Making A Living betting Horses (My Opinion Of What It May Involve And Imply)

[Partsnut]

For those that have an interest.
Please click on the following link to view my post:
http://wp.me/ppTmJ-1p

A happy and safe labor day to all.

[PaceAdvantage]

Any reason why you couldn't just post that here?

[Imriledup]

Respectfully disagree. I think you need that monster pick 6 or pick 4 score in order to survive as a pro. 200 bucks to win on 5-1 shots isn't going to pay the bills.


This is the way i look at things. Lets take a typical 10 horse field at Del Mar. In that race there is WPS, Exa, Tri and Super wagering. Lets also say there are a couple longshots you like in the race. In order to win, you are going to have to have a differing opinion from the general public. You are going to have to be 'right' while they are 'wrong'. Now, if you are right about this particular race, you need to get paid substantially. Lets say you like a longshot and dislike the favorite, do you want to just bet your 20-1 shot to WIN? No, you want to take advantage of your edge on the race. You want to try and make a score. Tris and supers can pay thousands or tens of thousands of dollars, why not take advantage of your 'edge' on a race and try and clean out the pool?

To each his own. If you can make a living betting Win only than i really admire that and you shouldn't change for anything.

BUT, if you have enough of an edge to make profits betting WIN, why not branch out and try and exploit that edge in the exotics pools? This is the question you have to ask. To be a great pro bettor, i'm not sure you want to play it safe all the time, you need to go for the gold imo.

[bisket]

the most intelligent thing to do is play for fun.

[ryesteve]

There's a lot in here that I disagree with:

1- The anti-software bias, and speaking in terms of what programs "yield", as if they're black boxes that spit out selections.

2- The implication that 10% is an insufficient ROI from which you can earn a living. Hell, the people making the most money are probably operating at a 0% ROI, and making it all via rebates.

3- The implication that handicapping 50-60 races per week is somehow burdensome. I "handicapped" 70 races just yesterday alone, and it wasn't a problem. Would've been a lot more, except I only played the early east coast tracks.

4- The idea that betting to win is the only way to be successful. Sorry, but this is just complete and utter nonsense. The vast majority of winning players are profitable because of exotics. Your belief that exotics will "cause one to fail in the long run" is mind-blowing. You really need to search the discussions around here about compounding one's edge via exotics.

[Space Monkey]

PA, I think he just wants to bring attention to his blog.

Partsnut, you state that all exotics have a takeout of 24-27%. You couldn't be more wrong. Go to HANA's website and learn. Please. The takeout at MTH on Pik4's is just 15%. Most exactas and doubles are 18-20%. Kentucky and Cal have an across the board 19-20% on all exotics. I could go on, but please just go to the site.

Riled, I agree with what you say, except leave out the pik6. Pik4 payoffs are good enough. Trying to hit that "monster" pik 6 will break you.

Ryesteve you touch on something that baffles me. How do you "fully" handicap 70 races in a day? I use a pace program and the BRIS Ultimates. I make my own decisions. I don't use a computer program to pick horses for me. It takes awhile. How do you do it?

[Ian Meyers]

There's a lot in here that I disagree with

2- The implication that 10% is an insufficient ROI from which you can earn a living. Hell, the people making the most money are probably operating at a 0% ROI, and making it all via rebates.


I find it really hard to believe that very few playing for a living have a positive ROI pre-rebate. I know some of the best in the U.S. and we speak in awe about guys that win on the up.

Most pros are about 5-10% post-rebate, FWIW.

[ryesteve]

I don't use a computer program to pick horses for me. It takes awhile. How do you do it?Via software. I do spend a lot of time on R&D outside of "handicapping"... but for raceday decision-making, I've coded what I want to be looking for, so the actual "handicapping" process is automatic.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I think if anybody is not a professional player,they should pipe down.The topic should be addressed by those who do it.Every time this subject is brought up here there is a contingent of naysayers that dominate the subject.My guess is that they are the same losers you see at the track that cannot beat the game but show up every day.

Let's leave this to the winners that do play everyday.Speak up boys and girls!

[Jeff P]

Interesting topic.

Valid points Steve. IMHO right on the money.

At the risk of looking like I'm piling on (which I'm not) a while back I looked at my records from the past year and saw something that surprised me. Show wagers - in races where I was deliberately playing against bridge jumper horses that my program considered vulnerable - that single category had the highest pre-rebate roi of any wager category spanning the preceding 12 months...

Which brings me to a very important point. There are a lot of different ways to reach profitable play. For every blanket statement about things like wager type, handicapping methodology, computer program vs pencil and drf, class levels, track or venue, surface, distance, track condition, rider, trainer, workouts, medication, equipment changes, etc. there are bound to be exceptions. The minute somebody proclaims "THAT" can't possibly work - there's a pretty good chance somebody else is out there making some variation of "THAT" work (whatever "that" turns out to be.)

IMHO wager type isn't the difference maker. Positive expectancy of the individual wager is what's important. There's a concept that I call Strength of Play. In JCapper each potential win wager can be measured according to certain metrics. You have probability. You have payoff based on the odds after the pool reflects the amount of all bets including yours. From that you can calculate expected value. The higher the probability and the higher the expected value the higher the Strength of Play. The higher the Strength of Play the higher the percentage of bankroll you can safely bet... much like Kelly.

