Looking for books on tote board analysis

[nalley0710]

I am reading The Tote Board Is Alive And Well by Milt Gaines. Does anyone know where I can buy any other literature on this topic? I have heard of Charles Ubil and Louis G Holloway but cannot find any of there writings. There must be some tote board analysis specialists out there that know.

[punteray]

Go to www.oddsbet.com (http://www.oddsbet.com) , Ken Lempenaus book "Analyzing Professional Betting Action" ($39.99 + shipping) is a good read.


Ray Scalise

[Overlay]

You might also e-mail (info@gamblersbook.com) or call ((702) 382-7555) Gambler's Book Club for items in their inventory or archives.

[RaceBookJoe]

Most of the tote stuff i have read is dated...Holloways was really good for the time...it was called "The Talking Tote" . Milt Gaines also wrote one entitled " The Tote is Alive and Well " he mentions Holloway in his book and 2 of his setups are named after Lou. I have read Ubil's book too just not sure how helpful any of the stuff would be nowadays. Maybe one of these computer guys could write something useful. I would try GCB also , last time i was there they had Gaines book but you wont find LGH's stuff except for possibly "Full Time Gambler ". Makes me want to find my copy of The Talking Tote...he had actual snapshots of the tote. He always talked about how he played a whole season at Santa Anita strickly betting off the tote...and coming out profitable. After the fact i see that you are reading the Gaines book...might have to pull that one out again too for old times sake. rbj

[CBedo]

I can't believe noone has mentioned Dr Z's Beat the Racetrack by Ziemba. He did lots of work on pool efficiency.

[ryesteve]

I can't believe noone has mentioned Dr Z's Beat the Racetrack by Ziemba. He did lots of work on pool efficiency.I guess it's because when someone talks about "tote betting", they're interested in following the money, not avoiding it, which is pretty much what Dr. Z boils down to.

Either way, I would've thought that following the adventures of our tote players on the Selections board would be enough to convince someone NOT to try to take that route...

[castaway01]

Two problems with the toteboard stuff:
1) A large percentage of the money is bet in the last minute before post
2) Approximately 95% of bettors lose money in a given year (rough percentage, my point is the same). So if you're following the toteboard to tell you how to bet, isn't there a 95% chance you're following the wagers of a loser and copying them? I mean, sure, we all see mysterious odds drops---but most of the meaningful ones are at about the quarter pole. :)

[Overlay]

Two problems with the toteboard stuff:
1) A large percentage of the money is bet in the last minute before post
2) Approximately 95% of bettors lose money in a given year (rough percentage, my point is the same). So if you're following the toteboard to tell you how to bet, isn't there a 95% chance you're following the wagers of a loser and copying them? I mean, sure, we all see mysterious odds drops---but most of the meaningful ones are at about the quarter pole. :)

I grant your point about having to deal with late odds drops, but I'd say that the 5% (or whatever figure is accurate) who are making money consistently would be those who can recognize when the tote board is "out of line" and who bet against that trend, rather than following the wagering preferences or patterns of the losing public as a whole. The winners are indeed "letting the tote board tell them how to bet", but not in the sense that you suggest.

[Tom Barrister]

In my opinion, tote analysis is a waste of time, and none of the books I've read are in tune with the times (most advocate methods that were geared to the 1970's and earlier, when WPS was the only option in many races).

[RaceBookJoe]

In my opinion, tote analysis is a waste of time, and none of the books I've read are in tune with the times (most advocate methods that were geared to the 1970's and earlier, when WPS was the only option in many races).

I used to love playing right off the tote but i have to agree with you. Like you say...in the 1970's with mainly WPS in combination with strictly on track betting it was a much easier process..not always easy, but definately very doable. You had to be sharp enough to watch the tote, plus if you did your handicapping homework correctly, you could spot the "hot horse" Also if sharp enough, you could spot the big bets almost down to the dollar. Spotting an "out of proportion' doubles pool wasnt too difficult either. rbj

[CBedo]

I also think Mark Cramer has some sections on tote methodology in some of his works.

[njcurveball]

My personal disclaimer is that tote board methods are not as reliable with ADW wagering involved.



Having said that, I have Full Time Gambler by Lou Holloway, Pot O gold, Tote Watchers Profit Guide, Sportsstat Morning Line betting patterns and some other stuff that may interest tote watchers.

Contact me privately if interested.

Jim

[pandy]

I guess it's because when someone talks about "tote betting", they're interested in following the money, not avoiding it, which is pretty much what Dr. Z boils down to.

Either way, I would've thought that following the adventures of our tote players on the Selections board would be enough to convince someone NOT to try to take that route...

Good point, the last minute tote board picks that are posted here are awful and as I tried to tell the guy, you can't win without using some sort of past performance information.

[BlueShoe]

I also think Mark Cramer has some sections on tote methodology in some of his works.

