnielu
03-20-2008, 01:10 PM
I disagree with the premise that the longer the list of exotic wagers on the menu....the more difficult it becomes. I find that having the choice to play either a double, pick three, pick four, exacta, trifecta or superfecta where I can possibly combine two handicapping overly opinions makes it easier for me. In a perfect world ......i would like to see every venue have pick fours with a low takeout that start every two races or so rather than just the last four races. While i am at it......I wish I could ALWAYS identify the false favorite or the the false second favorite to wager around in the exotic pools. What a wonder paramutual world it would be! :ThmbUp: Good luck to all.

The added difficulty is with respect to the win bettor. Going to the exotic is a good idea, but, understand that the dynamics of 3rd, and 4th are different from 1st, and 2nd.

jdl

jonnielu
03-20-2008, 01:20 PM
The logical choice is determined differently today than it was 70 years ago, or even 20 years ago.
Track Variant wasn't in the form around 30 years ago. 20 years ago, Beyer ratings weren't in the form.
Then came trainer angles etc.
In the 60's in Ontario there were 8 races a day, one daily double and two exactors...no tri's every race, no simulcasting, no lasix, etc.
Horses started a lot more often per year as well.
Purses were a lot less before slots, making the possibility for race fixing higher.
Now drugs have come into the picture big time and it creates erratic form on many horses.
There were no internet rebate shops either up until recently.
Crowds were high up until the mid 80's, now they are sparce in most tracks.
The game has changed immensely, and continues to change.

Not really, after all the gyrations and calculations, the favorite continues to be most often, that horse with the "best" form.

How have all of these other changes impacted the results? Such as the favorites win % and the average win mutuel paid?

jonnielu
03-20-2008, 01:23 PM
The beyers are a subjective snapshot accurate to within plus or minus ten percent. Keep in mind that they are frequently revised. The most defintive study I have seen shows that, on average, a winning horse improves his beyers by nine points. Some of my better scores increased by over forty points.
Take a six horse field with one horse coming off a 100 figure and another off a 92. The other four were never above 76. The first was bet down to 3/5 and the 2nd down to 4/5 and the best that either could do was third. Before the figures were published these horses might have been co-favorites at 2-1.
I need them to stay in the form and I want the public handicappers to continue to quote them.

The Beyers are an expression of time, the accuracy and/or predictive quality is similar.

jdl

badcompany
03-20-2008, 01:30 PM
Bad, you are convinced that this sport is made up of nothing but degenerate losers. So, I'm curious about something. Have you ever spent time at, or are you familiar with the myriad of folks that frequent casinos? Do you realize the ratio, in the country today, of casinos to racetracks? Excluding any racino.

How many card players have lost--and I'm not talking about the "world class dudes" that are celebrated as "Joe Cool" on tv's Texas Hold 'Em, or whatever game is being aired, nightly; I'm talking guys that have lost their homes, their marriages, etc.

I may be kidding myself, but I really believe these people exist, and I think more of them have taken the route of casinos, and back room poker parlors, than racetracks.

Maybe they dress better, maybe they're clean shaven. But sweetheart, they're just as damn broke. What's the difference?

Who said there was a difference? In fact, I consider casino gamblers dumber than horseplayers. At least the latter is playing a conceivably beatable game.

To clarify, lots of people gamble with no harmful consequences. I have friends who have good jobs and nice apartments, but have bet horses for many years. They're doing fine. However, if losing is a PROBLEM for someone, meaning that they're betting money that would be better used elsewhere, like to pay bills, imo, the best thing one can do is to stop gambling cold turkey and find another hobby.

Then again, no one here ever loses. So, it's hard to relate to what I'm saying.:lol: :D

Grits
03-20-2008, 01:33 PM
Bad, everyone loses, its simply a less mentioned topic.;)

bigmack
03-20-2008, 01:46 PM
Then again, no one here ever loses. So, it's hard to relate to what I'm saying.
That sure is a common post for you. I think it's about the 12th time you've typed the same thing.

Have you paid much attention to threads where a majority of those surveyed said they were down for the year?

Nothing worse than some bitter little fellow sitting in a corner somewhere pimping others because of his own failings. I haven't seen this mass exclaimation of everyone being winning players that you constantly refer to. You must be reading things into posts that fit your agenda. A losers agenda. Have a ball.

ryesteve
03-20-2008, 02:00 PM
The beyers are a subjective snapshot accurate to within plus or minus ten percent. Keep in mind that they are frequently revised.
No one says figs aren't flawed, but that doesn't mean they're not predictive.


Take a six horse field with one horse coming off a 100 figure and another off a 92. The other four were never above 76. The first was bet down to 3/5 and the 2nd down to 4/5 and the best that either could do was third.But more times than not, the horse with a 30 point Beyer edge IS going to win. Pointing out the times that it doesn't work out that way also doesn't mean they're not predictive.

Perhaps you're confusing "predictive" with "deterministic"?

Dave Schwartz
03-20-2008, 02:07 PM
The added difficulty is with respect to the win bettor. Going to the exotic is a good idea, but, understand that the dynamics of 3rd, and 4th are different from 1st, and 2nd.


Another great quote from this thread. And this is the money quote.

Good one, Jonnie.

Dave

Gibbon
03-20-2008, 04:31 PM
During the 70 some years of pari-mutuel wagering history, how much change has there been in the favorites win percentage? With the plethora of professionally coded handicapping tools AND hand crafted sheet figs – why has the percentage of winning favs. gone DOWN. Adjusted for dwindling field size of course.

Would you say, that here in 2008, the logical choice is not often the best bet? Best suited to win today's race based upon known factors; yes. Fine correlation with final win odds and actual win percentage. Wisdom of the masses. All{?} attempts to make $$$ following such wisdom is futile.