There are situations each and every day where Strength of Play is sufficiently strong (a positive expectancy exists) to justify wagering in many different pools... win, place, show, exacta, tri, super, double, pick3, pick4, pick5, pick6... did I leave anything out?

The important thing is the ability to analyze Strength of Play so that you can differentiate between good bets and bad bets. And then muster the discipline to make (predominantly) only good bets. Btw, that last part is harder than most would think.



The following areas are the critical elements to success - at least for me:

1. Selection Process

2. Play or Pass Decision Making

3. Bet Sizing

4. Ticket Structure/Backing Your Opinion

5. Carrying Your Edge Into the Long Run

6. Discipline

It's been my experience that far too many players spend far too much time and energy focusing on area #1. The more I play and the more experience I get under my belt the more convinced I become that areas 2-6 are far more important than area #1. (But that's just me.)

And sure as I type this out and hit the submit button there's bound to be somebody out there winning decent money (hell, MY money on some days) and their strong point is going to be in area #1 - and they probably have no idea whatsoever it is I'm talking about when they hear terms like Strength of Play or Play or Pass Decision Making. <G>


-jp

.

[Ian Meyers]

I think if anybody is not a professional player,they should pipe down.The topic should be addressed by those who do it.Every time this subject is brought up here there is a contingent of naysayers that dominate the subject.My guess is that they are the same losers you see at the track that cannot beat the game but show up every day.

Let's leave this to the winners that do play everyday.Speak up boys and girls!


I am playing professionally, and have previously. The numbers I am quoting are from others that play professionally as well.

[Jeff P]

I'll vouch for what Ian says about post rebate numbers of most playing for a living. <G>

-jp

.

[misscashalot]

Any reason why you couldn't just post that here?

I'm clocking his site a short time. His method has several provisos based on post time odds. He shows promise, and his site is well worth following. I don't know the guy so I'm not shilling for him.

[Space Monkey]

Via software. I do spend a lot of time on R&D outside of "handicapping"... but for raceday decision-making, I've coded what I want to be looking for, so the actual "handicapping" process is automatic.

Your own software?

Jeff, 2-6 are all dependent on #1. Without selecting the right horse/horses, 2-6 don't mean a thing. What am I missing?

[classhandicapper]

The inter-relationship between ROI and volume has been discussed many times.

I think it's not extremely difficult to either win and show a high ROI if you are extremely selective. What's difficult is getting a lot of money through the windows and doing either.

IMHO, a lot of pros and very active players have a low ROI because they are playing a lot of unprofitable horses (without realizing it of course). If they became more selective they could raise their ROI. However, you don't want to get to the point where in an effort to raise your ROI you stop betting some marginally profitable horses. Making those fine line decisions in marginal situations is extremely difficult. Some people tend to opt for volume (perhaps because they like action) and others tend to opt for extreme selectivity (perhaps because they favor greater certainty of profit). I am in the latter camp trying to edge my way into greater volume over time.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Interesting topic.

Valid points Steve. IMHO right on the money.

At the risk of looking like I'm piling on (which I'm not) a while back I looked at my records from the past year and saw something that surprised me. Show wagers - in races where I was deliberately playing against bridge jumper horses that my program considered vulnerable - that single category had the highest pre-rebate roi of any wager category spanning the preceding 12 months...

Which brings me to a very important point. There are a lot of different ways to reach profitable play. For every blanket statement about things like wager type, handicapping methodology, computer program vs pencil and drf, class levels, track or venue, surface, distance, track condition, rider, trainer, workouts, medication, equipment changes, etc. there are bound to be exceptions. The minute somebody proclaims "THAT" can't possibly work - there's a pretty good chance somebody else is out there making some variation of "THAT" work (whatever "that" turns out to be.)

IMHO wager type isn't the difference maker. Positive expectancy of the individual wager is what's important. There's a concept that I call Strength of Play. In JCapper each potential win wager can be measured according to certain metrics. You have probability. You have payoff based on the odds after the pool reflects the amount of all bets including yours. From that you can calculate expected value. The higher the probability and the higher the expected value the higher the Strength of Play. The higher the Strength of Play the higher the percentage of bankroll you can safely bet... much like Kelly.

There are situations each and every day where Strength of Play is sufficiently strong (a positive expectancy exists) to justify wagering in many different pools... win, place, show, exacta, tri, super, double, pick3, pick4, pick5, pick6... did I leave anything out?

The important thing is the ability to analyze Strength of Play so that you can differentiate between good bets and bad bets. And then muster the discipline to make (predominantly) only good bets. Btw, that last part is harder than most would think.



The following areas are the critical elements to success - at least for me:

1. Selection Process

2. Play or Pass Decision Making

3. Bet Sizing

4. Ticket Structure/Backing Your Opinion

5. Carrying Your Edge Into the Long Run

6. Discipline

It's been my experience that far too many players spend far too much time and energy focusing on area #1. The more I play and the more experience I get under my belt the more convinced I become that areas 2-6 are far more important than area #1. (But that's just me.)

And sure as I type this out and hit the submit button there's bound to be somebody out there winning decent money (hell, MY money on some days) and their strong point is going to be in area #1 - and they probably have no idea whatsoever it is I'm talking about when they hear terms like Strength of Play or Play or Pass Decision Making. <G>


-jp

.

