Advice on direction for a new handicapper?

[Lateralus]

Well I would not exactly say I'm "new". I've been playing recreationally for years, but very seldom. I'd really like to get into it for real now.

I'd like advice on whether to stick with my current plan or not. Currently, I'm planning to (already started really) dust off all my old handicapping books by Quinn, Mitchell, Glendon Jones, Brohamer, Davidowitz, Scott etc from the late 80's / early 90's and buy the most recent versions of these books for any that have been updated. As well as purchase the latest books I don't have which are quite a few obviously. Then I'm planning to handicap the good old fashioned way, with a form and pen and pencil and calculator until I feel like it's all second nature, BEFORE jumping into computerized handicapping. I figure if I do this, I'll have a real fundamental understanding of what the computer is spitting out. Conversely, I could still read all the books but jump immediately into computerized handicapping and learn / practice that way. Paper and pencil might leave me understanding a lot more at a fundamental level, but starting out with software and all the books, I'd still understand what everything meant and how to use it I assume. Is it worth the extra time to get a super solid grasp on everything mechanically with paper and pencil first though? Or would that just be a waste of time which could be better spent reading the books and putting the massive amount of paper and pencil learning time exclusively into the software?

Lastly, any advice on what software might be most appropriate for the new handicapper? I've read about HSH, HTR, RDSS, Jcapper, HorSense, Black Magic, etc. Eventually I'm sure I'll try all of these out and work with the program or programs that I like best. I watched the Black Magic DVD and that in particular looks pretty spectacular to me. It looks so clean and refined, like an application from a large company really. Plus Michael Pizolla includes an ungodly amount of DVD instruction with it (perhaps another reason to not worry about mastery of paper and pencil handicapping first?) Whether or not it *looks* better though is less important to me than what program I might best be using as a beginner if it's something other than Black Magic.

Any and all advice appreciated! :)

Doug aka Lateralus

[Lateralus]

Another thing I should mention with regard to my plan to learn everything on paper until it's second nature: I'm planning to include POPS & TIPS handicapping in my overall approach. This was a method I bought back when it first came out which I loved, it just took WAY too bloody long. I did buy the TIPS software just last week because I believe it's something I can quickly add to my repertoire, however all advice seems to point to the fact that to really use it effectively, one NEEDS to learn pencil & paper POPS & TIPS and read / practice with the new manuals and TIPS report to really be able to get even close to the full potential out of the software. That being the case, I suppose if I must commit to doing a lot of TIPS paper & pencil handicapping anyway perhaps I should just take it all the way and practice everything in the books the old fashioned way as well. Perhaps tedious in the modern age of handicapping, but I don't mind; I enjoy it quite a bit actually. Although eventually I'm sure I'll enjoy software handicapping far more.

[kenwoodallpromos]

The book and I believe this excerpt are now public domain:
PITTSBURG PHIL:


A good jockey, a good horse, a good bet.
A poor jockey, a good horse, a moderate bet.
A good horse, a moderate jockey, a moderate bet.
A man who plays the races successfully must have opinions of his own and the strength to stick to them no matter what he hears.
Successful handicappers know every detail in regard to the horses upon which they are intending to place their money.
The minute that a man loses his balance on the race track he is like a horse that is trying to run away.
A man cannot divide his attention at the track between horses and women.
All consistently successful players of horses are men of temperate habits in life.
The racing man should arise in the morning cool and clear headed and should then take up the problem of the day.
Some horses will run good races over certain tracks, while in the same company under similar conditions on other tracks they will run very disappointingly. Study the likes and dislikes of a horse in regard to tracks.
If there are two or three very fast horses in a race one or two of them will quit before the end of the journey. Hence look out for your intelligent jockey.
Many killings are attempted but few are accomplished.
In handicaps the top weights are at a disadvantage always unless they are very high class horses.
There are few trainers who can send a horse to the post the first time out in perfect condition.
One race for a horse is equal to two or three private trials.
Horses are the same as human beings where condition is the test of superiority.
Winners repeat frequently while the defeated are apt to be defeated almost continuously.
The majority of horses will go further over the turf than they will over the dirt course. Mud runners are usually good on the turf.
Time enters into the argument under certain conditions, but if depended entirely for a deduction it will be found wanting.
The ability to tell whether a horse is at its best before a race is acquired only after years of the closest kind of study.
Special knowledge is not a talent. A man must acquire it by hard work.
A horse that frets is a very dangerous betting proposition.
The majority of the riders and horses are game and will fight for victory no matter where they are placed.
Some jockeys excel on heavy tracks.
A good mud rider will frequently bring a bad horse home.
You cannot be a successful horse player if you are going to get the worst of the price all the time.
The basis of all speculation is the amount of profit to be obtained on an investment.
It is not always the heaviest commission that is collected. The weight of the commission does not make a horse win. A poor man's horse and his $10 speak as loudly as a $10,000 commission from a millionaire. It is the horse that must be considered.
The clocker is something like the scout in the army.
Honest horses, ridden by honest boys, are sometimes beaten by honest trainers. Instructions are given to the riders which mean sure defeat when intended to be for the best.
The resistance of the wind is very great in a horse race and it is correspondingly great when acting as a propeller. Wind and atmosphere have considerable effect on horses that are troubled in their respiratory organs.
Class in a horse is the ability possessed by it to carry its stipulated stake weight, take the track and go the distance that nature intended that it should go.
I figure that two-year-olds can give considerably more weight away to horses in their class, than can horses in the older division excepting in isolated areas.
There is enough natural inconsistency in horse racing without having it forced upon the public by unscrupulous men, yet there is not one-tenth of one per cent, as much crookedness on the turf as it is given credit for.
A horse that is not contented in his stable cannot take on flesh and be happy.
Every horse I ever owned improved after I had him long enough to study his disposition.
A horse expects to race if he is a thoroughbred, just the same as a game chicken is anxious to fight.
When you feel yourself getting out of form then take a rest and freshen up.
What is frequently right in form is wrong in condition. If a horse is not in good condition he might as well be in the stable.
Look for improvement of mares in the fall of the year. They train better and are more consistent.
There are mud riders as well as mud runners in the racing world.
A jockey should not be overloaded with instructions.
It is not bad speculation to pick out two or three sure looking bets and parlay a small amount.
Cut your bets when in a losing streak and increase them when running in a spasm of good luck.
Double your wagers when you have the bookmakers' money in hand.
Condition has more to do with a horse winning or losing a race than the weight it carries.
A horse in poor condition cannot beat one of his own class.
A high class horse could not win a race with a feather on his back if he is not in condition.
Watch all the horses racing closely. You may see something that will be of benefit later on.
It is as well to play horses that are in winning form. A horse in winning condition generally repeats or runs into the money.
Different tracks cause decided changes in form frequently. Study horses' whims and fancies for certain tracks and you will see a good "lay" or a good "play." But a high class horse will do his best on any track.
The less one thinks of crookedness and trickery in racing the more successful will be his handicapping.
Look for defect in your own calculating rather than cheating of others.
Learn to finance your money to advantage.
Know when to put a good bet down and when not to.
___________________
Quotations from the
'Racing Maxims and Methods of "Pittsburgh Phil" ' Copyright 1908
by Edward W. Cole, Turf Editor of the New York Evening Telegram.

[JBmadera]

I would add Beyer, Crist (esp Exotic Betting) and Wilson (psy of thoroughbred handicapping) to your reading list.

I use HTR. After many, many years of using the DRF and pen and paper I didn't think I would be able to make the switch to software but now I would be totally lost without Robot! Since the days/times when I can play the races change all the time I love being able to have a single source and format for my handicapping information regardless of which tracks I am playing. I know that lot's of guys on this forum use the other programs and have a lot of success with them.

Lastly, I would watch LOTS of races. Between all the cable shows, plus the internet, replays are available for virtually every race.

best of luck,

jb

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Always think VALUE. Picking winners is not the answer to making money (except the isolated few). Think of every bet as if you are in a grocery store and the price that you are taking on a horse should be in comparison with a product for sale. This attitude will force discipline to wait for and wager only on the situations where you are getting the best of the prices... as a rule never take the worst of the percentages.

The problem for most handicappers (including myself), is that during losing streaks the tendency is their to try to cash a winner instead of sticking to the value plan...picking a winner tends to satisfy our depleted bankroll but it is like putting a bandaid on a gapping wound. Stick to the value/selectivity plan 100% of the time (otherwise you have no plan).