What is his day job? Beyer is an information broker who wrote four books popularizing final time handicapping. Nothing you don't already know. Beyer struck oil in a partnership with Figs Form and later DRF displaying his final time numbers. He has always been an information paddler. Keep in mind all profession sports in America provide FREE past performance on ALL past games. In racing, information is where the real $$$ is made.

Cangamble
03-20-2008, 04:32 PM
Not really, after all the gyrations and calculations, the favorite continues to be most often, that horse with the "best" form.

How have all of these other changes impacted the results? Such as the favorites win % and the average win mutuel paid?
Favorites that win and average win mutuel are most related to field size and nothing more.
Using your comparison, if dog racing races with 8 dogs had the same percentage of faves who won and the same average mutuel as races with 8 horses, you could conclude that there is no difference between dog racing and horse racing.

Gibbon
03-20-2008, 06:37 PM
The beyers are a subjective snapshot accurate to within plus or minus ten percent. Excluding dates, what part of data collection are objective in racing? Lengths behind? GP final times? Turf pace times? Workout times? Jockey names? Weight? Medication? Shoes? All variants to some degree are subjective attempts to smooth flawed data.

jonnielu
03-20-2008, 09:36 PM
Another great quote from this thread. And this is the money quote.

Good one, Jonnie.

Dave

Dave,

Thanks, now if we could just figure a way to program it in.

jdl

Dave Schwartz
03-20-2008, 09:53 PM
That I've got covered.

jonnielu
03-20-2008, 10:16 PM
With the plethora of professionally coded handicapping tools AND hand crafted sheet figs – why has the percentage of winning favs. gone DOWN. Adjusted for dwindling field size of course.

Best suited to win today's race based upon known factors; yes. Fine correlation with final win odds and actual win percentage. Wisdom of the masses. All{?} attempts to make $$$ following such wisdom is futile.

Beyer is an information broker who wrote four books popularizing final time handicapping. Nothing you don't already know. Beyer struck oil in a partnership with Figs Form and later DRF displaying his final time numbers. He has always been an information paddler. Keep in mind all profession sports in America provide FREE past performance on ALL past games. In racing, information is where the real $$$ is made.

I don't know that it has gone down, ML favorites have actually been at 26% for decades. I wrote that the logical choice is not often the best bet in my book in 1982. Not much change there.

The masses make the same general mistake today that they made in the past. That is basically, taking past performances at face value, or rating those past performances and expecting them to be repeated today. This is very general of course, but expecting the everyday thoroughbred to run a great race twice within three weeks, is a little unrealistic.

Sure, it happens with regularity, but this contender is also upset with regularity. That is the horse that the bettor should be seeking, your game should be developed around identifying this horse. If all things are equal, the longer odds is generally the better bet. The favorite is always still the favorite, and usually by past performances, deservedly so. But, that is also the horse with the bullseye on his butt, and there are always at least 3 - 4 horse/trainer tandems that have working the last three weeks at drilling that bullseye.

The nature of this bunch is that they do not like to make their work very obvious to the masses, but it is always in evidence to the horseplayer that is looking for it.

jdl

jonnielu
03-20-2008, 10:29 PM
Excluding dates, what part of data collection are objective in racing? Lengths behind? GP final times? Turf pace times? Workout times? Jockey names? Weight? Medication? Shoes? All variants to some degree are subjective attempts to smooth flawed data.

If you know that the data is flawed, you should be able to find where and/or what the flaws are. This would be valuable information that the masses are definitely without. Giving you a huge advantage.

If data collection is no better these days, it seems that it would still be adequate.

jdl

jonnielu
03-20-2008, 10:38 PM
Favorites that win and average win mutuel are most related to field size and nothing more.
Using your comparison, if dog racing races with 8 dogs had the same percentage of faves who won and the same average mutuel as races with 8 horses, you could conclude that there is no difference between dog racing and horse racing.

Ya know, your killing me over here :bang:

I'm saying that the game has changed little, if, past performance handicapping still generally yields a favorite that wins 30% of the time. The average mutuel paid for a winner is still 4 - 1.

I am suggesting that maybe "form" handicapping, with all of its angles and variations/different focal points... hits the wall at this same point. This would suggest that something else may be needed.

jdl

John
03-20-2008, 10:52 PM
" Got a hunch, bet a bunch" Best Handicapping tool I got.

:) :) :)

PaceAdvantage
03-21-2008, 04:16 AM
That sure is a common post for you. I think it's about the 12th time you've typed the same thing.

Have you paid much attention to threads where a majority of those surveyed said they were down for the year?

Nothing worse than some bitter little fellow sitting in a corner somewhere pimping others because of his own failings. I haven't seen this mass exclaimation of everyone being winning players that you constantly refer to. You must be reading things into posts that fit your agenda. A losers agenda. Have a ball.Damn you're good....

badcompany
03-21-2008, 09:27 AM
Damn you're good....

Yeah, a guy with 5000 posts in two years getting on a guy's case who has less than 150 posts in one year for being repetitive.

There's a reason that certain people have a zillion posts on forums. No one in the real world can stand them.

