PDA

View Full Version : Is it harder or easier to win than it used to be?


Imriledup
09-27-2008, 08:05 PM
For you handicappers who have been at this for over 10 years, do you feel that its getting easier to win or harder to win and why.

Overlay
09-27-2008, 08:29 PM
I'd say that the information now available makes it easier to find the horse that's most likely to finish first in a race from a "handicapping" standpoint (which to me is not really handicapping, but just "picking winners"). But it's harder to come out ahead from a betting standpoint, unless you take winning probability and betting value into account -- not just with respect to the most likely winner, but considering all the horses in a field.

peakpros
09-27-2008, 09:31 PM
easier....

partly due to the fact fact I have better info and figs...

and partly due to being more mature and much more patient...

I know my strengths and weaknesses...and I bet accordingly.

cmoore
09-27-2008, 10:53 PM
Easier...Information and also what PeakPros said...know your strengths and focus on that part of the game...

raybo
09-28-2008, 07:33 AM
With quality data availability being much better now than years ago it is easier to project order of finish but it has become more difficult to show a positive ROI. Factors that worked in the past, more often than not, don't work as well today because those factors have become overbet resulting in lower payouts regarding those factors.

Value betting has become essential to producing a positive ROI. By value, I mean wagering on horses that have been underbet, regarding their success probability, by the public. Or value could mean migrating from win, place, show betting to the exotics.

Some can still produce a positive ROI with time honored methods simply by churning, wagering on many tracks per day and accepting extremely small average payouts, compared to what they could have received several years ago. Internet wagering and advanced handicapping software that speeds up the handicapping process have made this possible.

Bobzilla
09-28-2008, 07:54 AM
Been a fan of the sport since the golden seventies, a serious player since the late eighties. I believe there was much more dead money in the pools during my first ten years. The typical player today has a degree of sophistication markedly higher than those who constituted a majority of the action twenty or even ten years ago. Helpful information to the player is universally available and meaningfully parsed via database/internet technologies. With that said, I believe the typical player of today will enjoy more hits than his predecessors of yesteryear, though paradoxically the ability to acquire an edge has diminished, which combined with the depressive forces of higher takeout makes the game in the long run more difficult to beat. The ability to manage one's bankroll and recognize value are all the more important.

lamboguy
09-28-2008, 08:00 AM
i think its alot harder. even if you get a large rebate, i think the bet after the bell hurts you. if your horse breaks bad the price goes up, if he breaks good it goes down. it happens every single time. if they would close the pools down, and not allow access into them 2 minutes before the bell goes off, i would rebate the track 5% instead of getting one and come out way ahead.

rastajenk
09-28-2008, 08:24 AM
Oh, brother. :rolleyes: What nonsense.

ryesteve
09-28-2008, 08:41 AM
I'm going to say harder, because the money in the pools is smarter than it used to be. Not only is it smarter, it has more leverage. Someone who's getting an 8-12% rebate can afford to bet enough to turn profitable situations into breakeven or -5% situations (pre-rebate) which kills the edge that a like-minded small player used to have.

jonnielu
09-28-2008, 10:09 AM
It is much harder when you bring the 70's perspective to the modern game. The modern game differs in ways that a change of perspective is well beyond called for.

For the 70's player that is able to tune in to the changes in the modern game, and adapt, picking winners is much simpler. And, is best done in simple ways. Mostly because the consistencies of horse racing haven't changed at all.

This is clearly evidenced by the results of handicapping contests, where quite often the best past performance handicappers regularly fall to the better shot takers.

jdl

kenwoodallpromos
09-28-2008, 10:34 AM
I find it easier as I incorporate more info and factors into my handicapping.
Meanwhile, mainly just the horses' names and the track speed/conditions change.

ryesteve
09-28-2008, 11:12 AM
The modern game differs in ways that a change of perspective is well beyond called for. Mostly because the consistencies of horse racing haven't changed at all
Interesting...

peakpros
09-28-2008, 11:23 AM
i think its alot harder. even if you get a large rebate, i think the bet after the bell hurts you. if your horse breaks bad the price goes up, if he breaks good it goes down. it happens every single time. if they would close the pools down, and not allow access into them 2 minutes before the bell goes off, i would rebate the track 5% instead of getting one and come out way ahead.