Excellent post Jeff.I just wanted to add that beyond just pass or play,decision making and as you said bet sizing is the most critical elements of winning the game.Isolating contenders has to be a given.Extracting money from the probable outcome is where science fails and creativity succeeds IMO.

I'm a recreational player that has made forays into full time betting and have had success in most seasons since 2001.My worst season has been a 12% loss.Normal ROI at over 50%.

I think the big leap of winning and losing,playing fulltime is the values people grow up with.I come from a blue collar,bust butt and work comes first background and there is even in my own mind a stigma to overcome about betting as a living.I've always put work and necessity first and rightfully so.But the older I get the more I'm convinced that if this a doable thing,you might as well do it.Talk about job security!!If you can win and make money the tracks will never fire you and you can move up the food chain at your own will!

I had a 49% ROI Saturday.No longshot winners.In fact I was Joe chalk all day.But 1 better decision or so and I would have doubled that.It always comes down to fine lining and decision making.We all have the fundamentals in place.I think repeated play sharpens those tools but the fear factor involved in making that leap is what makes us human.Me anyway!!!I'll let you know:cool:

[Partsnut]

PaceAdvantage: Any reason why you couldn't just post that here?

I like the board and it's content.

I prefer to know where the comments to my posts are coming from.
For the most part, the comments are made respectfully even though they may disagree with me, their comments are well taken and appreciated.

I am trying avoid any pissing contests or flame wars with people on this board that hide their identity and those that have over inflated egos and look to belittle others. I have no need for these type of people and will do my utmost to ignore their comments.

If I like a particular product I will freely express my opinion even though it may not be one of your advertisers. If I dislike a product and it is one of your advertisers products, I will freely express my opinion as well.

Those that want to read what I have to say will do so and those that don't, won't.

[Tom Barrister]

I think if anybody is not a professional player,they should pipe down.The topic should be addressed by those who do it.Every time this subject is brought up here there is a contingent of naysayers that dominate the subject.My guess is that they are the same losers you see at the track that cannot beat the game but show up every day.

Let's leave this to the winners that do play everyday.Speak up boys and girls!

I don't agree. Anybody who has an opinion should be allowed to express it, provided that it's expressed within the rules of the forum.

I keep detailed records of my betting. In the past 15 years, I've played more or less full-time (although not professionally, per se) for 10 of them. In all 10, I can isolate at least half of my annual profit to no more than 20 races or horizontal-tickets. In some cases, I can isolate more than half to 10 or fewer tickets.

In my opinion, winning in this industry is all about grinding out the small edges, while waiting to pounce on the golden opportunities. The grinding takes care of the bills, keeps the bankroll healthy, and keeps the mind in the game. The few golden opportunities that one hits are what pad the bankroll or increase outside equity.

[DanG]

There's a lot in here that I disagree with:

1- The anti-software bias, and speaking in terms of what programs "yield", as if they're black boxes that spit out selections.

2- The implication that 10% is an insufficient ROI from which you can earn a living. Hell, the people making the most money are probably operating at a 0% ROI, and making it all via rebates.

3- The implication that handicapping 50-60 races per week is somehow burdensome. I "handicapped" 70 races just yesterday alone, and it wasn't a problem. Would've been a lot more, except I only played the early east coast tracks.

4- The idea that betting to win is the only way to be successful. Sorry, but this is just complete and utter nonsense. The vast majority of winning players are profitable because of exotics. Your belief that exotics will "cause one to fail in the long run" is mind-blowing. You really need to search the discussions around here about compounding one's edge via exotics.
This post earns 4 check marks. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:
http://i.ehow.com/images/GlobalPhoto/Articles/4804825/check-mark-main_Full.jpg

[CincyHorseplayer]

I don't agree. Anybody who has an opinion should be allowed to express it, provided that it's expressed within the rules of the forum.

I keep detailed records of my betting. In the past 15 years, I've played more or less full-time (although not professionally, per se) for 10 of them. In all 10, I can isolate at least half of my annual profit to no more than 20 races or horizontal-tickets. In some cases, I can isolate more than half to 10 or fewer tickets.

In my opinion, winning in this industry is all about grinding out the small edges, while waiting to pounce on the golden opportunities. The grinding takes care of the bills, keeps the bankroll healthy, and keeps the mind in the game. The few golden opportunities that one hits are what pad the bankroll or increase outside equity.

Well you are really in the minority then.What do you do???Most people don't bet the races fulltime but not professionally unless they are rich or retired.If either of those apply and your winning or losing doesn't impact your life,then IMO you aren't qualified to speak on a topic about who is making an attempt at winning in this game.

And yes,we all know we can say what we want,when we want,and where we want.My whole point is that the losers clog up threads like this so players that are actually winning or trying to win have to sift through a wave of "No" and "It's not possible" posts.That to me is BS.Let the winners speak.Losers have no business in this thread.

[ryesteve]

Your own software?Yes, and no. I use Jcapper as a front-end, and then apply my own software to the output to derive and print out bet reports.