Meanwhile, I offered the only guaranteed way for a loser to stop losing; whereas, he offered a picture of a broken down old man in a dirty shirt shooting pool.

nobeyerspls
03-21-2008, 10:16 AM
[QUOTE=njcurveball]You are taking a big leap of faith here with a betting public of 80% or more who do not have access to these figures. A large majority of on-line players do not use the form these days. An even larger majority at the track do not buy it.
[QUOTE]
Are you saying that 80% of handicappers don't see the figures? Most of my acquaintances at the simulcast facility see them in the Form or simulcast book.
The example I used was in response to a guy who said that they were predictive. It was a real race and Coa rode the 3/5 who was coming off a 100 beyer. The $63 winner who beat him by six lengths was ridden by Rivera, a 9% jockey. His mount was coming off a 55.
My eye is trained to ignore the column with the beyer speed figures as I hold that they have no practical application in handicapping thoroughbred races, hence my ID name. Note too that Andy Bayer himself is not a slave to raw figures. He advises to pay attention to how the number was "earned" (love that word) and he relies heavily on replays as part of his handicapping. His work, as it has evolved over time, is the best attempt to digitize the performance of race horses. It's flawed though as evidenced by the relatively few people who rise to its defense.

alysheba88
03-21-2008, 10:21 AM
[QUOTE=njcurveball]You are taking a big leap of faith here with a betting public of 80% or more who do not have access to these figures. A large majority of on-line players do not use the form these days. An even larger majority at the track do not buy it.
[QUOTE]
Are you saying that 80% of handicappers don't see the figures? Most of my acquaintances at the simulcast facility see them in the Form or simulcast book.
The example I used was in response to a guy who said that they were predictive. It was a real race and Coa rode the 3/5 who was coming off a 100 beyer. The $63 winner who beat him by six lengths was ridden by Rivera, a 9% jockey. His mount was coming off a 55.
My eye is trained to ignore the column with the beyer speed figures as I hold that they have no practical application in handicapping thoroughbred races, hence my ID name. Note too that Andy Bayer himself is not a slave to raw figures. He advises to pay attention to how the number was "earned" (love that word) and he relies heavily on replays as part of his handicapping. His work, as it has evolved over time, is the best attempt to digitize the performance of race horses. It's flawed though as evidenced by the relatively few people who rise to its defense.


Just an educated guess but I would say 90% of players dont see Beyer figures. Most players do not bu a form. Some dont even buy a program. The program doesnt typically have "Beyer" speed figures

alysheba88
03-21-2008, 10:23 AM
With the plethora of professionally coded handicapping tools AND hand crafted sheet figs – why has the percentage of winning favs. gone DOWN. Adjusted for dwindling field size of course.

Best suited to win today's race based upon known factors; yes. Fine correlation with final win odds and actual win percentage. Wisdom of the masses. All{?} attempts to make $$$ following such wisdom is futile.

Beyer is an information broker who wrote four books popularizing final time handicapping. Nothing you don't already know. Beyer struck oil in a partnership with Figs Form and later DRF displaying his final time numbers. He has always been an information paddler. Keep in mind all profession sports in America provide FREE past performance on ALL past games. In racing, information is where the real $$$ is made.

I do not believe Beyer had any relationship with Figs Form. I believe you may be thinking about Racing Times.

Glad though that I am not only one who remembers Figs Form. You ask someone else that question and they look at you like you are crazy

njcurveball
03-21-2008, 10:37 AM
Are you saying that 80% of handicappers don't see the figures? Most of my acquaintances at the simulcast facility see them in the Form or simulcast book.
.

Actually I think the number is higher, but ballpark 80%+. They would need to be in the official track program to get over 50% of the bettors to see them.

njcurveball
03-21-2008, 10:42 AM
I do not believe Beyer had any relationship with Figs Form. I believe you may be thinking about Racing Times.

Glad though that I am not only one who remembers Figs Form. You ask someone else that question and they look at you like you are crazy


Sounds right to me! :ThmbUp:

Figs Form was a very very good publication masterminded by a guy named Iggy. It had nothing to do with the Racing Times or DRF. Rumor has it they the DRF pushed them out of business by threatening to pull their stuff if Figs Form continued to be sold.

The Racing Times was a great paper and the reason the DRF has made so many changes. I believe the Racing Times actually had "hand made" figures, rather than the computer generated, computer adjusted, dynamic Beyer figures that are in the form today.

John
03-21-2008, 11:45 AM
At my track Racing form $5.00 three tracks. The program put out by Equibase Company LLC. $4.00 14 tracks and a few Harness tracks. Some handicappers I know that use speed numbers claim they like Equibase numbers better. I can't say for sure who's numbers are better because I use CJ's performance figures only.

:) :) :)

Cangamble
03-21-2008, 12:29 PM
The program odds are done by an oddsmaker who sees figures and makes odds with figures playing big in the final odds posted.
So whether it is actually 80% or 50% or whatever, speed figures are influencial.

And lets not forget that most people who don't use figures or read a form, or equibase form, etc. aren't the ones who bet the largest sums.

njcurveball
03-21-2008, 01:09 PM
The program odds are done by an oddsmaker who sees figures and makes odds with figures playing big in the final odds posted.
So whether it is actually 80% or 50% or whatever, speed figures are influencial.

And lets not forget that most people who don't use figures or read a form, or equibase form, etc. aren't the ones who bet the largest sums.


You lost me here, I thought the topic was the BEYER figures, not speed figures in general. Before the BEYER figures were in the form, many people were computing them "by hand". Before that, many people were computing speed figures as well.

The past speed of a horse has always been and will always be the #1 predictive factor for picking winners.

One of many funny stories was when I was doing the TV analysis and left out a horse who had a 100 rating in the track program. The rest of the field had 80s and below.

When I was asked why I left the horse out, I told the person that the 100 was a mistake and there was some problem computing a figure for the horse, so they gave it a 100. (I forget if it was fog, no time given, or something else).

Naturally that horse won and I was ridiculed how I could have missed such a figure "stand-out"/ :bang:

bigmack
03-21-2008, 01:34 PM
Meanwhile, I offered the only guaranteed way for a loser to stop losing; whereas, he offered a picture of a broken down old man in a dirty shirt shooting pool.
Here's your "broken down old man in a dirty shirt".
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43506&highlight=hong+kong

The reason you have 150 posts is because you only have one thing to say. That you're a loser and you assume everyone is a loser. Bye, loser.

rufus999
03-22-2008, 09:50 AM
10. Overall though it’s as honest as about any other sporting event. If you don’t think it is, why are you betting? Horsemen have too much to lose by not running as honest a game as possible.