:ThmbUp:

well said about the late money

classhandicapper
09-28-2008, 11:54 AM
I'm a much better handicapper and have much better information, but it's tougher. If I knew 15 years ago what I know now, I would have had a much easier time winning.

cnollfan
09-28-2008, 10:51 PM
I think it's the same. Of course, if we knew then what we know now it would be easy to kill them then, but that's true about life in general.

It's still a zero-sum game (minus the track take). As certain handicapping styles and factors come into fashion, those horses pay less than they would have previously. Meanwhile, other methods, also valid, fall out of fashion, and those horses pay more than they used to.

Valuist
09-28-2008, 11:10 PM
I'm a much better handicapper and have much better information, but it's tougher. If I knew 15 years ago what I know now, I would have had a much easier time winning.

Well said. Having more information really doesn't help because so many more people have it now. Its much tougher now, and the competition is tougher.

dav4463
09-29-2008, 12:37 AM
I think it is hard to figure out when a favorite will win these days or a longshot will win. I play longshots most of the time and many times I beat what I consider to be a legitimate favorite.

Then, the most vulnerable favorite (in my opinion) romps home over my longshot who runs up the track.

So, I just pretty much look for longshots in every race; and the better the favorite looks, the better my chance of beating him.

Big Brown looked legit. I beat him! The Maiden Special Wt. with a 30 point Beyer edge over the field runs second to my 30-1 shot. I can beat him!

That 5/2 shot at Mountaineer, Suffolk, Retama, etc.... who looked like he could be beat by at least five or six other horses wins easily! Hard to figure!

BombsAway Bob
09-29-2008, 12:43 AM
Horses run...One Wins(usually), & the rest lose... You still have to pick the winner...
Nothing has changed, except how we feel we have improved in breaking the races down...
if I didn't feel it was easier for me to win now than it was 20 years ago, I wouldn't be playing...

Imriledup
09-29-2008, 12:59 AM
Do you guys think that simulcasting has made things tougher to win? In other words, if there was no such thing as simo and the only monies bet were bet by people on track, i think it would be much 'easier' to win. Personally, i think its gotten MUCH harder to win. Take Beyer figs for example. They might not be as good as TG or Rag, but they're good enough to deflate the prices on the right horses enough of the time to skim you out of profits that you would have had years ago by crunching your own numbers.

Also, i feel that there's a tremendous problem with tote security, but that's another discussion for another day/thread.

samyn on the green
09-29-2008, 01:18 AM
I think it is getting easier. The parimutuel competition is getting older and more senile by the day. Yesterdays sharpie is today's Alzheimers patient. Many have given up, outsourced to computers while losing touch with the heart of the game. For someone young, motivated, bold, yet patient the opportunity is there to make money.

JustRalph
09-29-2008, 03:00 AM
I think it is getting easier. The parimutuel competition is getting older and more senile by the day. Yesterdays sharpie is today's Alzheimers patient. Many have given up, outsourced to computers while losing touch with the heart of the game. For someone young, motivated, bold, yet patient the opportunity is there to make money.

that's funny........... I have sat in the simulcast area at Keeneland the last three meets for a few days and I would say that Keeneland is the oldest average crowd I have seen at the track. I have yet to make any money at Keeneland and I know some of those "older alzheimers prone types" took some money home................ anecdotal evidence against your theory :lol:
Either that, or I am a loser.................... :lol:

jonnielu
09-29-2008, 09:08 AM
Do you guys think that simulcasting has made things tougher to win? In other words, if there was no such thing as simo and the only monies bet were bet by people on track, i think it would be much 'easier' to win. Personally, i think its gotten MUCH harder to win. Take Beyer figs for example. They might not be as good as TG or Rag, but they're good enough to deflate the prices on the right horses enough of the time to skim you out of profits that you would have had years ago by crunching your own numbers.

Also, i feel that there's a tremendous problem with tote security, but that's another discussion for another day/thread.

Simo has made it much easier with respect to access while in your underwear. It has also created great opportunity at the more popular venues by allowing them to put more money into purses and thereby attracting full, competitive fields. This works to insure the presence of the dark horse. And, the dark horse is much more able to take advantage of a 10 horse field then a 7 horse field.