Dealing with losing streaks properly is one of the greatest edges a horseplayer can have. I have had the priviledge of seeing real 'pros' in New York who have at times been bogged down in real series losing periods only to rebound and gain all their losses and back into the profit area. And some of these guys barely has their confidence shaken...amazing!

[fmolf]

Well I would not exactly say I'm "new". I've been playing recreationally for years, but very seldom. I'd really like to get into it for real now.

I'd like advice on whether to stick with my current plan or not. Currently, I'm planning to (already started really) dust off all my old handicapping books by Quinn, Mitchell, Glendon Jones, Brohamer, Davidowitz, Scott etc from the late 80's / early 90's and buy the most recent versions of these books for any that have been updated. As well as purchase the latest books I don't have which are quite a few obviously. Then I'm planning to handicap the good old fashioned way, with a form and pen and pencil and calculator until I feel like it's all second nature, BEFORE jumping into computerized handicapping. I figure if I do this, I'll have a real fundamental understanding of what the computer is spitting out. Conversely, I could still read all the books but jump immediately into computerized handicapping and learn / practice that way. Paper and pencil might leave me understanding a lot more at a fundamental level, but starting out with software and all the books, I'd still understand what everything meant and how to use it I assume. Is it worth the extra time to get a super solid grasp on everything mechanically with paper and pencil first though? Or would that just be a waste of time which could be better spent reading the books and putting the massive amount of paper and pencil learning time exclusively into the software?

Lastly, any advice on what software might be most appropriate for the new handicapper? I've read about HSH, HTR, RDSS, Jcapper, HorSense, Black Magic, etc. Eventually I'm sure I'll try all of these out and work with the program or programs that I like best. I watched the Black Magic DVD and that in particular looks pretty spectacular to me. It looks so clean and refined, like an application from a large company really. Plus Michael Pizolla includes an ungodly amount of DVD instruction with it (perhaps another reason to not worry about mastery of paper and pencil handicapping first?) Whether or not it *looks* better though is less important to me than what program I might best be using as a beginner if it's something other than Black Magic.

Any and all advice appreciated! :)

Doug aka Lateralus
picking winners is just as important as getting value!...having one without the other is still a losing proposition....the harder part i believe is determining just what value is!i am a recreational/serious handicapper with a family(3 in college)wife and full time + job i do make an odds line but i am not sure if the %'s i assign each horse are accurate...i like to handicap the old fashioned way using bris ultimate with comments....even though i use the computer to get these i do not use it to handicap...good luck with your software to me the fun is using my brain to choose the horses i will figure out the odds line making too.. when i have more time to make an analytical study

[DanG]

This won’t be popular, but I would seriously give all your handicapping books away and / or sell them on EBay. (Except those that stress wagering; I.e. Cramer) I would get an HDW subscription (HTR is my choice as JB said, but all their clients seem to be excellent)

I would study some popular day trading works, game theory in poker and all the risk / reward / probability studies I could find.

Long story short; I would travel a unique path in a game where so many march in step. You actually have an advantage in some respects in that you don’t carry the years of wagering scars and the time honored racing theory that is ingrained in so many. You have a clean slate and it might pay-off to start without the foundation most of your competition bets from.

Best of luck Doug!

[HUSKER55]

DAN, that is a very valid point. There is an art to wagering that is just as important as determining the winner.

[markgoldie]

Hey Doug. You'll get a lot of responses on this thread because there's something about gamblers and egomania that seem to go hand in hand. LOL.

On the positive side, we as a group, tend to hold nothing much back. We'll tell you what we know free of charge.

So, for my two cents: This may sound a bit crazy, but I think the difference between winning players and losing players has a whole lot less to do with the sophistication of the information they are using and a whole lot more to do with their own mental makeup.

To put it as concisely as I can, you have to learn to lose before you can hope to learn how to win. Why? Well, lots of posters here and lots of books will tell you that the only way to win is to bet for value. Another way of saying the same thing is that you need to look for overlays. Clearly this is true and doesn't deserve the long, drawn-out explanation that beginners' books will give you.

But here's what they DON'T tell you: Playing consistently for value means that you will have to consistently make wagers on propositions that you really and truly feel will most likely lose. THAT'S what's tough to learn and to do because it is completely counterintuitive. However, (and here's the good part) since it is so very difficult, it is the single greatest error made by the general wagering public. Furthermore, it is one of the two biggest wagering anomalies that create consistent market inefficiencies which may be exploited for ongoing profit. (The other is the public's inability to cover a representative sample of possibilities in complex wagering gimmicks.)

Now. Since you will have to make wagers that you expect to lose, you must realize going in that you will sustain losing streaks far longer than the chalk player who restricts his wagers to the most likely outcome at all times. So you will lose lots more than the average bettor, even though you are probably (and hopefully) a superior handicapper to the average.

Okay. So you need a bigger bankroll, etc., etc. And you must expect to lose, blah, blah, blah. All easy enough to say. But only certain types of personalities can carry it off. I truly believe that. Why? Because the white-knuckle rooters getting the endorphin blast every time their money is at risk simply don't have a chance to pull the long-term thing off. They'll never be able to bet to lose.

As for HOW to find value? Well, this post isn't meant to be a technical paper. However, here's a real shorthand way which also, I think, captures the principle. Ask yourself how many times you have made a larger-than-normal wager on a heavy favorite, trying to recoup earlier losses. When the horse loses, you say "I KNEW IT!" This was a sucker bet! A drop-down claimer at the wrong distance. Or off a 28-day layoff without the usual workout. Or high final figs without fast pace numbers. Whatever.

Well, here's a place to start. Start by betting against these scenarios rather than on them. Use every trap you've ever walked into as a starting point for value betting.

Good luck. Let us know how you're making out. Mark

[shoelessjoe]

1) Read Calibration Handicapping by Jim Lehane and Ray Taulbot's stuff

2)Get yourself a good set of figures preferably CJ'S if he is taking on new people.

3)Racing Form

4)red pen

5)stick to 1 track and know your circuit

[fmolf]

Hey Doug. You'll get a lot of responses on this thread because there's something about gamblers and egomania that seem to go hand in hand. LOL.

On the positive side, we as a group, tend to hold nothing much back. We'll tell you what we know free of charge.

So, for my two cents: This may sound a bit crazy, but I think the difference between winning players and losing players has a whole lot less to do with the sophistication of the information they are using and a whole lot more to do with their own mental makeup.

To put it as concisely as I can, you have to learn to lose before you can hope to learn how to win. Why? Well, lots of posters here and lots of books will tell you that the only way to win is to bet for value. Another way of saying the same thing is that you need to look for overlays. Clearly this is true and doesn't deserve the long, drawn-out explanation that beginners' books will give you.

But here's what they DON'T tell you: Playing consistently for value means that you will have to consistently make wagers on propositions that you really and truly feel will most likely lose. THAT'S what's tough to learn and to do because it is completely counterintuitive. However, (and here's the good part) since it is so very difficult, it is the single greatest error made by the general wagering public. Furthermore, it is one of the two biggest wagering anomalies that create consistent market inefficiencies which may be exploited for ongoing profit. (The other is the public's inability to cover a representative sample of possibilities in complex wagering gimmicks.)

Now. Since you will have to make wagers that you expect to lose, you must realize going in that you will sustain losing streaks far longer than the chalk player who restricts his wagers to the most likely outcome at all times. So you will lose lots more than the average bettor, even though you are probably (and hopefully) a superior handicapper to the average.

Okay. So you need a bigger bankroll, etc., etc. And you must expect to lose, blah, blah, blah. All easy enough to say. But only certain types of personalities can carry it off. I truly believe that. Why? Because the white-knuckle rooters getting the endorphin blast every time their money is at risk simply don't have a chance to pull the long-term thing off. They'll never be able to bet to lose.

As for HOW to find value? Well, this post isn't meant to be a technical paper. However, here's a real shorthand way which also, I think, captures the principle. Ask yourself how many times you have made a larger-than-normal wager on a heavy favorite, trying to recoup earlier losses. When the horse loses, you say "I KNEW IT!" This was a sucker bet! A drop-down claimer at the wrong distance. Or off a 28-day layoff without the usual workout. Or high final figs without fast pace numbers. Whatever.

Well, here's a place to start. Start by betting against these scenarios rather than on them. Use every trap you've ever walked into as a starting point for value betting.