Eddie Arcaro pulled more horses than most jockeys ever get to ride.
In Australia, the 'syndicate' (crooks) painted a horse and entered it as a ringer in a stakes race. Vernon W. Bush has a long history of suspensions realted to fixes. Pat Valenzuela has screwed the pooch. Jean Luc Samyn has stiffed horses on the turf. Bravo and Zito are throwing races as we speak at Gulfstream. The NYRA is now a modern day Tammany Hall. I'll admit most of my experience is with NY racing but if it is at all indicative of the rest of the community and business practice in general in today's world, then 'as honest as' don't mean squat, babe.

rufus

John
03-22-2008, 10:17 AM
Eddie Arcaro pulled more horses than most jockeys ever get to ride.
In Australia, the 'syndicate' (crooks) painted a horse and entered it as a ringer in a stakes race. Vernon W. Bush has a long history of suspensions realted to fixes. Pat Valenzuela has screwed the pooch. Jean Luc Samyn has stiffed horses on the turf. Bravo and Zito are throwing races as we speak at Gulfstream. The NYRA is now a modern day Tammany Hall. I'll admit most of my experience is with NY racing but if it is at all indicative of the rest of the community and business practice in general in today's world, then 'as honest as' don't mean squat, babe.

rufus

WOW!!! those are serious statements...

I have known Veron Bush since he rode his first horse.Over thr years he has had some drug problems and a weight problem. For the years that he has rode in New England I never knew him to hold a horse on his own. I know a lot of race people here and most will ride him if he can make the weight.

The others you mention.I don't know about.

:) :) :)

Overlay
03-22-2008, 10:31 AM
Eddie Arcaro pulled more horses than most jockeys ever get to ride.
In Australia, the 'syndicate' (crooks) painted a horse and entered it as a ringer in a stakes race. Vernon W. Bush has a long history of suspensions realted to fixes. Pat Valenzuela has screwed the pooch. Jean Luc Samyn has stiffed horses on the turf. Bravo and Zito are throwing races as we speak at Gulfstream. The NYRA is now a modern day Tammany Hall. I'll admit most of my experience is with NY racing but if it is at all indicative of the rest of the community and business practice in general in today's world, then 'as honest as' don't mean squat, babe.

rufus

I'm not prepared to dispute your personal knowledge or observations, but my reaction is similar to claims of betting coups that are detectable by toteboard reading. If it is as widespread as you indicate, how can there be performance characteristics and statistics that recur at a consistent rate over extended periods of time? (Or would your response be that that is merely indicative of the continuance of the same volume of fixing over that period?) Either way, I think the way to address it is to make handicapping judgments in light of those established rates and probabilities, rather than isolating only the one most likely winner (whatever its odds may be) in any given race.

Grits
03-22-2008, 11:33 AM
Eddie Arcaro pulled more horses than most jockeys ever get to ride.
In Australia, the 'syndicate' (crooks) painted a horse and entered it as a ringer in a stakes race. Vernon W. Bush has a long history of suspensions realted to fixes. Pat Valenzuela has screwed the pooch. Jean Luc Samyn has stiffed horses on the turf. Bravo and Zito are throwing races as we speak at Gulfstream. The NYRA is now a modern day Tammany Hall. I'll admit most of my experience is with NY racing but if it is at all indicative of the rest of the community and business practice in general in today's world, then 'as honest as' don't mean squat, babe.

rufus

BABE, let me give you a little clue . . . .

it is crap like this on public forums--that is posted from individuals with petulant, whining attitudes, accusing when you have NO proof, though convinced everyone and every game or business on earth is cheating their way to gazillions of $$$ for their own personal gain--that causes others to walk away.

Horseracing doesn't need whiners like yourself.

Everyone loses races, but unlike you, everyone doesn't blame others. What a bore.

njcurveball
03-22-2008, 12:32 PM
Bravo and Zito are throwing races as we speak at Gulfstream.

NO horses for them today. Are they running on a different Planet? Mine is caled Earth, and we ride in peace. :D

This is what I found for them yesterday.

fin 2nd (2-1) - Louis James ridden by J Bravo trained by N Zito
rated off pace, 3 wide turn, 2nd best

This was Thursday

fin 3rd (9-2) - Web Gem ridden by J Bravo trained by N Zito
saved ground, swung out, rallied, gained 3rd

two starts, 1 2nd, 1 3rd. Their record at Gulfstream is 24% winners and returning 99 cents on the dollar. If this qualifies as "throwing races" then I didn't get the memo.

rufus999
03-22-2008, 12:40 PM
Horseracing doesn't need whiners like yourself.

Everyone loses races, but unlike you, everyone doesn't blame others. What a bore.

I don't argue... sorry...:cool:

rufus

rufus999
03-22-2008, 12:43 PM
NO horses for them today. Are they running on a different Planet? Mine is caled Earth, and we ride in peace. :D



They run on planet FL.

rufus

rufus999
03-22-2008, 12:52 PM
I have known Veron Bush since he rode his first horse.Over thr years he has had some drug problems and a weight problem. For the years that he has rode in New England I never knew him to hold a horse on his own. I know a lot of race people here and most will ride him if he can make the weight.




Not By A Longshot: A Season At A Hard Luck Horse Track.
T.D. Thornton @2007
Publisher; Public Affairs, NY

rufus

badcompany
03-24-2008, 12:26 AM
Not By A Longshot: A Season At A Hard Luck Horse Track.
T.D. Thornton @2007
Publisher; Public Affairs, NY

rufus

Sounds like a good read.