In general, the competition decides the winner, less competition tilts toward the favorite, more competition tilts toward the dark horse.

In general, the handicapper is tilted toward "positive" past performances moreso then any other factor. When full competitive fields are stirred into the equation, the handicapper's mis-takes in recognizing the ability to win within the more competitive field creates larger mis-takes, when mis-takes are made.

In general, the handicapper is always trying to rate past performances to find the best horse. That usually comes back around to the favorite. The ML maker is putting forth a prediction of the public "take". When the ML prediction is below 2 - 1, that can be taken as a reasonable prediction of a public mis-take. Especially, when the field is full.

If one is specializing in looking for public mis-takes more then handicapping, simo makes that easier and much broader. It does involve some change in the players perspective, but, for the experienced player, there are many opportunities.

jdl

raybo
09-29-2008, 09:20 AM
that's funny........... I have sat in the simulcast area at Keeneland the last three meets for a few days and I would say that Keeneland is the oldest average crowd I have seen at the track. I have yet to make any money at Keeneland and I know some of those "older alzheimers prone types" took some money home................ anecdotal evidence against your theory :lol:
Either that, or I am a loser.................... :lol:

I assume that you have made money at other tracks which would suggest that, for you anyway, Keeneland is just a harder track to handicap. The average age of the players at any particular track, IMO, is mute. Whereas, average experience level, IMO, is not mute. There are many younger, sharper minded players that couldn't turn a profit if their life depended on it.

raybo
09-29-2008, 09:27 AM
Simo has made it much easier with respect to access while in your underwear. It has also created great opportunity at the more popular venues by allowing them to put more money into purses and thereby attracting full, competitive fields. This works to insure the presence of the dark horse. And, the dark horse is much more able to take advantage of a 10 horse field then a 7 horse field.

In general, the competition decides the winner, less competition tilts toward the favorite, more competition tilts toward the dark horse.

In general, the handicapper is tilted toward "positive" past performances moreso then any other factor. When full competitive fields are stirred into the equation, the handicapper's mis-takes in recognizing the ability to win within the more competitive field creates larger mis-takes, when mis-takes are made.

In general, the handicapper is always trying to rate past performances to find the best horse. That usually comes back around to the favorite. The ML maker is putting forth a prediction of the public "take". When the ML prediction is below 2 - 1, that can be taken as a reasonable prediction of a public mis-take. Especially, when the field is full.

If one is specializing in looking for public mis-takes more then handicapping, simo makes that easier and much broader. It does involve some change in the players perspective, but, for the experienced player, there are many opportunities.

jdl

As I stated earlier, value is essential, unless you are churning the smaller payouts, in a mass production @ smaller profit per unit scenario. Profit can be accomplished both ways.

trigger
09-29-2008, 11:36 AM
Personally, I find it much harder to win than in the 80's and 90's when the Rags and TG numbers were a great advantage.
BUT, as far as I know, the percentage of winning favorites and their average payoffs have remained about the same over the last 20 or 30 years which indicates to me that the overall ability to win hasn't changed over the years.

rrbauer
09-29-2008, 01:09 PM
Been a fan of the sport since the golden seventies, a serious player since the late eighties. I believe there was much more dead money in the pools during my first ten years. The typical player today has a degree of sophistication markedly higher than those who constituted a majority of the action twenty or even ten years ago. Helpful information to the player is universally available and meaningfully parsed via database/internet technologies. With that said, I believe the typical player of today will enjoy more hits than his predecessors of yesteryear, though paradoxically the ability to acquire an edge has diminished, which combined with the depressive forces of higher takeout makes the game in the long run more difficult to beat. The ability to manage one's bankroll and recognize value are all the more important.

The proportion of "informed" money in the pools is much higher today than back in the days of the 40,000 and 50,000, mostly recreational, fans attending the live venues. The even-money favorite (of which there were few) in those days is the 3/5 favorite today. Interesting that favorites still win about 1/3 of the time. They just don't pay as much.

oddsmaven
09-29-2008, 01:26 PM
...make it harder.