[proximity]

.My whole point is that the losers clog up threads like this so players that are actually winning or trying to win have to sift through a wave of "No" and "It's not possible" posts.That to me is BS.Let the winners speak.Losers have no business in this thread.

to me there is a difference between "winning" and "making a living" at the game.

i'm sure this forum has its share of long term winning players but "making a living" (at least to me) implies some minimum level of profits being made EVERY month and i just see too much variance in this game to guarantee this. i'm not including rebates in these thoughts, just talking straight up profits from the pools.

as far as the blog post, i'd say that $2,000 is way, way, way too small to even play for a living off of rebates and you'd better be handicapping more than 50-60 races a week too.

[CincyHorseplayer]

to me there is a difference between "winning" and "making a living" at the game.
.


If you read the entirety of my post I said the same thing.The leap from one to the other is scary and I laid my whole thoughts bare on where I'm at in this game.I welcome the criticism.I know I will be a better player because of it.Winning is a very realistic goal though IMO.I just haven't had the stones to suck it up and do it fulltime.I have had some very good success part time.

I appreciate your honesty.

[proximity]

If you read the entirety of my post I said the same thing.The leap from one to the other is scary and I laid my whole thoughts bare on where I'm at in this game.I welcome the criticism..

didn't mean to come off as being critical of your game. given your history of success, you'd probably be fine with about a $50,000 bankroll and a decent rebate. i just don't see the consistency in gambling that others do...... and to me that's at least part of what this "making a living" stuff implies....

[CincyHorseplayer]

didn't mean to come off as being critical of your game. given your history of success, you'd probably be fine with about a $50,000 bankroll and a decent rebate. i just don't see the consistency in gambling that others do...... and to me that's at least part of what this "making a living" stuff implies....

Prox,my bankroll is under 10,000 right now because I keep dipping to pay for my kid's school loans or cars they wrecked and etc!!!

When I get a betting bankroll of 20,000 or so I will feel invincible.Because money buys time.I know that over time,and not long stretches,I can hammer this game.It is beatable.Time makes a good handicapper great.Simply because they can wait on opportunities to present themselves instead of trying to "Make it happen" on Saturdays when they're there!

Anyway I'm getting there.Slowly but surely.

[Imriledup]

Prox,my bankroll is under 10,000 right now because I keep dipping to pay for my kid's school loans or cars they wrecked and etc!!!

When I get a betting bankroll of 20,000 or so I will feel invincible.Because money buys time.I know that over time,and not long stretches,I can hammer this game.It is beatable.Time makes a good handicapper great.Simply because they can wait on opportunities to present themselves instead of trying to "Make it happen" on Saturdays when they're there!

Anyway I'm getting there.Slowly but surely.

DROP THE HAMMER!

Love to hear a positive horseplayer, someone who believes in their heart and gut they can beat this game and crush it. Don't ever lose that positive believe.

[riskman]

A good gambler /risk taker is one who takes advantage of an opportunity to achieve an end and can make money many ways in life. He or she can also avoid a lot of problems in life by being able to assess a situation and know whether the risks offset the possible reward. That is true of many situations, not just betting on horses.

Once the handicapping is finished, decisions have to be made, on the wagering of money. IMHO the most important part of making money on horses is learning how to gamble. How you wager your money, in what amounts and on what type of bets is a challenge and at times can be complicated and demanding, at least for me. It is a contest of wits, skill, and courage. You are competing against others with varying intelligence, experience, determination, and information. IMHO,the number one skill that any professional horse player cannot succeed without developing, is the gambling skill. While his or her handicapping skill may be competent, the gambling skill has to be first-rate. Any acquired edge in wagering talent with a minimum outlay of time, energy, or both can be a contributing factor to overcome the track take which is the # 1 goal in this difficult game.

[Tom Barrister]

What do you do???

I'm self-employed. What I do takes up about 600-700 hours of my time per year, generally in three separate one-month spurts. When I'm working, I don't have much time for anything else. When I'm not, I have more time than I know what to do with. That's what I meant by "more or less full-time".

[CincyHorseplayer]

DROP THE HAMMER!

Love to hear a positive horseplayer, someone who believes in their heart and gut they can beat this game and crush it. Don't ever lose that positive believe.


I thought everybody on here was thinking it's not if I win but how much!!!

I know I'm going to win.It's just a matter of how much!!That's what makes this game so fun.Your butt is going to win.Running those bucks up the flagpole is key:jump:

[CincyHorseplayer]

I'm self-employed. What I do takes up about 600-700 hours of my time per year, generally in three separate one-month spurts. When I'm working, I don't have much time for anything else. When I'm not, I have more time than I know what to do with. That's what I meant by "more or less full-time".

Tom,

I wasn't trying to slam you at all.But at 12.5 hours avg a week and being indifferent to the results of full time gambling it's hard to take serious on a thread regarding playing for a living!!!But please invite me out for cocktails when I'm in the vicinity;)

[CincyHorseplayer]

A good gambler /risk taker is one who takes advantage of an opportunity to achieve an end and can make money many ways in life. He or she can also avoid a lot of problems in life by being able to assess a situation and know whether the risks offset the possible reward. That is true of many situations, not just betting on horses.

Once the handicapping is finished, decisions have to be made, on the wagering of money. IMHO the most important part of making money on horses is learning how to gamble. How you wager your money, in what amounts and on what type of bets is a challenge and at times can be complicated and demanding, at least for me. It is a contest of wits, skill, and courage. You are competing against others with varying intelligence, experience, determination, and information. IMHO,the number one skill that any professional horse player cannot succeed without developing, is the gambling skill. While his or her handicapping skill may be competent, the gambling skill has to be first-rate. Any acquired edge in wagering talent with a minimum outlay of time, energy, or both can be a contributing factor to overcome the track take which is the # 1 goal in this difficult game.