Just ordered it from Amazon. Thanks.

http://www.amazon.com/Not-Long-Shot-Season-Horse/dp/1586484494

Fwizard
03-24-2008, 01:11 PM
I can't really worry about if the "Fix" is in because there are two many other things to worry about. Does something crooked go on is some places, yes, but I see it as a very small amount (under 1%) . If I thought that the races were fixed why would I play them? Seems I would just leave racing and play blackjack instead.

thespaah
03-24-2008, 02:07 PM
Here's a list I put together for an old book. Anything I missed? Helpful?

Here are some of the reasons people continue to lose:

1. They don’t have a time tested and proven strategy that wins. A winner will take the time to research and test a method to make sure it can show long-term profits. If it looks promising they’ll test their method with real money making small wagers to learn and understand it before betting seriously.

2. If they have a successful method they don’t have the discipline or confidence to follow it. Losers don’t put in the proper time to practice and study their method, thus they lack the confidence to properly use it in the correct situations. As soon as a losing streak takes place they abandon the method searching for the next method that promises them riches. A winner takes the necessary time to learn and understand a method and sticks with it through the inevitable losing cycles.

3. They make too many bad bets: In contrast most but not all winning handicappers limit themselves to a couple prime bets per day per track. Some days they may not bet at all. Again, I can’t stress this enough, if you want to win long-term don’t bet unless you have an edge! There’s plenty of stuff you can do at the track when you’re not betting. Try to get better at visual handicapping. Try a new handicapping approach that’s worked for others and see what you can learn. I can handicap a card and not have any bets for the day. The next day at the same track I might have 4-5 qualifying bets. Don’t determine beforehand how many races you’ll bet, let the bets come to you. There’s always another day.

4. They can’t stand being wrong. It is more important for the majority of people to select and be on the winner of a race than it is to win money. They’ll bet on the favorite even if it’s over bet just to make sure they cash a ticket. They’ll hedge their exotic bets with multiple horses even if it costs them money in the long run. Do the opposite if you want to win. Ron Cox a noted handicapper observed that it wasn’t until he started asking himself how or if he could make money on the race instead of asking who the winner was that he really began winning at the races. Instead of spending all your time trying to figure out who the winner will be, try to figure out if there’s a way you can make money in the race. If you can’t, pass the race and avoid wearing the losers suit.

5. They blame somebody or something else for their losses. When you blame something or somebody other than yourself for your losses you will continue to repeat the same mistakes. If you say you lost because of the jockey, the trainer or the track you will repeat the same mistakes over and over because their actions are outside of your control. If you don’t control your outcome your actions don’t have any consequences. (There are some things out of your control in the short term but we’re talking long term here). Also, if they’re responsible for your losing they’re also responsible for your winning! You never hear someone give credit to the jockey or the trainer after they win a bet. The winning is always due to good handicapping; the losing is almost always blamed on something else. Start taking responsibility for your bets; you’re the one that placed them.

6. They blame bad luck on themselves. Losers will blame themselves for results that are part of the game but beyond their control. If their horse goes 4 wide and loses by a neck or their horse gets trapped and doesn’t get the racing room it needs to win they blame it on bad luck. (But when their horse wins because another horse gets into trouble it’s quickly forgotten.) This is part of the game in the short term. Understand what’s beyond your control and the things that you can control. Pay attention to the long-term results.


7. They don’t cut back during long losing streaks. The most important part of money management is not to let your losses get out of hand. You have to learn how to preserve your betting capital. Most people start making bad decisions when they’ve lost too much money for their comfort. They increase their bet size or start betting on marginal horses trying to make their money back immediately. Why? They can’t accept losing or missing a bet on a winning horse. You’re going to lose races and pass on winners that you could have bet. Accept that and make sure you have a good money management system in place and a large enough bankroll to withstand a losing streak.

8. They’re a slave to their ego. They only focus on how many winners they’ve picked. Remember the goal shouldn’t be how many winners you picked but how much money you have in your pocket at the end of the day, the week and the year. This will change your entire perspective on picking horses and betting.

9. They’re comforted by all the losing horseplayers around them. Losers know how to handle failure because they’ve done it before. Other losing horseplayers share their losses and sympathize with them creating camaraderie between the group. This leads them to more losses in order to be a part of the group (their friends of losers). It may sound silly but the psychology behind being part of a group and having a sense of acceptance and belonging has lead to a lot of irrational behavior in history and in today’s society. Do your own thing and find others who are also dedicated to winning. Stay away from the whiners who blame everything bad that happens to them on someone else.

10. They believe the outcomes are fixed against them. If you’re in the game long enough you will read from time to time about some questionable instances in horse racing. Overall though it’s as honest as about any other sporting event. If you don’t think it is, why are you betting? Horsemen have too much to lose by not running as honest a game as possible.

If you’re currently losing do yourself a favor. Discard any pre-conceived notions you have about handicapping and start over. Throw away all your non-essential handicapping material. I did this and I believe it’s the only reason I’m able to win today. I was filled with information from losing horseplayers and outdated books. If you have some concepts that are winning keep those, but get rid of the rest.

*Some of the above information doesn’t apply to people who play the horses a couple of times a year. If you’re one of those players you can learn from the information in this book but tailor it to your needs. Concentrate on the handicapping sections and have some fun.