Not going to affect a ton of races, but there are enough times when I have to deal with horses who have raced on different surfaces (more than in the past) and that is a headache :bang: and more of a guessing game :confused: .

JohnGalt1
09-29-2008, 09:11 PM
Easier.

Because I have learned how to interpret the information better.

And I am now (finally) passing more races than I play.

JustRalph
09-29-2008, 09:45 PM
I assume that you have made money at other tracks which would suggest that, for you anyway, Keeneland is just a harder track to handicap. The average age of the players at any particular track, IMO, is mute. Whereas, average experience level, IMO, is not mute. There are many younger, sharper minded players that couldn't turn a profit if their life depended on it.

:ThmbUp:

This brings a question to mind. How do tracks know who is playing? Demographically speaking? How does an ADW know?

Off topic I know............. just asking rhetorically

BlueShoe
09-29-2008, 10:25 PM
Much harder.Todays player has access to much more information.The solid horse that payed $10.00 forty years ago now gets you 7 and change.There was a time when the West Coast edition of the DRF did not even publish fractional times;just the final time and the running line.Those of us back then that saved the charts had a big edge because we could find pace standouts that others could not.

Backwheel
09-30-2008, 08:49 AM
Not sure whether it's harder or easier, but it can be more frustrating because of all the info that's avaialbe. You get locked into so much info and then when the race is over and your horse is still running you look at the winner and say "how did I miss that?"

:bang:

;)

jonnielu
09-30-2008, 11:56 AM
Not sure whether it's harder or easier, but it can be more frustrating because of all the info that's avaialbe. You get locked into so much info and then when the race is over and your horse is still running you look at the winner and say "how did I miss that?"

:bang:

;)

A salient point, a percentage that wins just as frequently as the favorite shows up in PP's as negative, and the positives always score higher. Today's handicapper has too mich PP info, and not enough of the info that matters.

It is harder for the handicapper to pick winners today because modern racing revolves around a much broader betting menu, the 10 horse field will usually contain 5 legitimate contenders. Today, you only get the 3 contenders of the 70's in a 6 or 7 horse field. The favorite has an additional advantage in that field.

When the handicapper moves to the exotic to compensate, he is still constantly plagued by two of the same contender that he couldn't well recognize in the 70's.

Having his computer sift through the PP's hasn't helped because it can't see the constants of horse racing in the PP's any better then he can.

Basically, the daily results show that the game has passed him by, but it is human nature to cling to the vast project that was started with half vast ideas by continuing to employ the same half vast ideas, or different ones that are still based on those half vast ideas.

jdl

DanG
09-30-2008, 01:05 PM
Also, i feel that there's a tremendous problem with tote security, but that's another discussion for another day/thread.
Many good points in this thread, but this one really stood out to me…

Original thread: Very difficult question to define with so many of us coming at the game with different approaches; but at the risk of thread drift…this is the 300lbs elephant in the room that the powers at be have yet to properly address.

Every time I speak to the integrity of the game a close friend reminds me that a child hacked into the deepest levels of our Pentagon’s security. If we think our antiquated tote system held together by duct tape is bullet proof we are borderline delusional imo.

Lock the tote in an absolute fashion as the bell goes and let the best man / women or horse line up to cash.

To the original question I do believe the game is clearly harder regarding the sophistication of the pools on a whole. Having said that; it’s offset to some degree because of increased access to clean data (HDW), signals (sometimes :bang: ), rebates, racing software and handicapping forums except when some jerk from Tampa is making an ass of himself :blush:etc…

Did we ever dream 30 years ago we could download virtually every track, pick our poison and have an almost endless menu of exotic wagers? When we say “harder” we sometimes must define what pool; the win pool is clearly very efficient (long term) just as our most complicated wagers often have a large (good) variance.

Imriledup
09-30-2008, 01:15 PM
Many good points in this thread, but this one really stood out to me…

Original thread: Very difficult question to define with so many of us coming at the game with different approaches; but at the risk of thread drift…this is the 300lbs elephant in the room that the powers at be have yet to properly address.

Every time I speak to the integrity of the game a close friend reminds me that a child hacked into the deepest levels of our Pentagon’s security. If we think our antiquated tote system held together by duct tape is bullet proof we are borderline delusional imo.