Good luck. Let us know how you're making out. Markwhenever i find myself falling into arut of choosing the samre losing horses as the public i know i need to step away and take a break...absolutely spot on it is very hard to make a bet you know will only win once in five tries especially if this is not your top selection.....you have to pass the race when the favorite is solid and offers no value

[dav4463]

Keep records of every race you handicap. Study it every day. Find out where your profits come from. Play these situations when they occur again. Avoid situations where you are showing a loss.

[ranchwest]

1) Books. Sell all of them but one. Take it down to the river and throw it in. Develop your own style.

2) Paper vs. computer. Winners usually come from between the ears of the handicapper. Given that, you can win either way. Why not have the additional information available from the computer? You're still going to need to think, so why not have more to ponder?

Learn to find contenders and phonies. When you can't determine the contenders and the phonies, it's a sure pass.

Every race is its own puzzle.

[garyoz]

1) Read Calibration Handicapping by Jim Lehane and Ray Taulbot's stuff

2)Get yourself a good set of figures preferably CJ'S if he is taking on new people.

3)Racing Form

4)red pen

5)stick to 1 track and know your circuit

#5 is the best advice. Understanding trainers (& I don't mean Formulator or Bris categorical stats) is more important now than ever (for a number of reasons).

Given the takeout and shrinking pool of unsophisticated players you have to do things differently to make money. It is not about picking winners as much bet structuring and money management. Finding overlays to fill out exotics for example. I would recommend Crist's book on Exotic Betting.

I wouldn't bother with the traditioanl handicapping literature review (and I'm an academic). This isn't a Ph.D. dissertation, but about winning & making good use of your time. Those books are all MOTO and following them will get you to around an 18% loss. Better to spend your time handicapping.

Working with figures gives some idea of form cycle--also Pizzola's BLAM is mainly based on form cycle and pace. Both good ways to go.

If you want to do a lit review, I'd focus on fig handicapping. I'd suggest Len Ragozin's The Odds Must be Crazy and Carey Fotias' Blinkers Off.

Finally, I wouldn't use a red pen (#4)--they aren't allowed on Wall Street Trading Desks--bad luck--red=loss. Stick to black or blue.

[Tom]

Go down to the river and pick up a couple of books (;))
Ainslie's Complete Guide and Davidowitz's Betting Thoroughbreds.
Both are general enough to cover most aspects of the game and give you basic exposure to many windows into it. Although older books, they can be a good foundation to build on. Like RW says, develop your own style, but you need to find out what you are comfortable with. I am basically a pace handicapper, but I use class, form, trainer, to identify which horses are likely to run their A races today.

But this is the place to learn - search the archives in the Handicapping forum.

[shoelessjoe]

Well the way Wall Street has been going maybe they should switch to pencils,blue or black pen doesnt mean profits these days

[jandrus]

I would also advise you to read the psychology of the winning horseplayer by tom hagerty. I think this is one of the best books to come out in a long time.

[BadaBing]

1) Read Calibration Handicapping by Jim Lehane and Ray Taulbot's stuff

2)Get yourself a good set of figures preferably CJ'S if he is taking on new people.

3)Racing Form

4)red pen

5)stick to 1 track and know your circuit
This is the best advice I have ever heard.Although I've never read the book you mention,I sure will try in the near future.Any idea where to get one?

[Overlay]

This is the best advice I have ever heard.Although I've never read the book you mention,I sure will try in the near future.Any idea where to get one?

This was the website of the author (Jim Lehane) at one time. I don't know if it's still active as far as being able to order from it or not, although it appears to be:

http://www.free-horseracing-info.com/

I couldn't find Calibration Handicapping in stock at either Gambler's Book Club or American Turf Monthly.

[Cadillakin]

I used Ray Taulbot's, "Thoroughbred Horse Racing" as my primary learning tool.

It's a long road, 10-15 years minimum for handicapping competency. Developing good gambling habits and learning to pick your spots takes longer.

Nothing will work consistently for you until you can make a flat bet profit, so make that your primary goal.. Don't get too sidetracked with exotic gambling. Bet win only until you get a leg-up.

Learn self discipline. Without that, you're dead in the water.
Learn what you're good at and specialize.
Learn pace - raw speed, energy in reserve.
Learn form cycles.

Bet when you disagree... Pass when you agree.

[DeanT]

Then I'm planning to handicap the good old fashioned way, with a form and pen and pencil and calculator until I feel like it's all second nature, BEFORE jumping into computerized handicapping.

I'd do the opposite of that.

[Hajck Hillstrom]

Any and all advice appreciated!Lots of good information here, but, as usual, I find Dan G's perspective the most useful. Read anything you can get your hands on by Mark Cramer, as it gives you the contrarian's outlook, and not so much a method, but an approach.

Find your niche. See what fits your eye, and then exploit it. In this day and age there is no lack of action. Keep copious records as these will be the key that unlocks your success. You might realize that your exacta ROI on dirt surfaces at 6.5 furlongs in claiming events more than doubles any other racing venue, so you can now focus on a strength.

The game can be profitable if you are disciplined, patient, and allow your greed to merely simmer on the back burner.

There is much to overcome in the game, as the take alone will destroy the average player, but it is the perfect game for the analytical mind.

I have been on a semi-hiatus from the wagering end of the sport for 7 months now, in that time wagering only on the Triple Crown races and HANA's weekly pool party, and I really miss the hunt, not to mention the income. Analyzing a race on paper is good practice, and essential in developing your methodology, but there is nothing like cashing a 5 figure Pik4 or Superfecta rewarding your efforts.

Finally, remember this..... An average handicapper with strong money management skills will always be more successful than a great handicapper with average money management skills. :ThmbUp:

Join HANA and have a vested interest in the sport.

[fmolf]

i am only a recreational handicapper at the moment but plan to get more serious when the children get out of college......i have found that basics still work and have worked picking winners since racing started...when to bet and when not to bet is what separated the men from the boys..i do not bet anything more complicated than exactas and maybe a pick three but i prefer to stick with the vertical bets .....

[raybo]

Hey Doug. You'll get a lot of responses on this thread because there's something about gamblers and egomania that seem to go hand in hand. LOL.

On the positive side, we as a group, tend to hold nothing much back. We'll tell you what we know free of charge.

So, for my two cents: This may sound a bit crazy, but I think the difference between winning players and losing players has a whole lot less to do with the sophistication of the information they are using and a whole lot more to do with their own mental makeup.

To put it as concisely as I can, you have to learn to lose before you can hope to learn how to win. Why? Well, lots of posters here and lots of books will tell you that the only way to win is to bet for value. Another way of saying the same thing is that you need to look for overlays. Clearly this is true and doesn't deserve the long, drawn-out explanation that beginners' books will give you.

But here's what they DON'T tell you: Playing consistently for value means that you will have to consistently make wagers on propositions that you really and truly feel will most likely lose. THAT'S what's tough to learn and to do because it is completely counterintuitive. However, (and here's the good part) since it is so very difficult, it is the single greatest error made by the general wagering public. Furthermore, it is one of the two biggest wagering anomalies that create consistent market inefficiencies which may be exploited for ongoing profit. (The other is the public's inability to cover a representative sample of possibilities in complex wagering gimmicks.)

Now. Since you will have to make wagers that you expect to lose, you must realize going in that you will sustain losing streaks far longer than the chalk player who restricts his wagers to the most likely outcome at all times. So you will lose lots more than the average bettor, even though you are probably (and hopefully) a superior handicapper to the average.

Okay. So you need a bigger bankroll, etc., etc. And you must expect to lose, blah, blah, blah. All easy enough to say. But only certain types of personalities can carry it off. I truly believe that. Why? Because the white-knuckle rooters getting the endorphin blast every time their money is at risk simply don't have a chance to pull the long-term thing off. They'll never be able to bet to lose.

As for HOW to find value? Well, this post isn't meant to be a technical paper. However, here's a real shorthand way which also, I think, captures the principle. Ask yourself how many times you have made a larger-than-normal wager on a heavy favorite, trying to recoup earlier losses. When the horse loses, you say "I KNEW IT!" This was a sucker bet! A drop-down claimer at the wrong distance. Or off a 28-day layoff without the usual workout. Or high final figs without fast pace numbers. Whatever.

Well, here's a place to start. Start by betting against these scenarios rather than on them. Use every trap you've ever walked into as a starting point for value betting.

Good luck. Let us know how you're making out. Mark

Great stuff here!!

Even a great win bettor loses more than he wins. Value is just as important for him as for a less accomplished handicapper.