Traits of losing handicappers

Here’s the ultimate loser’s profile (do the opposite if you want to win):

• They have a negative outlook and always expect the worst to happen to them.
• They blame others when things go wrong and only accept responsibility when things go right. If the five horse loses it’s the jockeys fault. If the horse wins it’s because it was a good bet.
• Instead of relying on their own opinions they follow the crowd, look for tips and are easily swayed from their own opinions. (Don’t take this to the extreme though. There are different approaches and opinions that are valid. Each of us is not smart enough to know all the answers. Keep an open mind and learn but don’t be swayed from your own opinions if you have solids facts and data to back it up.)
• They are impatient and have little control.
• They need constant action regardless of the outcome.
• They don’t put in the necessary time and study to understand their handicapping method, their own strengths and weaknesses, risk control, money management and the process of winning.
• They always look for a shortcut. Success is found in simplicity only after you have waded through complexity.
• They don’t follow a system or method long enough to see if it works. They’re constantly searching for the magic bullet that will lead to riches.Your points are well stated. I scrolled down to the one that jumped of the screen. Money management. Proper money mamagement is the key to winning money.
I don't care how many winners I have duirng the day. The object is to make a profit. And of course have fun doing it. In fact, a day at the races for me is always fun.

1st time lasix
03-25-2008, 01:18 PM
I can't really worry about if the "Fix" is in because there are two many other things to worry about. Does something crooked go on is some places, yes, but I see it as a very small amount (under 1%) . If I thought that the races were fixed why would I play them? Seems I would just leave racing and play blackjack instead. There is a very loud self important guy at my simulcast venue that must yell -"fix" ...."zap 'em with a battery"...."cobra venom" at least thirty to forty times in an afternoon. It may be eighty times....I have never counted as I strive to ignore him. He must believe everyone there cares about his obnoxious antics. He only handicaps using the bottom of the program book so he has lots of idle time to annoy people. He certainly must lose. He is a real irritant to any of the other people in the room playing the races .....yet management and security do nothing about it. He has chased several people away. I would love to pop 'em in the nose.... but i am too civilized and mature that type of behavior. Praying someone else does it! ha!

john del riccio
03-25-2008, 01:49 PM
My number one reason for having a bad day is distractions. I need my space,and I need to be alone with my thoughts. One of my old buddies that used to go to MTH alot and see me there loved to talk. I can't tell you how many times I had to go somewhere else, and finalize my race stragedy, then bet & come back to my spot to watch the race. Socializing is for AFTER the races, not during them.

John

John
03-25-2008, 03:09 PM
That is what the race tracks are nowday. An extension of Dunkin Donuts. A place to hang around and B.S. The area of my track I am pretty much a loner untill the Bingo players show up.

dav4463
03-26-2008, 12:38 AM
Like most touts, Beyer realized that giving out information is more profitable than acting on it.


Why can't you do both? If you are good at something, it is only natural to show it to someone else and if you make some more money...why not? I know we are playing against each other, but it is an ego thing.

If winners didn't want to share info to help others, there wouldn't be a forum like this one or handicapping books, or seminars. It was just be a bunch of loners playing the horses and trying to beat each other.

Dave Schwartz
03-26-2008, 01:13 AM
If winners didn't want to share info to help others, there wouldn't be a forum like this one or handicapping books, or seminars. It was just be a bunch of loners playing the horses and trying to beat each other.


You are so right!

Imriledup
03-26-2008, 02:08 AM
My number one reason for having a bad day is distractions. I need my space,and I need to be alone with my thoughts. One of my old buddies that used to go to MTH alot and see me there loved to talk. I can't tell you how many times I had to go somewhere else, and finalize my race stragedy, then bet & come back to my spot to watch the race. Socializing is for AFTER the races, not during them.

John

This is HUGE.

I can't tell you how many times when i was trying to cut my teeth in this game that i had to go and 'hide' in the track to avoid 'hanging out' with people. Intense concentration is PARAMOUNT to being a winning player.

jonnielu
03-26-2008, 07:51 AM
Eddie Arcaro pulled more horses than most jockeys ever get to ride.
In Australia, the 'syndicate' (crooks) painted a horse and entered it as a ringer in a stakes race. Vernon W. Bush has a long history of suspensions realted to fixes. Pat Valenzuela has screwed the pooch. Jean Luc Samyn has stiffed horses on the turf. Bravo and Zito are throwing races as we speak at Gulfstream. The NYRA is now a modern day Tammany Hall. I'll admit most of my experience is with NY racing but if it is at all indicative of the rest of the community and business practice in general in today's world, then 'as honest as' don't mean squat, babe.

rufus

You are not losing because "they" are cheating. You are losing because you fail to understand the basic realities of the game as they apply to everyday competition.

Reality #1 - If a trainer trys to win every race, and is successful in these efforts 50% of the time, or even 30%.... HE LOSES THE HORSE.

Reality #1a - If a trainer allows the exact ability of his horse to be widely known..... HE LOSES THE HORSE.

jdl

rokitman
03-26-2008, 09:42 AM
You are not losing because "they" are cheating. You are losing because you fail to understand the basic realities of the game as they apply to everyday competition.

Reality #1 - If a trainer trys to win every race, and is successful in these efforts 50% of the time, or even 30%.... HE LOSES THE HORSE.

Reality #1a - If a trainer allows the exact ability of his horse to be widely known..... HE LOSES THE HORSE.

jdl
You ever make a movie with Richard Dreyfuss?

jonnielu
03-26-2008, 10:57 AM
You ever make a movie with Richard Dreyfuss?

Not that I got paid for, what was the name of that hilarious thing anyway? I might have made some background shots.

jdl

rufus999
03-26-2008, 01:22 PM
You are not losing because "they" are cheating.
jdl

My post addressed honesty in the sport, not losing due to cheating.:cool:

rufus

jonnielu
03-26-2008, 03:38 PM
My post addressed honesty in the sport, not losing due to cheating.:cool:

rufus

So then, do you consider it dis-honest to put forth less then the ultimate effort?

jdl

badcompany
03-26-2008, 04:42 PM
So then, do you consider it dis-honest to put forth less then the ultimate effort?

jdl

If it's done because the trainer is thinking about the longterm, no. I would equate this to a football or basketball coach pulling his starters late in a game, even though doing so means his team might not cover the spread.