Excellent post Riskman.I couldn't agree more.Going through the motions of handicapping is routine.I put my notes in the form,I have an idea of who I like.When the windows open up,then the work starts.You have to be not only sharp but fast.A buddy called me Saturday and we spoke for about 2 minutes.I half a$sed a big score by the delay.Betting decisions are what separates .500 from being a winner.I think in many ways it is like being a MLB hitter.All the adjustments you go through to hit .300 is a success,yet you fail 7 times out of 10.But it doesn't matter,as long as those other 3 times you are fearless and bet accordingly!

[oexplayer68]

Well I do this full-time, professionally, or whatever you want to call it, and I do none of what the original poster recommends; i.e. straight wagering or use of computer software. Not saying you can't do it that way, but the tracks I play and the way I bet are not conducive to making large wps bets, as well as the inevitable odds drop on the final click.

Rebates are the real key in my estimation. I am a volume player and have a flat roi, but when you factor in rebates on monthly wagering in the 250K area you are talking about a very large income. Even better, the ADW's love this type of consistent play, so you will be able to command even higher rebates. I play almost exclusively vertical wagers as that is my expertise. To me, this is where both the public and even astute players have the most trouble.



I am relatively young, but I still don't see how anyone with their computer software can outperform what I see with my eye. I am sure there are some pretty sophisticated programs out there, but I am 100% sure I can outperform them the way I play. To each his own though, as certainly Benter's stuff works for him.



One thing that helped me a lot was learning to focus on just a few circuits/tracks. My year is always planned out ahead of time as far as what I will be playing. Of course, wherever I get the best real rebate is where I usually play.



The real key at least for me is wager structuring. I still need to improve in this area, but have made some big strides in the past year. Playing too many combinations has always been my downfall. Tightening it up has led to an increase of a few ROI points.



It always intrigues me when this subject appears. I know most think beating the ponies year in and year out can't be done, but those are probably the same folks who say you can't time the stock market.



The game is very tough right now. There is just little to no dumb money any more, so you are competing against a lot of sharpies. I think the whole key for anyone is to just find their niche and stick to it. Of course, rebates are mandatory, as otherwise you stand little chance of being able to make a decent income.

[Bruddah]

Well I do this full-time, professionally, or whatever you want to call it, and I do none of what the original poster recommends; i.e. straight wagering or use of computer software. Not saying you can't do it that way, but the tracks I play and the way I bet are not conducive to making large wps bets, as well as the inevitable odds drop on the final click.

Rebates are the real key in my estimation. I am a volume player and have a flat roi, but when you factor in rebates on monthly wagering in the 250K area you are talking about a very large income. Even better, the ADW's love this type of consistent play, so you will be able to command even higher rebates. I play almost exclusively vertical wagers as that is my expertise. To me, this is where both the public and even astute players have the most trouble.

I am relatively young, but I still don't see how anyone with their computer software can outperform what I see with my eye. I am sure there are some pretty sophisticated programs out there, but I am 100% sure I can outperform them the way I play. To each his own though, as certainly Benter's stuff works for him.



One thing that helped me a lot was learning to focus on just a few circuits/tracks. My year is always planned out ahead of time as far as what I will be playing. Of course, wherever I get the best real rebate is where I usually play.



The real key at least for me is wager structuring. I still need to improve in this area, but have made some big strides in the past year. Playing too many combinations has always been my downfall. Tightening it up has led to an increase of a few ROI points.



It always intrigues me when this subject appears. I know most think beating the ponies year in and year out can't be done, but those are probably the same folks who say you can't time the stock market.



The game is very tough right now. There is just little to no dumb money any more, so you are competing against a lot of sharpies. I think the whole key for anyone is to just find their niche and stick to it. Of course, rebates are mandatory, as otherwise you stand little chance of being able to make a decent income.


The young man has it right in my opinion. Playing one track or circuit with a disciplined/ structured approach to vertical wagering is a must. I have followed this approach since 1992 and have been profitable all but two years. One of those years, last year, I could not play because of health issues.

I am a Hobbyist and have been since 1965. However, being a Hobbyist, doesn't preclude one from doing the same things that professionals do. There are thousands of non professional golfers trying to emulate the Pros everyday and many of those play very competitively on their home courses/ circuits. ;)

[Tom Barrister]

Tom,

I wasn't trying to slam you at all.But at 12.5 hours avg a week and being indifferent to the results of full time gambling it's hard to take serious on a thread regarding playing for a living!!!But please invite me out for cocktails when I'm in the vicinity;)

Perhaps I was ambiguous. 500-600 hours a year is spent on what I do for a living. I could easily spend 4,000 hours a year (80 hours a week) on this, if I saw fit to. I don't want to be chained to my "job". 200 hours a month, three separated months a year, is enough.

Pardon me while I pontificate for a while.