Your mention of the public's inability to cover a representative sample of possibilities in the gimmicks is the advantage that I exploit more than any other.

The inability of bettors to handle losing is , as you stated, one of the most important differences between successful players and unsuccessful ones, no matter their handicapping prowess.

IMO, the best way to win at this game is to forget about WPS, exactas, quinellas and daily doubles and concentrate on the picks, tris, or supers or a combination of them. Sure you'll lose a bunch and it will drag on you some but if you can keep yourself in a positive mindframe and have faith in your skills "it will all come out in the wash".

As a footnote, I lose 92% of my wagers. I know that going in and that knowledge keeps me from getting discouraged when long losing streaks happen. I know it will turn around soon enough. I've not gone broke yet.

[Lateralus]

Hope everyone had a great Memorial Day Weekend! :)

WOW guys (and gals if any posted, I know there are a few here), thank you all so much for taking the time to post so much useful advice. It is GREATLY appreciated. I will find great use for much of it I am sure.

To the several posts that recommended I throw all my books away: I certainly understand where you're coming from with that advice, but let me clarify a bit. I'm not planning on going through all my books and learning everything in them and then simply stopping there. To me they are just a stepping stone to a good foundation of understanding of the overall handicapping process with regard to speed, pace, form, class etc. and what it all truly means. At some point after this learning process I am sure I would begin to develop my own perspective on it all, and at that time, start developing my own unique methodology and approach. I have no plans to ultimately end up taking any sort of purely mechanical approach to this game.

The books I have are as follows. Many of them have updated versions which I plan on purchasing, as well as adding many books I don't have, both new and old, to the list.

Recreational Handicapping by James Quinn. This was the first book I bought on the subject clear back in 1993. I absolutely love this book still and would loan it to a friend if they ever asked me "how to begin". Not to say "here, read this, do what it says and you'll be rich" -- remember, there are those who don't even know how to read a form and they NEED an introduction to the absolute basics. This is a great intro for someone with zero exposure to racing IMO.

Betting Thoroughbreds by Steve Davidowitz. I also felt like I got a lot out of this book. Haven't read it for over 10 years, plan to get the new edition.

Winning Thoroughbred Strategies by Dick Mitchell.

Commonsense Handicapping by Dick Mitchell. What I liked most about this book was the instruction in fractional Kelly wagering based on a fair odds line.

Modern Pace Handicapping by Tom Brohamer. Thought this was great and I'm sure to this day it would help a computer handicapper have a much more meaningful understanding of the pace numbers the computer spits out, allowing for much more competent pace analysis

Horse Racing Logic by Glendon Jones. Loved this book but don't remember much since I last read it over 12 years ago.

Investing at the Racetrack by William L. Scott. Don't remember too much about this one either, though I seem to recall he was the author who introduced the concept of ability time? Seemed useful overall when added to a much broader picture.

The Best of Thoroughbred Handicapping by James Quinn. Was a fun read, mainly for getting ideas. Need the latest edition.

I can understand an expert handicapper advising someone to toss all of these, if the reader planned to simply follow them all verbatim as their way to riches, as a mechanical system. Used properly however, to me they represent an educational process from which to build on. A starting point only, really. With the advanced understanding of course that they represent only that: a starting point. Thumbing through them all, I can't see how they could possibly be bad for a beginner or advanced beginner to read and study on their way to the intermediate level.

[Lateralus]

Again, thank you all for the advice! :)

The most important question I have for you all at this point would have to be this, and please anyone feel free to give me your opinion on this:

What circuit would you recommend as the wisest choice for a beginner to focus on?

The common wisdom seems to be that smaller circuits are significantly easier to beat, and with a smaller bankroll, than the mega circuits such as California or New York. The common wisdom also seems to suggest that full fields are highly desirable. So apparently, I'm looking for a smaller circuit, with full fields and preferably year-round racing. Which circuit do YOU recommend, and why?

Thank you in advance for your advice! :ThmbUp:

Doug

[fmolf]

Again, thank you all for the advice! :)

The most important question I have for you all at this point would have to be this, and please anyone feel free to give me your opinion on this:

What circuit would you recommend as the wisest choice for a beginner to focus on?

The common wisdom seems to be that smaller circuits are significantly easier to beat, and with a smaller bankroll, than the mega circuits such as California or New York. The common wisdom also seems to suggest that full fields are highly desirable. So apparently, I'm looking for a smaller circuit, with full fields and preferably year-round racing. Which circuit do YOU recommend, and why?

Thank you in advance for your advice! :ThmbUp:

Dougif you like full fields then indiana downs or prairie meadows offers good racing....tampa bay would have been perfect they are closed now....oaklawn alsogood for what you are looking for.... i enjoy wagering on finger lakes and lone star park myself....as well as all nyra tracks because i grew up playing those

[rusrious]

Has to be in the top 5 of ALL posts on this forum,
Very nice, This is a list that should be read before even loggin into your account, or stepping one foot into the OTB,JMO..

The book and I believe this excerpt are now public domain:
PITTSBURG PHIL:


A good jockey, a good horse, a good bet.
A poor jockey, a good horse, a moderate bet.
A good horse, a moderate jockey, a moderate bet.
A man who plays the races successfully must have opinions of his own and the strength to stick to them no matter what he hears.
Successful handicappers know every detail in regard to the horses upon which they are intending to place their money.
The minute that a man loses his balance on the race track he is like a horse that is trying to run away.
A man cannot divide his attention at the track between horses and women.
All consistently successful players of horses are men of temperate habits in life.
The racing man should arise in the morning cool and clear headed and should then take up the problem of the day.
Some horses will run good races over certain tracks, while in the same company under similar conditions on other tracks they will run very disappointingly. Study the likes and dislikes of a horse in regard to tracks.
If there are two or three very fast horses in a race one or two of them will quit before the end of the journey. Hence look out for your intelligent jockey.
Many killings are attempted but few are accomplished.
In handicaps the top weights are at a disadvantage always unless they are very high class horses.
There are few trainers who can send a horse to the post the first time out in perfect condition.
One race for a horse is equal to two or three private trials.
Horses are the same as human beings where condition is the test of superiority.
Winners repeat frequently while the defeated are apt to be defeated almost continuously.
The majority of horses will go further over the turf than they will over the dirt course. Mud runners are usually good on the turf.
Time enters into the argument under certain conditions, but if depended entirely for a deduction it will be found wanting.
The ability to tell whether a horse is at its best before a race is acquired only after years of the closest kind of study.
Special knowledge is not a talent. A man must acquire it by hard work.
A horse that frets is a very dangerous betting proposition.
The majority of the riders and horses are game and will fight for victory no matter where they are placed.
Some jockeys excel on heavy tracks.
A good mud rider will frequently bring a bad horse home.
You cannot be a successful horse player if you are going to get the worst of the price all the time.
The basis of all speculation is the amount of profit to be obtained on an investment.
It is not always the heaviest commission that is collected. The weight of the commission does not make a horse win. A poor man's horse and his $10 speak as loudly as a $10,000 commission from a millionaire. It is the horse that must be considered.
The clocker is something like the scout in the army.
Honest horses, ridden by honest boys, are sometimes beaten by honest trainers. Instructions are given to the riders which mean sure defeat when intended to be for the best.
The resistance of the wind is very great in a horse race and it is correspondingly great when acting as a propeller. Wind and atmosphere have considerable effect on horses that are troubled in their respiratory organs.
Class in a horse is the ability possessed by it to carry its stipulated stake weight, take the track and go the distance that nature intended that it should go.
I figure that two-year-olds can give considerably more weight away to horses in their class, than can horses in the older division excepting in isolated areas.
There is enough natural inconsistency in horse racing without having it forced upon the public by unscrupulous men, yet there is not one-tenth of one per cent, as much crookedness on the turf as it is given credit for.
A horse that is not contented in his stable cannot take on flesh and be happy.
Every horse I ever owned improved after I had him long enough to study his disposition.
A horse expects to race if he is a thoroughbred, just the same as a game chicken is anxious to fight.
When you feel yourself getting out of form then take a rest and freshen up.
What is frequently right in form is wrong in condition. If a horse is not in good condition he might as well be in the stable.
Look for improvement of mares in the fall of the year. They train better and are more consistent.
There are mud riders as well as mud runners in the racing world.
A jockey should not be overloaded with instructions.
It is not bad speculation to pick out two or three sure looking bets and parlay a small amount.
Cut your bets when in a losing streak and increase them when running in a spasm of good luck.
Double your wagers when you have the bookmakers' money in hand.
Condition has more to do with a horse winning or losing a race than the weight it carries.
A horse in poor condition cannot beat one of his own class.
A high class horse could not win a race with a feather on his back if he is not in condition.
Watch all the horses racing closely. You may see something that will be of benefit later on.
It is as well to play horses that are in winning form. A horse in winning condition generally repeats or runs into the money.
Different tracks cause decided changes in form frequently. Study horses' whims and fancies for certain tracks and you will see a good "lay" or a good "play." But a high class horse will do his best on any track.
The less one thinks of crookedness and trickery in racing the more successful will be his handicapping.
Look for defect in your own calculating rather than cheating of others.
Learn to finance your money to advantage.
Know when to put a good bet down and when not to.
___________________
Quotations from the
'Racing Maxims and Methods of "Pittsburgh Phil" ' Copyright 1908
by Edward W. Cole, Turf Editor of the New York Evening Telegram.