Perhaps his most valuable idea about board reading was his KOD (kiss of death).Simply put,beware of favorites and/or 2nd choices that open way above their morning lines,stay there for awile,and then go down in price late in the wagering.At the same time this occurs,look for others that are bet early.This "ice" betting pattern has validity,and am always very cautious about using chalk that has this pattern.We have all seen something like this;the M/L favotite is 2-1,but our line says that he should go off at around even money.On the first flash he opens at 7-2,stays there or at 3-1 until about 10 minutes before post,and then gradually starts to drop in price until postime,finally closing at 8-5.These types are usually poison,thus Cramers refering to them as "kiss of death" runners.

[pandy]

Perhaps his most valuable idea about board reading was his KOD (kiss of death).Simply put,beware of favorites and/or 2nd choices that open way above their morning lines,stay there for awile,and then go down in price late in the wagering.At the same time this occurs,look for others that are bet early.This "ice" betting pattern has validity,and am always very cautious about using chalk that has this pattern.We have all seen something like this;the M/L favotite is 2-1,but our line says that he should go off at around even money.On the first flash he opens at 7-2,stays there or at 3-1 until about 10 minutes before post,and then gradually starts to drop in price until postime,finally closing at 8-5.These types are usually poison,thus Cramers refering to them as "kiss of death" runners.

I agree, I've found this to be true. The best favorites are horses that are ML favorites, open up as the favorite, and go off as the favorite.

[CBedo]

Perhaps his most valuable idea about board reading was his KOD (kiss of death).Simply put,beware of favorites and/or 2nd choices that open way above their morning lines,stay there for awile,and then go down in price late in the wagering.At the same time this occurs,look for others that are bet early.This "ice" betting pattern has validity,and am always very cautious about using chalk that has this pattern.We have all seen something like this;the M/L favotite is 2-1,but our line says that he should go off at around even money.On the first flash he opens at 7-2,stays there or at 3-1 until about 10 minutes before post,and then gradually starts to drop in price until postime,finally closing at 8-5.These types are usually poison,thus Cramers refering to them as "kiss of death" runners.If I remember correctly (that's a big assumption), the first chapter of Kinky Handicapping talked about this concept. I think he talked about using this concept in chaos races to eliminate the favorites and look for horses taking money.

[Joey D]

I think this follows the assumption that the "inside" money would come in early and then maybe very, very late in the wagering and that the general betting public usually bets between 10 minutes to post and post time. Hard to gauge anymore with all of the satellite and ADW money which seems to come in AFTER the start of the race.

I used to work a tote thing with a guy back in the 80's and 90's in a race book here in Vegas. We would look for early and late $ in the win pool on a particular horse with a disproportinate amount bet to win vs. what was bet to place. For example a horse with odds of 6-1 or better with say, 11000 bet to win and 3000 bet to place on him.

Love Cramer's stuff too..

[Tape Reader]

I bet off the tote board. IMO, the best way to beat the game is to have an auto-bet program that P.A. has designed. http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=53321 (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=53321) Simply, enter your variables and come back at the end of the day to see how much money you won.

Come on Pace, put it up for sale.

[PaceAdvantage]

Come on Pace, put it up for sale.It didn't do any better than Anderon or Ultimate Bet....in fact, it may have been worse...who would buy it? :lol:

[njcurveball]

It didn't do any better than Anderon or Ultimate Bet....in fact, it may have been worse...who would buy it? :lol:


HEY! It is automatic right! Who cares if it wins. ;)

[Tape Reader]

It didn't do any better than Anderon or Ultimate Bet....in fact, it may have been worse...who would buy it? :lol:

Me! I'm offering $700 for a version where I could enter my own conditions.

[Warren Henry]

It didn't do any better than Anderon or Ultimate Bet....in fact, it may have been worse...who would buy it? :lol:

I would buy it if it were open source so that I could learn how to do it myself.

Teach us to build auto betting modules and you might single handedly save racing. Imagine the increase in handle if all of us set up our own Bots to automatically bet our own theories.

[ryesteve]

It didn't do any better than Anderon or Ultimate Bet....in fact, it may have been worse...I think that's because when you were posting your picks, there were no emoticons or jpgs included :D

[BenDiesel26]

A couple of times I have been to AC when I haven't had time to buy a form but just want to get drink tickets, I'll just look at the daily double and see where the money is going in the next race. If when the next race rolls around the daily double doesn't match the favorite, I'll go ahead and bet. I have hit some 5 or 6 to ones which I think is pretty good considering I have zero knowledge of the horses involved.

[John]

Dan Pope had a lot of tote stuff. He had a good one for the 2nd half of the DD. I lost it.but, it worked on DD.

[Warren Henry]

Dan Pope had a lot of tote stuff. He had a good one for the 2nd half of the DD. I lost it.but, it worked on DD.
This is an OLD, OLD angle. System and software sellers have made a lot of money off of this angle. It is really pretty easy and, used properly, can produce some worthwhile wagers.