If I put in a "regular" 2,000 hours a year doing my "day job", my income wouldn't be much more or less than it is now; likewise, if all I did was play horses/etc. (and this didn't change my results-per-hour), I would have about the same amount of money. The three months that I work earn me enough to pay about 80% of my real life bills (and would pay all of them if I wanted to live more cheaply than I do). The money I make from horses/greyhounds/poker is literally money in the bank.

All of this isn't meant for me to blow my trumpet; it's pertinent to this thread. To gamble successfully for a living, one needs a large enough bankroll and a separate fund for living expenses----enough to not feel pressure to produce. Along with that, the "professional" also needs the ability to win, a willingness to work as hard as needed to achieve athe goal of winning, self-confidence, discipline, patience, preparedness, the willingness to pounce when the "golden opportunity" arises, total self-honesty with oneself, the ability to adapt when the game changes, the ability to self-criticize and take criticism (and improve based on the critique), and countless other things. If I could no longer make money betting, I would probably work more hours at the "day job". As it is, those years are past, and I'm semi-retired from betting, as greyhounds (and some live poker) don't take as much of my time as horses did. In other words, I have something to fall back on if the income from horses/greyhounds/poker dries up.

For me, having a regular, steady, reliable income takes the pressure off of me to produce by gambling. It eliminates the need to take living expenses out of my bankroll. Instead, I put the extra money in the bank/investments/etc. This is what works for me. Somebody else might be willing to live more on the edge, and they might do well that way, and it might even be needed to keep them focused.

Everybody has different wants and needs. What works for one person won't work for another. There's no one "right" way to do things, no one-size-fits-all.

[DeanT]

Something I see from time to time is that when players play exotics, especially supers and long sequence horizontal wagers, the stress and pressure is immense. If you have three or four tracks going and are really hitting the exotics deep, you can really get burned out with that.

Second, with win betting only, I guess it depends what you are doing. If you live in the UK and play at betfair, for example, the win pool is more than enough for you. You can bet $4000 to win on a horse at fixed odds at 5-2, who ends up paying $5.90. Why fiddle with exotics when you have a good edge and can bet that much without hurting your price, and you know what price you are getting? Some folks there are 1.10 ROI with better prices, fixed odds and no rebate, and they would not think of branching out to high stress exotics.

[andymays]

Something I see from time to time is that when players play exotics, especially supers and long sequence horizontal wagers, the stress and pressure is immense. If you have three or four tracks going and are really hitting the exotics deep, you can really get burned out with that.

Second, with win betting only, I guess it depends what you are doing. If you live in the UK and play at betfair, for example, the win pool is more than enough for you. You can bet $4000 to win on a horse at fixed odds at 5-2, who ends up paying $5.90. Why fiddle with exotics when you have a good edge and can bet that much without hurting your price, and you know what price you are getting? Some folks there are 1.10 ROI with better prices, fixed odds and no rebate, and they would not think of branching out to high stress exotics.


Along the same lines sort of, one bet I like to make is a parlay. Since you have to pick winners at a price to make money whether it's to win or with exotics it's important to carry the handicapping process to a point where you have to pick the one Horse in a race that you like best. Sometimes with exotics like tri's or supers it's easy to be lazy and use three on top instead of committing to one.

Take a 3 Horse Parlay(I've done it up to 5 Horses). When you do it with 5 Horses the win parlay of all Horses gets nuts and is almost impossible to hit not to mention the insane amount of money going to win on the 5th Horse. I would call it a Round Robin of sorts. You would pick your three best bets of the day of all the Tracks you handicap. I'm sure I probably made an error in here somewhere so forgive me if I did in advance!


$100 bet increments and $1100 investment!

Parlay from Horse A to win to Horse B to win.
Parlay from Horse A to win to Horse B to place.
Parlay from Horse A to place to Horse B to win

Parlay from Horse A to win to Horse C to win.
Parlay from Horse A to win to Horse C to place.
Parlay from Horse A to place to Horse C to win

Parlay from Horse B to win to Horse C to win.
Parlay from Horse B to win to Horse C to place.
Parlay from Horse B to place to Horse C to win

Parlay from Horse A to win to Horse B to win to Horse C to win
Parlay from Horse A to place to Horse B to place to Horse C to place



For arguments sake let say they all go off at 5 to 1

All pay $12 to win and $6 to place

How much do you win if they all win?

How much do you win if 2 out of three win and the third runs out?

How much do you win if 1 wins and 2 run second?

How much do you win if 2 out of three win and 1 runs second?

[badcompany]

And yes,we all know we can say what we want,when we want,and where we want.My whole point is that the losers clog up threads like this so players that are actually winning or trying to win have to sift through a wave of "No" and "It's not possible" posts.That to me is BS.Let the winners speak.Losers have no business in this thread.

If you can't handle the harsh reality of what goes into being a professional gambler, then, maybe it's not for you.

It's easy to sit there and fantasize about spending your days at the track where you don't have a boss and you can't be fired. It's another box of twinkies to deal with an extended losing streak when you have bills to pay.

Say what you want about a day job, but, I've been at my current one for eight years and have yet to have a negative paycheck.

[CincyHorseplayer]

If you can't handle the harsh reality of what goes into being a professional gambler, then, maybe it's not for you.

It's easy to sit there and fantasize about spending your days at the track where you don't have a boss and you can't be fired. It's another box of twinkies to deal with an extended losing streak when you have bills to pay.