[rusrious]

Just a few tips that work for me,

You must look for Closers,-- very important.. Always know the number of front runners and closers in the field.. Thru alot of races Ive seen, a field full of frontrunners MUST LIKELY wear themselves out by the last 1/4, because their MO is to take the lead, so altimatly, they race fast and tiredsome.. A field with the lone closer, or closers, will lay back, and wait for the pack to wear out, while fighting for first, from the start of the race.. Then will make her move in the final 1/4, and mostlikely will make the money, and usually at nice odds..

I love the horse that moves 5-6 spots close to the wire, they are fighters, and are programmed to do just that..

Be aware of Distance--a horse that raced a fast mile last out, could burn a field of 7 FL runners. But also, a 1 Mile runner could have crap speed early, and drag the field..

last 4 meets-- I look for streaks, Money won, patterns in finishes, J/T %, starting barrier in the gate,..

Some horses do great when 1-2-3-4, but run like crap in 5-6-7-8-9.. Ive seen it.. Hot horses like to be hot for 3-4 races.. Usually a 3 streak

There is big money in maiden races. Great workouts is key to finding these gems.. But dont dig to much into maiden races.. Focus on fields that have a past. Your looking for sure money, and not donating to the pools.

This is JMO, but money can be made. Takes alot of reps, dicipline, and patiance.. Ive pen and papered it for 10 years. Ive done soooo many simulations with the DRF, then going to results and seeing why i lost, or why I won.. Everyday I did this.. Same race 5-6 times.. Started at the front to back, then did it again..

Train the eye to find points of intrest quickly. Im to the point that I can spot the closers and frontrunners, in a field of 10 runners, in 10 seconds or so.. Thats always my first step. But thats me, everyone is differant.. It works for me..

When you can get to the point that your hitting in the money, conistantly, you can be confident to recop your loses easily.. Your in it to Win money. Dont bet on crap odds horses, unless your playing exotics of course..

Im a Place better. I like the 2 chances to make the money.. If I lose, I look for a higher odds payout for my next bet, and double my bet from last lose.. But you have to be confident that your horse is going to place or win, or it wouldnt be worth it, right?

Slow grind it.. Get comfortable with your betting site or track that you use to place your bets. Have a favorite hat to wear when your handicappin, seriously.. Sounds funny, but it makes you think differant sometimes.. Or a favorite chair at the Track.

Keep notes.. Every track runs differantly.. Some horses like crtain tracks, some jockeys are horrible at certain tracks. It human nature,lol.. If something pops in your brain, write it down.

Smart gamblers dont drink. Always have a clear head, when MESSIN WITH MONEY.. Enough said about that..:bang:

When you are getting positive ROI, consistantly, double your bets every 10 days, and watch what WILL happen with your bankroll..

BOTTOM LINE, BE CONSISTANT, START EVERY RACE THE SAME, AND BE SMART

[acorn54]

i guess i'll put in my two cents
keep it simple. just find a horseplayer you know makes a positive r.o.i at betting the horses and ask him for advice. there are plenty of losers that will give you advice and is simply the case of the blind leading the blind off a cliff.
i won't give you any advice on handicapping because i lose at this game. the past two years i have come close losing only 2 percent of my money but it's still a loss. if i put as much time studying the law as i have studying the horses the past 30 years i'd be on the supreme court. but i must say handicapping is interesting and a good time passer and you meet alot of people with the capacity to enjoy life.

[proximity]

Horse Racing Logic by Glendon Jones. Loved this book but don't remember much since I last read it over 12 years ago.
.


i wouldn't throw away this little book. keep it and periodically review those intangibles mr jones talks about in the final chapter the inner struggle.

i would argue that to reach your goals in betting that you need a passing grade in each of these factors. one weak link can ruin your whole chain.

and fwiw, i also agree with garyoz about not using a red pen. i seem to do much better when marking my pps with a green or blue flair pen. but of course if red is working for you.....

[raybo]

Pittsburgh Phil is the only horse racing author I've ever read from cover to cover, many years ago. I still follow many of his maxims today.

[turfbar]

My advice on all this advice is take Dan G's advice.

Turfbar

[acorn54]

This won’t be popular, but I would seriously give all your handicapping books away and / or sell them on EBay. (Except those that stress wagering; I.e. Cramer) I would get an HDW subscription (HTR is my choice as JB said, but all their clients seem to be excellent)

I would study some popular day trading works, game theory in poker and all the risk / reward / probability studies I could find.

Long story short; I would travel a unique path in a game where so many march in step. You actually have an advantage in some respects in that you don’t carry the years of wagering scars and the time honored racing theory that is ingrained in so many. You have a clean slate and it might pay-off to start without the foundation most of your competition bets from.

Best of luck Doug!


i would say to follow doug's advice also if you can't find a winning horseplayer to learn from. doug's premise is that horsebetting is basically a competition among bettors and if you follow the popular beliefs you won't beat the take out.

[fmolf]

i would say to follow doug's advice also if you can't find a winning horseplayer to learn from. doug's premise is that horsebetting is basically a competition among bettors and if you follow the popular beliefs you won't beat the take out.
this is precisely why you have to pick your spots and bet when you have the contrarian view.....if you are gonna bet the same horses the crowd does then you will lose .....betting overlays the crowd ignores or underbets is the one and only way to make money....this goes for straight bets and exotics(vertical & horizontal)otherwise the takeout grinds you down

[Lateralus]

I would study some popular day trading works, game theory in poker and all the risk / reward / probability studies I could find.

Dan your advice seemed to be the most popular and recommended in this thread. I have actually read many of the poker books out there (Theory of Poker by Sklansky and Malmuth for one) and several day trading books as well (Elder is my favorite). I think that's all extremely useful, to be sure.

However, so far my plan is to start out as a win bettor ONLY, constructing a fair odds line and betting based on that odds line. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed to me as if Dick Mitchell pretty much covered everything a win bettor with a fair odds line needs to do with regard to optimal betting, formulas and all. He discussed the various popular methods and proceeded to show that fractional Kelly wagering was truly optimal. So, I set up a spreadsheet to calculate 5% Kelly wagers on single win bets. He had the optimal formula for dutches when there are multiple overlays as well, but I haven't managed to get that to work in my spreadsheet yet, so I just use 3.5% Kelly on both. He also covered how to calculate fair exacta odds based on a fair odds line which once I am able to MAKE an accurate odds line, I'll bet as well any combos at 50%+ overlay using conditional wagering, starting out betting only the minimum $1 per combo exacta. But that's getting ahead of myself. Got to prove I can win as a win bettor with a good oddsline first.

I guess my question is this: what information did Mitchell leave out of his books on risk vs reward, EV, probabilities, odds, mathematically optimal wagering, etc? His books are no longer current but the math looks correct to me; but, has anyone improved on his work since he wrote them? One place where I do make adjustment is overlay %. Mitchell says bet anything over 25% overlay whereas I put that mark at 40-50%. 25% overlay betting would mean one would have to have one seriously accurate odds line... 40-50% allows more room for error especially for newbies such as myself.

Ultimately, although I've got the books on poker, day trading etc. and will certainly reread what I have and then read more books as well, I just wonder what the true usefulness of them is when applied to horse racing if one already has the discipline to sit through any number of races without an overlay if that's what it takes. And I have the formulas to ensure I'm making mathematically optimal wagers when I DO have an overlay.

I appreciate the advice on HDW / HTR as well. HTR is definitely on my "must have" list. I also plan to give HSH a try, but will probably start with Black Magic since I lovethe UI and the fact that Michael P. includes something like 18 hours of DVD instruction with it.