Now, if it's done because of betting interests, yes.

rufus999
03-26-2008, 06:58 PM
So then, do you consider it dis-honest to put forth less then the ultimate effort?

jdl

Hiding a horses form addresses issues of ethics. Nothing illegal about it. Perhaps a bit disingenuous. Most certainly bad manners. I don't lose any sleep over it.:cool:

rufus

jonnielu
03-26-2008, 08:55 PM
Hiding a horses form addresses issues of ethics. Nothing illegal about it. Perhaps a bit disingenuous. Most certainly bad manners. I don't lose any sleep over it.:cool:

rufus

Well, now I am wondering. What do you actually expect from a trainer? And, if everybody knows every thing about everybody's horse, wouldn't the game become just a boring excercise. Do you want to take the horse race out of horseracing?

jdl

Kelso
03-26-2008, 10:54 PM
What do you actually expect from a trainer?


Maximum effort with every runner, every race. Let them train on their own time ... and on their own dimes. Sandbagging a race is no different, in any respect, than throwing a fight. The purpose is irrelevant; only the effort matters.

rufus999
03-27-2008, 12:45 AM
Well, now I am wondering. What do you actually expect from a trainer? And, if everybody knows every thing about everybody's horse, wouldn't the game become just a boring excercise. Do you want to take the horse race out of horseracing?

jdl

I enjoy the races. I understand the strategies employed and the reasons trainers have for employing them. Its a tough way to make a living. My experience and knowledge of whats new and noteworthy help me to keep abreast of the sport as it continues to evolve. One has no choice but to accept the sport at face value if one is to continue to enjoy it. So, thats what I do. What I won't do is ignore the larcenous behavior running rampant in all walks of life at all levels sporting, corporate, and political. We do ourselves a great disservice by keeping quiet on matters that sorely need to be addressed.

rufus

jonnielu
03-27-2008, 07:40 AM
I enjoy the races. I understand the strategies employed and the reasons trainers have for employing them. Its a tough way to make a living. My experience and knowledge of whats new and noteworthy help me to keep abreast of the sport as it continues to evolve. One has no choice but to accept the sport at face value if one is to continue to enjoy it. So, thats what I do. What I won't do is ignore the larcenous behavior running rampant in all walks of life at all levels sporting, corporate, and political. We do ourselves a great disservice by keeping quiet on matters that sorely need to be addressed.

rufus

Do you see it as larcenous for the betting stable to be a betting stable? Maybe they figure that if you can't see the activity on the board, it is only because you are incomplete in your analysis. When the stable bets, information is being expressed in broad daylight.

A betting stable not betting would also be valuable information that is openly expressed.

It might help here to understand that there are four principal parties involved in horseracing, three of them are interested in honestly competing for your cash. They are, the horsemen, the track, and you. The fourth party is parasitic in nature and does not wish to compete for cash, but extracts a hefty toll without contributing a damn thing. Government thereby brings the dishonesty that can infect the other participants.

jdl

jonnielu
03-27-2008, 07:48 AM
Maximum effort with every runner, every race. Let them train on their own time ... and on their own dimes. Sandbagging a race is no different, in any respect, than throwing a fight. The purpose is irrelevant; only the effort matters.

Don't you think it a bit unrealistic, the horseman is there primarily to compete for purse money. He can't do that well by running his horses into the ground in order to give you full fields and full cards.

What would boxers be doing if they were expected to perform for 12 rounds twice a week?

jdl

rufus999
03-27-2008, 10:17 AM
When the stable bets, information is being expressed in broad daylight.

A betting stable not betting would also be valuable information that is openly expressed.


jdl

The only source I ever had for betting stable action was my uncle who worked for the NYRA for close to 30 years. And that usually came first hand from the trainer or jockey a day in advance.;)

rufus

Kelso
03-27-2008, 11:31 PM
Don't you think it a bit unrealistic, the horseman is there primarily to compete for purse money. He can't do that well by running his horses into the ground in order to give you full fields and full cards.

What would boxers be doing if they were expected to perform for 12 rounds twice a week?

jdl

Kindly advise how you have concluded that I support either racing horses excessively or entering horses for the sole purpose of filling cards. I have done neither.

Race them when, and only when, they are ready ... and run them to their maximum ability every time they race. Anything less is cheating.

Clear enough?

rusrious
03-28-2008, 09:21 AM
Here is what I did in the last 2 days.. What did I do wrong? This was my 2nd time betting real money online, could have done better, but I guess it could have been worse, LOL.. There are some that I bet on twice, because I was overwelmed with info, and doing to much at once.. I have learned alot. I tried alot of SHOW bets, most loses came in 4th, Blahhh... Today im going to try exactas, real money, and progressive paper betting..

One thing I found myself doing is betting on horses that weren't worth it, reguardless of the win.. 10 cent gains has to stop..

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e52/rusrious/ehorse1.jpg
http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e52/rusrious/ehorse2.jpg

rusrious
03-28-2008, 09:27 AM
O yeah, and not staying my course, or system.. I think I have a nice system, but I trail off it, and lose because I didnt stay the course..

jonnielu
03-28-2008, 09:30 AM
The only source I ever had for betting stable action was my uncle who worked for the NYRA for close to 30 years. And that usually came first hand from the trainer or jockey a day in advance.;)

rufus

I've always found the last minute reports that come in from 5 minutes to post to 3 in the gate, to be a little more accurate.

jdl

Tom
03-28-2008, 09:36 AM
Maximum effort with every runner, every race. Let them train on their own time ... and on their own dimes. Sandbagging a race is no different, in any respect, than throwing a fight. The purpose is irrelevant; only the effort matters.

Amen!

It is amazing racing has come up with so many PC terms for "cheating."

jonnielu
03-28-2008, 10:12 AM
O yeah, and not staying my course, or system.. I think I have a nice system, but I trail off it, and lose because I didnt stay the course..