Say what you want about a day job, but, I've been at my current one for eight years and have yet to have a negative paycheck.

You're quoting a post that was aimed at the fact we can all say what we want,when we want,where we want.It's the internet.

The guy who I was responding too is financially aloof from any damage he can make by betting.

There have been times in my existence as a horseplayer where I have made a living at this.Short periods sure,but success nonetheless.My entire input in this thread was geared to hearing from players who do it now or have done it.Not to hear the reprimands of those who fail and cannot do it and throw that failure in the face of who are actually making the attempt of winning.

[markgoldie]

Well I do this full-time, professionally, or whatever you want to call it, and I do none of what the original poster recommends; i.e. straight wagering or use of computer software. Not saying you can't do it that way, but the tracks I play and the way I bet are not conducive to making large wps bets, as well as the inevitable odds drop on the final click.

Rebates are the real key in my estimation. I am a volume player and have a flat roi, but when you factor in rebates on monthly wagering in the 250K area you are talking about a very large income. Even better, the ADW's love this type of consistent play, so you will be able to command even higher rebates. I play almost exclusively vertical wagers as that is my expertise. To me, this is where both the public and even astute players have the most trouble.



I am relatively young, but I still don't see how anyone with their computer software can outperform what I see with my eye. I am sure there are some pretty sophisticated programs out there, but I am 100% sure I can outperform them the way I play. To each his own though, as certainly Benter's stuff works for him.



One thing that helped me a lot was learning to focus on just a few circuits/tracks. My year is always planned out ahead of time as far as what I will be playing. Of course, wherever I get the best real rebate is where I usually play.



The real key at least for me is wager structuring. I still need to improve in this area, but have made some big strides in the past year. Playing too many combinations has always been my downfall. Tightening it up has led to an increase of a few ROI points.



It always intrigues me when this subject appears. I know most think beating the ponies year in and year out can't be done, but those are probably the same folks who say you can't time the stock market.



The game is very tough right now. There is just little to no dumb money any more, so you are competing against a lot of sharpies. I think the whole key for anyone is to just find their niche and stick to it. Of course, rebates are mandatory, as otherwise you stand little chance of being able to make a decent income.
Reading this post was nearly unbelievable for me since it almost exactly describes myself. I can't remember having heard from this poster before even though he's been a member since 2005. I've been here only since May and I guess I like to post a whole lot more since most of my methodology has been put out on the forum in the past.

I play verticals almost exclusively. Sometimes horizontals especially with carryovers. Seems like we bet about the same amount (3m annually). Maybe I get a better rebate because he focuses on tracks where he gets a better kickback. I don't because my provider takes the exact same 10% of the track takeout and rebates the rest no matter what or where I play. So playing into a high-takeout pool is no issue because I get that much more of a rebate. I average about a 13.5% rebate on all bets and I have a consistently negative ROI. My best years are roughly -2%. I'm sure I could get a better ROI on straight bets but what he says is true. Bet size destroys the price and the gimmicks offer much better rebates because the track takeout is so much higher.

He's young. I'm old (63). Even though I am not automated (like him), we have an apparent philosophical difference about the possibilities of automation. He says it can never match what he sees with his eyes. I say that the brain makes decisions based on mathematical probabilities, which even if we don't realize it, can be quantified by numbers. In fact, numerical quantification is far more accurate over the long haul. Such quantification can be done with targeted data mining. Kasparov is a genius who said exactly the same thing as the poster until a computer destroyed him once and for all in chess. He'd said that a computer would never beat him because at his level, the game was more art than science. In defeat, Kasparov explained what he'd learned. He said he dominated other human players because they made mistakes in judgements now and then. But the computer was relentlessly accurate. Same with handicapping. We make hundreds of shaded decisions which are never applied equally. Those shades of decision could be researched for accuracy and then applied relentlessly through automation. I am very interested in doing this someday.

Other small differences. I don't play specific circuits. I am much more interested in field size (larger the better) and bet layout, by which I mean either (1) the degree of contention (higher the better) or (2) vulnerability of the favorite. Most of my best scores are made with the favorite off the ticket. As I've said before, the biggest overlays in the sport are in large-combination gimmicks on non-favorite types. Playing a specific circuit or two would cut my opportunities way down. Another drawback to playing a specific circuit is that you develop mental biases about it. These mindsets make it difficult to be properly flexible because you actually know too much, or think you do.

Wager structuring. Agree with the poster that this is critical. I have written about this before on the forum. In most races, weak E and E/P types are the best eliminations. S and P types are the best inclusions for underneath positions. They are often great value at huge prices because the public errs in consistently playing as if a 20-1 S-type to win is 20-1 not to make the ticket all together. How do I know this? The prices tell me it's true. As far as ticket width, it's not a problem for me. I play wide but that's a function of the type of race I play. If I can't play wide, I'd rather skip the event. I very rarely use a "key" horse because of the uncertainty principle that any horse will perform in a given race. Exceptions are price horses that I really like in the given scenario. Also, (and this could be important to the poster and others who play complex verticals) try dual key horses in certain situations to reduce bet size.

Finally, I agree that the game has gotten tougher. The casual money is drying up, probably due to the recession. Also, out-of-work computer programmers are taking up the game. These guys get good fast and are not gambling for recreation. As for self-control, this is an issue which could demand an entire book. The short version is never, ever vary your bet-size structure. You can vary bet size but only depending on a pre-determined basis based on opportunity of the individual wager.