[DanG]

I guess my question is this: what information did Mitchell leave out of his books on risk vs reward, EV, probabilities, odds, mathematically optimal wagering, etc? His books are no longer current but the math looks correct to me; but, has anyone improved on his work since he wrote them?

Ultimately, although I've got the books on poker, day trading etc. and will certainly reread what I have and then read more books as well, I just wonder what the true usefulness of them is when applied to horse racing

I appreciate the advice on HDW / HTR as well. HTR is definitely on my "must have" list .
You sound like your well on your way to what feels right for you. It’s sad how many gamblers go through their entire life not actually representing themselves. It’s like the musician who learns only through the recordings of others and turns themselves into a very proficient Parakeet.

As far as what game theory, day trading etc can bring to your game…this will sound odd but I can’t really put it into words. It’s more of a mindset of what we are trying to accomplish. How a serial bet for instance represents the flop, turn, 4th street and river in hold em. Each turn of the card changes the pot odds in poker and the same thing applies to a P4 for example. I’m learning from a man who is adjusting with each result during his sequence with excellent results btw.

Mark Cramer’s classic works on betting, Crist’s book on exotic betting and Dave Schwartz’s package of “Horse Market Investing” can all play a role in defining a sound betting approach. You can’t go very wrong following Mitchell and what you described as your spreadsheet set-up is probably well ahead of many experienced players if they would admit it or not.

I think the thread title should be changed from "new" btw. It sounds like you’re anything but new on this block and are well on your way to being just what we need…more stiff competition. :)

Best of luck with your quest.

[Lateralus]

I think the thread title should be changed from "new" btw. It sounds like you’re anything but new on this block and are well on your way to being just what we need…more stiff competition. :)

Best of luck with your quest.

LOL - I guess I'm "new" as far as how much actual handicapping and wagering experience I have. As far as having read books go, well yes I've done plenty of that. ;) I just don't have much experience applying what I've read.

I just realized how useful the day trading books could be while I was typing this. A good point I didn't think about day trading when I asked about the usefulness of it with regard to horse racing is the fact that almost all of the books I've read (my favorite author Alexander Elder included) will tell you to trade using RULES based trading which you do not second guess yourself on nor deviate from. For example, choosing to stay in a trade and move your stop loss when your trading rules clearly require a trade to get stopped out, thinking "it might turn around." If you do that, it then it is no longer day trading and becomes gambling instead, and pretty soon your day trading account balance is zero. That same kind of discipline seems necessary to me with horse racing if one does not want an equally demolished racing bankroll.

The odds and probabilities you suggest taught in poker books do seem as well to apply to an overall thinking process that would lend itself well to handicapping. As you say, mindset: you're always thinking about true odds and probabilities which keeps you from "taking a shot" on wagers you know you either have no advantage on or no way of reasonably calculating an advantage. Or in over betting your bankroll: the poker books teach you how to always know the odds so as to avoid over betting the pot, which will in turn keep you focused on making appropriate sized wagers in racing, sports betting, etc. Certainly Mitchell and fractional Kelly wagering force you into this mode as well, but with such an important topic any and all reinforcement is a good thing. I am surprised the correlations didn't occur to me before and that I had to ask! :eek:

I will admit that I still think, when not taken as gospel, the other general handicapping books have plenty to offer as far as learning the fundamental concepts of speed, class, pace, form, etc. though. ;) I just consider them a good start, but nowhere near an end point.

Oh, and thanks for reminding me about Dave's Horse Market Investing Package. That's on my "must have list" too, (along with his software and HTR) as well as Overlay's complete package. I've got a ton to learn and absorb, that is for sure! I enjoy it a ton though so I say the more the better. :) I don't ever feel like I can learn too much.

[DanG]

The odds and probabilities you suggest taught in poker books do seem as well to apply to an overall thinking process that would lend itself well to handicapping. As you say, mindset: you're always thinking about true odds and probabilities which keeps you from "taking a shot" on wagers you know you either have no advantage on or no way of reasonably calculating an advantage. Or in over betting your bankroll: the poker books teach you how to always know the odds so as to avoid over betting the pot, which will in turn keep you focused on making appropriate sized wagers in racing, sports betting, etc.

Those are great points and you’re going to be dangerous Lateralus. We need more reckless money in the pools; not people who approach this like a financial market. ;)

PA was nice enough to recommend some trading materials / BBS to me a while back and much of what I learned that applies to our form of gambling was almost by osmosis. (I.e. I couldn’t express it as well as you just did) I didn’t pick up too many things that went directly to paper, or into algorithms, but there is no doubt I’m a better gambler after studying these other disciplines.

While HTR is my software of choice, Dave’s ‘Horse Market Investor’ was a real breakthrough for the spot plays I use. It’s just an ingenious / systematic approach to bet sizing and has a clever way of rewarding the inevitable hot streaks and somewhat limits exposure during the dry spells. For an automated betting process (with a few minor tweaks) it’s been a +- 3% rebate and has paid for itself many times over.

Thanks for your thoughts and we will be seeing you at the races.

[Lateralus]

Those are great points and you’re going to be dangerous Lateralus. We need more reckless money in the pools; not people who approach this like a financial market. ;)

I think there will always be an abundance of reckless money in parimutuel pools thankfully. :ThmbUp: :) If the powers that be would do what is necessary to truly improve the popularity of the sport, we could be flooded with additional reckless money. Wouldn't that be nice?

I've been thinking about what the poker and day trading books have to teach a lot lately since the real value of them finally occurred to me. I'm sure there will be many more things that occur to me, but here's one more. Another thing I thought about that can be learned from the poker books is this: odds wise, do you have a hand that should even be played given your position? Or that should be played given a prior raise? The poker books instruct you on how to avoid playing the wrong hand out of position for the wrong price, or staying in on what would have been a good hand save for the raise a player to your right just put in. Apply that to horses, and you have a lot of things to consider that could become second nature: "is this horse really a value bet at the right odds given the probable pace scenario of the race? Or, the odds look good, but when post position and track bias are considered, are these *really* acceptable odds given my horse will be breaking from a bad post position and likely running against the bias? Really examining my odds on ALL fronts, don't I FOLD here and just watch the race just like I would watch the play at the poker table after folding?"

You're absolutely right: poker and day trading books can REALLY get you thinking as you should at the races, or sports betting even, probably causing things to occur routinely and by second nature that otherwise would not of had those books not been studied. Fantastic advice and I'll certainly be studying my poker and day trading books (as well as buying and reading more of them) until those concepts are totally second nature to ANY type of situation in wagering of all kinds.

And don't be surprised if I start playing poker after the races. :D

[raybo]

I think there will always be an abundance of reckless money in parimutuel pools thankfully. :ThmbUp: :) If the powers that be would do what is necessary to truly improve the popularity of the sport, we could be flooded with additional reckless money. Wouldn't that be nice?

I've been thinking about what the poker and day trading books have to teach a lot lately since the real value of them finally occurred to me. I'm sure there will be many more things that occur to me, but here's one more. Another thing I thought about that can be learned from the poker books is this: odds wise, do you have a hand that should even be played given your position? Or that should be played given a prior raise? The poker books instruct you on how to avoid playing the wrong hand out of position for the wrong price, or staying in on what would have been a good hand save for the raise a player to your right just put in. Apply that to horses, and you have a lot of things to consider that could become second nature: "is this horse really a value bet at the right odds given the probable pace scenario of the race? Or, the odds look good, but when post position and track bias are considered, are these *really* acceptable odds given my horse will be breaking from a bad post position and likely running against the bias? Really examining my odds on ALL fronts, don't I FOLD here and just watch the race just like I would watch the play at the poker table after folding?"

You're absolutely right: poker and day trading books can REALLY get you thinking as you should at the races, or sports betting even, probably causing things to occur routinely and by second nature that otherwise would not of had those books not been studied. Fantastic advice and I'll certainly be studying my poker and day trading books (as well as buying and reading more of them) until those concepts are totally second nature to ANY type of situation in wagering of all kinds.

And don't be surprised if I start playing poker after the races. :D

Some good analogies here. Having studied poker and, on a more limited scale, the market, there are definitely some correlations that can be drawn.

I know one thing for sure, relating to poker, in poker there is a saying that holds firm for any type of gambling: "If you don't know who the fish is, you're it!"

If you don't know when you're making a bad bet, you're in serious trouble.