This is way easy. My gift to you :jump: ---


This works for second race of the DD, third race of a Pik 3, 4th race of a pik 4, etc.

Just divide the morning line of each horse into the will pay for that same horse. Lower numbers of the results are the ones to look at.

Don't use this as an absolute selection method. If the lowest numbers are the m/l favorites, it just means that nothing special is going on in the pool. However, if a horse with a higher morning line is one of the lower numbers after your calculation, it means it has been bet heavier in the exotic than the morning line would suggest. These are the horses to look at.

Example. Morning line of a horse is 2 and the DD will pay is 100. 100/2 = 50

Morning line of another horse is 10 and the DD will pay 400. 400/10 = 40. This is out of whack, so this horse has been bet heavier in the exotic than it should have been based on morning line.

Do these numbers for a while and you get a feel for when it means something and when it does not.

[John]

Thanks Warren Henry, Sounds like it is worth a try.

[karlskorner]

50 years ago Al Illichs wrote of this method in his book "How to pick winners". Worked 50 years ago, works today. Down here we call it the CHINESE DOUBLE.

[showbet]

...you can't win without using some sort of past performance information.
After placing over 22,000 wagers since January 1, 2008, using nothing but the WPS pool data, I can tell you that it is possible to have a positive ROI without using the PPs.

[John]

After placing over 22,000 wagers since January 1, 2008, using nothing but the WPS pool data, I can tell you that it is possible to have a positive ROI without using the PPs.


Could you please, elaborate a little more.

Thanks


:) :) :)

[ryesteve]

I'm going to guess it has to do with exploiting show pool inefficiencies and anti-bridgejumper strategies, except I don't know how you could come up with 22,000 such opportunities in such a relatively short period of time.

[Tape Reader]

After placing over 22,000 wagers since January 1, 2008, using nothing but the WPS pool data, I can tell you that it is possible to have a positive ROI without using the PPs.

...and the tote board readers are beginning to come out of the closet.

[John]

...and the tote board readers are beginning to come out of the closet.


NO!!! Its my curious mind that wants to know.

[showbet]

Could you please, elaborate a little more.

Thanks


:) :) :)
See my posts from October of last year in the "Betting To Show" (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51803) thread; that will explain how I choose my wagers. I posted a screenshot of "MyROI" from YouBet back then. I could do it again, updated through yesterday's races, but someone could say I doctored the image, which is fair enough.

I'm going to guess it has to do with exploiting show pool inefficiencies and anti-bridgejumper strategies, except I don't know how you could come up with 22,000 such opportunities in such a relatively short period of time.
Yes, I attempt to exploit show (and place, and win, on very rare occasions) pool inefficiencies. I also bet against the "bridgejumpers".

I probably should have said I've bet on over 22,000 horses since January 1, 2008, since in many races I will bet on more than one horse. I've bet far fewer than 22,000 races in that time. If I bet four horses in one race that is counted as four bets, not one.

Number of individual bets (ie, horses) from January 1, 2008 through yesterday:
Win 35
Place 1220
Show 21,197
Place-Show 246

[highnote]

I guess it's because when someone talks about "tote betting", they're interested in following the money, not avoiding it, which is pretty much what Dr. Z boils down to.

Either way, I would've thought that following the adventures of our tote players on the Selections board would be enough to convince someone NOT to try to take that route...


Steve, the Dr. Z system does NOT boil down to avoiding the money. The Dr. Z syste follows the money. The system identifies horses that are taking a lot of money in the win pools, but are being ingnored by the people who are betting the horses in the place and show pools. Therefore, a sharp observer of the tote will recognize that the place and show pools are mispriced compared to the win pools. The sharp observer will follow the win money and then bet into the place and show pools.

I would like to encourage anyone who reads this thread to ignore the place and show pools so I can have them all to myself. Thank you very much.

[ryesteve]

Steve, the Dr. Z system does NOT boil down to avoiding the money. The Dr. Z syste follows the money. The system identifies horses that are taking a lot of money in the win pools, but are being ingnored by the people who are betting the horses in the place and show pools. Therefore, a sharp observer of the tote will recognize that the place and show pools are mispriced compared to the win pools. The sharp observer will follow the win money and then bet into the place and show pools.
It's just semantics. By "avoiding the money" I meant betting into the show pools where the money isn't (but ought to be, based on the win pool). Most people's idea of "tote betting" involves piling on, which is the opposite of what you're doing with a Dr. Z approach.

[highnote]

It's just semantics. By "avoiding the money" I meant betting into the show pools where the money isn't (but ought to be, based on the win pool). Most people's idea of "tote betting" involves piling on, which is the opposite of what you're doing with a Dr. Z approach.


I was wondering if that's what you meant, but maybe didn't say it exactly as you meant it.