There you go. The results must reinforce your analysis, if not, your analysis must come into question. Everyone is prone to wander when the results don't reinforce. This only serves to convince you that horseracing is in a constant state of flux. Which it is not.

The problem is that you only come to understand this when you have successfully tuned your analysis to the point that the results reinforce instead of confuse. This is a destination that is very hard to get to because the starting point is elusive for most.

You need only to consider the actual results, and the fact that most of them are unexpected. Now consider that even the most bewildering results can't be all happenstance, because someone set out to create them. When you can sign-up with that idea as a reality, set your considerations toward that first nose on the wire and think about what has to be done for that to happen consistently, on purpose. This is the starting point, follow it clockwise.

jdl

njcurveball
03-28-2008, 10:16 AM
There you go. The results must reinforce your analysis, if not, your analysis must come into question.

OR as we see often on here, it is the trip or the jock that causes the "perfect pick" to lose. Even if the winner stumbled at the gate, got caught behind a wall of horses and checked six or seven times.

Rarely will you hear a handicapper simply say they made the wrong choices. It is usually their Money Management or Bet Structure or Troubled Trip or Jock. If that isn't working, it is the horse didn't fire today, drugs, the other jock had a battery, the fix was in, etc.

Usually the results, good or bad, just reinforces their opinion.

jonnielu
03-28-2008, 10:19 AM
Kindly advise how you have concluded that I support either racing horses excessively or entering horses for the sole purpose of filling cards. I have done neither.

Race them when, and only when, they are ready ... and run them to their maximum ability every time they race. Anything less is cheating.

Clear enough?

Sure it's clear, it is equally unrealistic for everyday racing. You do get it in stake events.

If you posted a house rule for poker night at your place, that all players must hold their cards so that they face you, would you expect a big crowd?

jdl

rusrious
03-28-2008, 10:23 AM
There you go. The results must reinforce your analysis, if not, your analysis must come into question. Everyone is prone to wander when the results don't reinforce. This only serves to convince you that horseracing is in a constant state of flux. Which it is not.

The problem is that you only come to understand this when you have successfully tuned your analysis to the point that the results reinforce instead of confuse. This is a destination that is very hard to get to because the starting point is elusive for most.

You need only to consider the actual results, and the fact that most of them are unexpected. Now consider that even the most bewildering results can't be all happenstance, because someone set out to create them. When you can sign-up with that idea as a reality, set your considerations toward that first nose on the wire and think about what has to be done for that to happen consistently, on purpose. This is the starting point, follow it clockwise.

jdl

Understood, thank you jonnielu

nobeyerspls
03-28-2008, 10:29 AM
Actually I think the number is higher, but ballpark 80%+. They would need to be in the official track program to get over 50% of the bettors to see them.

Sorry for the delayed response to this but I had to check with some simulcast buddies to see what figures were in the book they buy. They say that they are not Beyer figures so you may be right about the percentages. In a non-scientific sampling done yesterday more bettors used the simulcast book than those who used the form by a 2-1 ratio. One guy had entries printed from a download and another person had the morning paper.

njcurveball
03-28-2008, 01:38 PM
They say that they are not Beyer figures so you may be right about the percentages. .

The speed figures are all computed using the same times, so I am sure there are many cases that the Beyer, sheet, TG, Cramer, Equibase, and many others agree.

A speed figure is the easiest way to judge performance so many people use them. I think the survey here was spot on confirming that.

Good to know what your competition is using. :ThmbUp:

Kelso
03-28-2008, 11:01 PM
If you posted a house rule for poker night at your place, that all players must hold their cards so that they face you, would you expect a big crowd?


Huh? You on drugs or somethin'? What the hell does this inane question have to do with trainers throwing races?

jonnielu
03-28-2008, 11:41 PM
Huh? You on drugs or somethin'? What the hell does this inane question have to do with trainers throwing races?

Trainers don't throw races, and they don't lay their out in your face either. They are doing their job, not yours too.

jdl

Kelso
03-28-2008, 11:59 PM
Trainers don't throw races, and they don't lay their out in your face either. They are doing their job, not yours too.
jdl

Do you write stuff for Hillary, too? What nonsense!
If they aren't trying to win, they're throwing the race.

Overlay
03-29-2008, 09:06 AM
If, as part of a horse's overall training regimen, a trainer is trying to get that horse to do something that it has never done before in terms of distance, running style, race intervals, or what-have-you, I think that actual race experience (as compared to non-race training) can often be the best means of accomplishing that, although the trainer might have no assurance of how the horse will respond. He might not be expecting to win (for which I would not fault him), but he would also not turn down any piece of the purse money that the horse earns. I think that judgments based on published form, coupled with a determination of what odds make the horse an acceptable wager under the circumstances of the particular race, can adequately address those situations, rather than trying to read the trainer's mind in each individual case.

Kelso
03-29-2008, 04:25 PM
He might not be expecting to win (for which I would not fault him),


My guess is that few trainers ever "expect" to win. However, they should never "intend" to do anything less. That's the issue here.

If a trainer wants on-the-job training for his horse, he should be required to declare such when he enters the race. Then he can run for purse only and not be a betting interest.

Anything less is just another kick in the ass to the players, the people who are financing those pools ... or who are at least still heavily subsidizing them at slots tracks.

Not trying ones best to win is cheating.

Overlay
03-29-2008, 05:25 PM
I share your frustration. But until we reach the (perhaps unattainable) goal of trainers declaring their intent not to exert maximum effort, I think (as I said) that it's possible to compensate adequately (although not ideally) for this less-than-transparent state of affairs through the analysis of published/available performance information, and (especially) the employment of acceptable odds (not just for one horse, but for every horse in a race).