[acorn54]

[QUOTE=Lateralus]I think there will always be an abundance of reckless money in parimutuel pools thankfully. :ThmbUp: :)

i am curious how you come to this perception, is it based on anecdotal evidence such as the fellow horsebettors you personally meet.
the data certainly doesn't support your conclusion as far as i can see. quite the contrary. the parimutuel market if anything is becoming more efficient.
horses win at the probability that they go off at.
in any event i'd like you to point me to the data that supports your perception that their is an abundance of reckless money in the parimutuel pools.

[Lateralus]

i am curious how you come to this perception, is it based on anecdotal evidence such as the fellow horsebettors you personally meet.
the data certainly doesn't support your conclusion as far as i can see. quite the contrary. the parimutuel market if anything is becoming more efficient.
horses win at the probability that they go off at.
in any event i'd like you to point me to the data that supports your perception that their is an abundance of reckless money in the parimutuel pools.

the data certainly doesn't support your conclusion as far as i can see. quite the contrary.

What data are you speaking of? Is there existing data either way which shows specific changes over the past 15 years? Or any period? It's my understanding that the public has been setting accurate WIN odds for decades now.

the parimutuel market if anything is becoming more efficient. horses win at the probability that they go off at.

Yes that's true, and all of the 15 year old books I have say this as well. It's my understanding that the public has ALWAYS been good at estimating the win probabilities of horses. But if the market is becoming more efficient and the public has become BETTER at estimating true odds, when did it change? The introduction of Beyer figures into the form perhaps?

in any event i'd like you to point me to the data that supports your perception that their is an abundance of reckless money in the parimutuel pools.

Again, is there actual solid, published data either way? I wouldn't say there is too much in the way of RECKLESS money, that's probably the wrong word to use. But there is plenty of clearly unsophisticated money and always will be. We are taught that proper wagering and money management is the key to profitting at this game, and that a good handicapper with superior wagering and money management skills will do much better than an expert handicapper with poor money management skills. Most have very poor skills in this area. People continue to bet on underlays as most handicappers now, as then, are still simply "looking for the winner" so they can go cash a ticket. Certainly, far more people today compared to then know what an "overlay" is, but at the race & sports books I still mainly see people betting on obvious horses that are anything but overlays. Very few of our competition even tries to calculate fair odds let alone does it effectively. Fewer still know how to calculate a mathematically optimal wager given a certain sized bankroll. It gets much more complicated still when separate bankrolls and calculations are needed for EACH type of wager. Thankfully this is the case, because these folks are going to continue to feed the underlays which makes overlays possible in the first place. Has it gotten harder in the past 10 or 20 years? I don't know. But I still see opportunity everywhere I look.

I don't have any data to show the levels of reckless or uninformed or unsophisticated money in the pools today vs. 10 or 15 years ago. If it exists, I'd love to see it. I can tell you it absolutely exists in the exotic pools however. The exacta pool is anything BUT efficient. I can see silly money all over the exacta probables as well as plenty of juicy overlay combinations in just about every race. I haven't yet read Crist, but that's the next book I'm getting. But Quinn explains the reason for mass inefficiency in the exacta pool in a chapter of his book THE BEST OF THOROUGHBRED HANDICAPPING, first edition. The chapter is titled "Smart and Silly Money in the Exotics". Most common ways of betting the exacta involve betting too many combinations involving too many low prices horses in boxes and wheels. This is great for us, because of course, they're dumping money into already underlayed combinations. Same goes for the tri, super, daily double and pick 3 pools although improvement has certainly occurred since these wagers were introduced as Quinn admits. It's still pretty freakin bad though, in that handicappers are still routinely betting all of these exotics playing too many combinations of too many overbet favorites and other completely obvious contenders, which guarantee they're making a nice fat underlay bet into whatever exotic pool they're entering. This clearly is good for the rest of us.

[jasperson]

I like to use the contrary opinion from a good on the track handicapper. If a handicapper has strong opinion on a horse that is different from the other traditional handicappers then I give this horse a closer look especially if he has good odds. This opinion must be present at the track and that is his only duty not like Terry Wallace, John Asher, or Jason (blewitt) spelling. Somebody like Ron Nicollette. If Ron likes a horse and the odds are good I will bet him.

[MzDucat]

Having worked around the windows for 25 years I can say something my husband taught me when we first met. The same people consistantly win. The same people consistantly lose. Never to be afraid to only play one race big and dabble in a couple interesting ones. If you try to chase every race, you'll get beat up. We sometimes came and sat out 15 races before we have one worth banging hard.

Money management is the most important. I've known great handicappers who lose. But I would use their best picks in a heartbeat. And you have to evolve with the technology. If you see stuff you don't understand either learn it or walk away with your bankroll. It took us years to adjust to huge simulcast money and off shores can wreak havoc with the pools. Many a time we cancelled our bets because something freaky was going down. Only time I regretted it was Ogyians first start. He broke through the gate, took them to the quarter to catch him up. He fell on his butt when the outrider got hold of the reins. Clerks were killing tickets like mad for the bettors when they stuffed him back in the gate.

He won easily. Only time that happened at the runners. Pretty good stud too.

[PaceAdvantage]

He fell on his butt when the outrider got hold of the reins. Clerks were killing tickets like mad for the bettors when they stuffed him back in the gate.What section of the track were you working to see this unusual occurance?

I attended live racing at Aqueduct and Belmont on a daily basis for about one and a half years straight and never, ever saw a mad dash of bettors run to the windows to cancel tickets when something odd would happen just prior to a start...what you describe almost reminds me of the scene from Airplane when all the reporters would rush at once to the bank of phone booths, only to see the booths tip over...

[cmoore]

Hey Doug. You'll get a lot of responses on this thread because there's something about gamblers and egomania that seem to go hand in hand. LOL.

On the positive side, we as a group, tend to hold nothing much back. We'll tell you what we know free of charge.

So, for my two cents: This may sound a bit crazy, but I think the difference between winning players and losing players has a whole lot less to do with the sophistication of the information they are using and a whole lot more to do with their own mental makeup.

To put it as concisely as I can, you have to learn to lose before you can hope to learn how to win. Why? Well, lots of posters here and lots of books will tell you that the only way to win is to bet for value. Another way of saying the same thing is that you need to look for overlays. Clearly this is true and doesn't deserve the long, drawn-out explanation that beginners' books will give you.

But here's what they DON'T tell you: Playing consistently for value means that you will have to consistently make wagers on propositions that you really and truly feel will most likely lose. THAT'S what's tough to learn and to do because it is completely counterintuitive. However, (and here's the good part) since it is so very difficult, it is the single greatest error made by the general wagering public. Furthermore, it is one of the two biggest wagering anomalies that create consistent market inefficiencies which may be exploited for ongoing profit. (The other is the public's inability to cover a representative sample of possibilities in complex wagering gimmicks.)

Now. Since you will have to make wagers that you expect to lose, you must realize going in that you will sustain losing streaks far longer than the chalk player who restricts his wagers to the most likely outcome at all times. So you will lose lots more than the average bettor, even though you are probably (and hopefully) a superior handicapper to the average.

Okay. So you need a bigger bankroll, etc., etc. And you must expect to lose, blah, blah, blah. All easy enough to say. But only certain types of personalities can carry it off. I truly believe that. Why? Because the white-knuckle rooters getting the endorphin blast every time their money is at risk simply don't have a chance to pull the long-term thing off. They'll never be able to bet to lose.

As for HOW to find value? Well, this post isn't meant to be a technical paper. However, here's a real shorthand way which also, I think, captures the principle. Ask yourself how many times you have made a larger-than-normal wager on a heavy favorite, trying to recoup earlier losses. When the horse loses, you say "I KNEW IT!" This was a sucker bet! A drop-down claimer at the wrong distance. Or off a 28-day layoff without the usual workout. Or high final figs without fast pace numbers. Whatever.

Well, here's a place to start. Start by betting against these scenarios rather than on them. Use every trap you've ever walked into as a starting point for value betting.

Good luck. Let us know how you're making out. Mark

Great Post Mark..Best post I've read this year..Maybe ever..:ThmbUp:

[MzDucat]

Pace Advantage:

Didn't say I was on track. I worked in a clubhouse dining room a spitball away from the Oklahoma track. Bunch of lawyers, doctors and hardcore guys who took an hour or two lunch to sit with their buddies at the harness track for comic relief. We were known as a simulcast branch. But the TV's on all the tables worked and the big screen ones were right in front of us.