Lock the tote in an absolute fashion as the bell goes and let the best man / women or horse line up to cash.

To the original question I do believe the game is clearly harder regarding the sophistication of the pools on a whole. Having said that; it’s offset to some degree because of increased access to clean data (HDW), signals (sometimes :bang: ), rebates, racing software and handicapping forums except when some jerk from Tampa is making an ass of himself :blush:etc…

Did we ever dream 30 years ago we could download virtually every track, pick our poison and have an almost endless menu of exotic wagers? When we say “harder” we sometimes must define what pool; the win pool is clearly very efficient (long term) just as our most complicated wagers often have a large (good) variance.

Good points about the children hacking into the pentagon. There are incredible hackers out there who probably think that getting into the horse racing pools are childs play. We only caught the drexel guys because the horse who won the classic was 45-1 and they just made a mistake in betting tickets that were too tight, but geez, no one is looking into this stuff, i'm alarmed.

I think whoever is hacking now is doing it really well and is really concious to not slay the golden goose. They just take a little smidge at a time.

onefast99
09-30-2008, 05:00 PM
Good points about the children hacking into the pentagon. There are incredible hackers out there who probably think that getting into the horse racing pools are childs play. We only caught the drexel guys because the horse who won the classic was 45-1 and they just made a mistake in betting tickets that were too tight, but geez, no one is looking into this stuff, i'm alarmed.

I think whoever is hacking now is doing it really well and is really concious to not slay the golden goose. They just take a little smidge at a time.
You would think with the millions bet each day someone would set up some sort of a firewall to prevent anyone from getting into the system. Maybe its time to watch the movie the Sting again, lot to be learned there!

Tom Barrister
09-30-2008, 05:41 PM
It's actually easier now than it was a couple of years ago, although it certainly isn't easy.

dav4463
10-01-2008, 12:31 AM
It's easy! I had a $93 winner at Philly today......like taking candy from a baby! :D

rufus999
10-01-2008, 01:11 AM
What's your reasoning for the 10 year experience minimum?

rufus:9::9::9:

p.s. I don't qualify for other reasons.:cool:

jjtuttle131
10-01-2008, 03:51 AM
I'm of the belief that (demographically speaking); the proverbial $2.00 bettor is still KING!!! Primarily due to the FACT that the "average age demographic" hasn't truly gotten much smaller since my youth. When I was 18 (and I'm rapidly approaching 39), there were still mainly "old men" patrolling most grandstands, as there still are, today. It's a bit better now, but not by much. But the real answer to this question: TECHNOLOGY! The Internet and all of its capabilities; allows for all of us to decipher and disseminate information much more accurately, now.

Signed,
Joseph J Tuttle

Pell Mell
10-01-2008, 10:13 AM
Back 50-60 yrs. ago it was much easier to pick winners AND make money. In the days before winter racing, Sunday racing and exotic bets we concentrated on 1 track at a time, whichever was running. I was at the track every day and knew who was who. I knew every jockey and trainer and who did what for who. We would spend hours poring over each race and took the smallest details into consideration. At that time I wished for more betting opportunities not realizing the pitfalls of unlimited action.

I guess back then we knew an awful lot about everything, but today, we know a little bit about everything, but not much of anything.

Imriledup
10-01-2008, 10:22 AM
What's your reasoning for the 10 year experience minimum?

rufus:9::9::9:

p.s. I don't qualify for other reasons.:cool:

I just picked a number. I guess theoretically someone with 8 years experience can say what their difference between 2000 and 2008 is and how the game has treated them over the past 8 years. I just figured 10 was a nice round number.

Imriledup
10-01-2008, 10:25 AM
You would think with the millions bet each day someone would set up some sort of a firewall to prevent anyone from getting into the system. Maybe its time to watch the movie the Sting again, lot to be learned there!

But, herein lies the rub. The people who are responsible for setting UP those firewalls don't really have any incentive to do such a thing only because each dollar wagered is equal to the next dollar in their eyes. They don't care who wins, they get the same exact amount. We care who wins because we're not the ones who are hacking into the tote or finding ways to place bets after the start, but to them, the more money the merrier, they could care less who's the owner of that money.