Ask Warren DeSantis our old GM about his buddies pushing women out of line to get or cancel a bet. They paid for the ladies tickets, thou. :D

Wasn't like Airplane at all. More like WKRP in Cincinnati.

[rokitman]

West

[thelyingthief]

Decide which method (pace, speed, class, etc.) you wish to follow and stick to it: interestingly, as you grow in ability, you will find your methodology growing more comprehensive. I don't think a player can develop a sustainable edge in this game without a well rounded method. As an example, say you're a pace analyst - which of two 21.3 E's will likely gain the lead? The classier animal, every time. Well, then what's class? Class is more easily comprehended in relation to one's needs for it, here, in the matchup, than it is defining it globally. Unless, of course, one is a class handicapper.

A lot of people advise the use of betting lines and a "value" approach. "Value" is a concept, I have found, that appeals largely to those who can determine true contenders, but lack the necessary skills/talent/tools to isolate the probable winner among them. This is not to say that you should ignore the price, either, but a race analyst must, I think, have as his prime objective, understanding the race in hand. It is completely possible that a value bettor would find 6 to 1 an attractive overlay, where in fact the animal hasn't a chance in hell against this 3/5 favorite. I have paid the price here: I learned that a "value" mindset prefigures and distorts my perception of a race before I begin to handicap it - my bias against the "chalk" would often prove a bias against the best horse, and I would find myself supplementing the favorite's winnings. Here again, some people can implement this strategy effectively, I'm sure, but you really need to know your game well enough to make that decision. I just don't think "value" is the panacea for the bettor's trouble it's cracked up to be. It is true that some kinds of races, claiming non winners, for instance, demonstrate much higher failure rates among favorites than others, and the value idea might sustain long term profits irrespective, but this is specific knowledge.

While I think that working on the acquisition of general knowledge is much more important than particular, since it provides an objectivity, I also think, detailed, independent research is indispensible, and without it, you will never obtain an edge.

Although I myself use a pace/energy based method, I would warn any prospective player against willy-nilly adopting pace or speed as their principle methods. Why? Because you are entering another man's bailiwick: pace/speed is everywhere and the profit-pool that once streamed so rich is now slowed because so many try to tap it; and though pace and speed enjoy a well deserved respect for providing objective, repeatable means to sort horses, it is not so sure they provide an edge, especially to a new comer. There are just too many outstanding players who employ this method already, and to think a tyro can compete with them is far-fetched. I use pace, supplemented by research - no one should expect to compete with me utilizing tools that I have adapted over the last 15 years to my very specific requirements. I'm very, very good at it, and while my ROI remains enviable, it is nowhere near as stellar as it was in times past. Newbies would be much better served, I really do think, acquiring knowledge less mainstream. Form and condition comes to mind, since most folks have only the sketchiest notions of these (that means money at the windows), and also since form is something quantifiable or at least definable, it can at least protest as something of a science. You ain't going to make no money if it ain't got science.

Penultimately, I think it is better to fail at the windows through discipline, than it is to succeed haphazardly.

I recall another of Pittsburgh Phil's observations to make my final point: People understand readily enough that medicine, the arts, or the sciences requires some special talent if one is to be really successful at them. But they believe that any fool can gamble on the horses without need of any talent whatsoever, and succeed.

Do you have talent? Do you have discipline? Sad to say, you're not going to get those from books.

tlt-

[jonnielu]

This won’t be popular, but I would seriously give all your handicapping books away and / or sell them on EBay. (Except those that stress wagering; I.e. Cramer) I would get an HDW subscription (HTR is my choice as JB said, but all their clients seem to be excellent)

I would study some popular day trading works, game theory in poker and all the risk / reward / probability studies I could find.

Long story short; I would travel a unique path in a game where so many march in step. You actually have an advantage in some respects in that you don’t carry the years of wagering scars and the time honored racing theory that is ingrained in so many. You have a clean slate and it might pay-off to start without the foundation most of your competition bets from.

Best of luck Doug!

There is much wisdom here.

jdl

[fmolf]

Decide which method (pace, speed, class, etc.) you wish to follow and stick to it: interestingly, as you grow in ability, you will find your methodology growing more comprehensive. I don't think a player can develop a sustainable edge in this game without a well rounded method. As an example, say you're a pace analyst - which of two 21.3 E's will likely gain the lead? The classier animal, every time. Well, then what's class? Class is more easily comprehended in relation to one's needs for it, here, in the matchup, than it is defining it globally. Unless, of course, one is a class handicapper.

A lot of people advise the use of betting lines and a "value" approach. "Value" is a concept, I have found, that appeals largely to those who can determine true contenders, but lack the necessary skills/talent/tools to isolate the probable winner among them. This is not to say that you should ignore the price, either, but a race analyst must, I think, have as his prime objective, understanding the race in hand. It is completely possible that a value bettor would find 6 to 1 an attractive overlay, where in fact the animal hasn't a chance in hell against this 3/5 favorite. I have paid the price here: I learned that a "value" mindset prefigures and distorts my perception of a race before I begin to handicap it - my bias against the "chalk" would often prove a bias against the best horse, and I would find myself supplementing the favorite's winnings. Here again, some people can implement this strategy effectively, I'm sure, but you really need to know your game well enough to make that decision. I just don't think "value" is the panacea for the bettor's trouble it's cracked up to be. It is true that some kinds of races, claiming non winners, for instance, demonstrate much higher failure rates among favorites than others, and the value idea might sustain long term profits irrespective, but this is specific knowledge.

While I think that working on the acquisition of general knowledge is much more important than particular, since it provides an objectivity, I also think, detailed, independent research is indispensible, and without it, you will never obtain an edge.

Although I myself use a pace/energy based method, I would warn any prospective player against willy-nilly adopting pace or speed as their principle methods. Why? Because you are entering another man's bailiwick: pace/speed is everywhere and the profit-pool that once streamed so rich is now slowed because so many try to tap it; and though pace and speed enjoy a well deserved respect for providing objective, repeatable means to sort horses, it is not so sure they provide an edge, especially to a new comer. There are just too many outstanding players who employ this method already, and to think a tyro can compete with them is far-fetched. I use pace, supplemented by research - no one should expect to compete with me utilizing tools that I have adapted over the last 15 years to my very specific requirements. I'm very, very good at it, and while my ROI remains enviable, it is nowhere near as stellar as it was in times past. Newbies would be much better served, I really do think, acquiring knowledge less mainstream. Form and condition comes to mind, since most folks have only the sketchiest notions of these (that means money at the windows), and also since form is something quantifiable or at least definable, it can at least protest as something of a science. You ain't going to make no money if it ain't got science.

Penultimately, I think it is better to fail at the windows through discipline, than it is to succeed haphazardly.

I recall another of Pittsburgh Phil's observations to make my final point: People understand readily enough that medicine, the arts, or the sciences requires some special talent if one is to be really successful at them. But they believe that any fool can gamble on the horses without need of any talent whatsoever, and succeed.

Do you have talent? Do you have discipline? Sad to say, you're not going to get those from books.

tlt-in order to be able to use your value horse you have to be able to determine when a fav. is ripe to be beaten......3/5 shots win i believe around 65% of the time i usually pass the race even if i have a good overlay in the race

[Overlay]

I learned that a "value" mindset prefigures and distorts my perception of a race before I begin to handicap it - my bias against the "chalk" would often prove a bias against the best horse, and I would find myself supplementing the favorite's winnings. Here again, some people can implement this strategy effectively, I'm sure, but you really need to know your game well enough to make that decision. I just don't think "value" is the panacea for the bettor's trouble it's cracked up to be. It is true that some kinds of races, claiming non winners, for instance, demonstrate much higher failure rates among favorites than others, and the value idea might sustain long term profits irrespective, but this is specific knowledge.

I don't think that playing for value necessarily presupposes a bias against chalk. I view each race as a completely blank slate, and objectively consider the winning chances of all the horses in the field, rather than eliminating any particular category of entrant out-of-hand based upon any pre-existing personal biases. A horse at low actual odds may be a greater proportional overlay (depending on what I assess its fair odds to be) than a horse at higher actual odds. I think that when you can get value on a horse that you and the public both like, that's a win-win situation.

[ranchwest]

in order to be able to use your value horse you have to be able to determine when a fav. is ripe to be beaten......3/5 shots win i believe around 65% of the time i usually pass the race even if i have a good overlay in the race

I say if it's ripe, pluck it.