[badcompany]

Finally, I agree that the game has gotten tougher. The casual money is drying up, probably due to the recession.

Mostly because horse racing hasn't replaced its aging fan base.

[Dave Schwartz]

Mark & Cincy,

Awesome posts. I can identify almost precisely with both of you in different parts of your post.

Because of my experience as a stand-alone, completely-support-myself player (many years ago) I can identify with just how difficult that route is unless you are have and are wagering massive amounts of money.

Because of my more recent experiences with rebating I can identify with that very hi-tech side that Mark speaks of.

Both of you are dead on. Enough so that anything I might add at this point would be just to hear myself talk.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[46zilzal]

I have met, usually up in the press box, a few big bettors who are ahead of the game all the time. They RARELY bet win only, have large enough bankrolls to survive long streaks and make big killings in exotics.

[Hank]

Reading this post was nearly unbelievable for me since it almost exactly describes myself. I can't remember having heard from this poster before even though he's been a member since 2005. I've been here only since May and I guess I like to post a whole lot more since most of my methodology has been put out on the forum in the past.

I play verticals almost exclusively. Sometimes horizontals especially with carryovers. Seems like we bet about the same amount (3m annually). Maybe I get a better rebate because he focuses on tracks where he gets a better kickback. I don't because my provider takes the exact same 10% of the track takeout and rebates the rest no matter what or where I play. So playing into a high-takeout pool is no issue because I get that much more of a rebate. I average about a 13.5% rebate on all bets and I have a consistently negative ROI. My best years are roughly -2%. I'm sure I could get a better ROI on straight bets but what he says is true. Bet size destroys the price and the gimmicks offer much better rebates because the track takeout is so much higher.

He's young. I'm old (63). Even though I am not automated (like him), we have an apparent philosophical difference about the possibilities of automation. He says it can never match what he sees with his eyes. I say that the brain makes decisions based on mathematical probabilities, which even if we don't realize it, can be quantified by numbers. In fact, numerical quantification is far more accurate over the long haul. Such quantification can be done with targeted data mining. Kasparov is a genius who said exactly the same thing as the poster until a computer destroyed him once and for all in chess. He'd said that a computer would never beat him because at his level, the game was more art than science. In defeat, Kasparov explained what he'd learned. He said he dominated other human players because they made mistakes in judgements now and then. But the computer was relentlessly accurate. Same with handicapping. We make hundreds of shaded decisions which are never applied equally. Those shades of decision could be researched for accuracy and then applied relentlessly through automation. I am very interested in doing this someday.

Other small differences. I don't play specific circuits. I am much more interested in field size (larger the better) and bet layout, by which I mean either (1) the degree of contention (higher the better) or (2) vulnerability of the favorite. Most of my best scores are made with the favorite off the ticket. As I've said before, the biggest overlays in the sport are in large-combination gimmicks on non-favorite types. Playing a specific circuit or two would cut my opportunities way down. Another drawback to playing a specific circuit is that you develop mental biases about it. These mindsets make it difficult to be properly flexible because you actually know too much, or think you do.

Wager structuring. Agree with the poster that this is critical. I have written about this before on the forum. In most races, weak E and E/P types are the best eliminations. S and P types are the best inclusions for underneath positions. They are often great value at huge prices because the public errs in consistently playing as if a 20-1 S-type to win is 20-1 not to make the ticket all together. How do I know this? The prices tell me it's true. As far as ticket width, it's not a problem for me. I play wide but that's a function of the type of race I play. If I can't play wide, I'd rather skip the event. I very rarely use a "key" horse because of the uncertainty principle that any horse will perform in a given race. Exceptions are price horses that I really like in the given scenario. Also, (and this could be important to the poster and others who play complex verticals) try dual key horses in certain situations to reduce bet size.

Finally, I agree that the game has gotten tougher. The casual money is drying up, probably due to the recession. Also, out-of-work computer programmers are taking up the game. These guys get good fast and are not gambling for recreation. As for self-control, this is an issue which could demand an entire book. The short version is never, ever vary your bet-size structure. You can vary bet size but only depending on a pre-determined basis based on opportunity of the individual wager.

Great post Mark.I must say however that I don't think your chess analogy(all variations known)is valid with respect to horse racing, many subtle unknowns.

[Grits]

As far as ticket width, it's not a problem for me. I play wide but that's a function of the type of race I play. If I can't play wide, I'd rather skip the event. I very rarely use a "key" horse because of the uncertainty principle that any horse will perform in a given race. Exceptions are price horses that I really like in the given scenario. Also, (and this could be important to the poster and others who play complex verticals) try dual key horses in certain situations to reduce bet size.


I've known, in business for over twenty years, it has taken money, to make money. It still does. But this same mindset has not transferred well to gambling/recreational horseplaying. At least, not for me. I need to rethink, not so much my handicapping, as my conservatism. Spreading in, or taking on other exotic wagers (beyond an exacta or an occasional pic 3) has been indicative of my lack of willingness to invest more. Too, I've felt to spead indicates my inability to narrow the wager, hence, a weakness. Trying to key a horse, has proved useless, the majority of the time in any trifecta.

I've probably lost, by not trying, more than I've won, due to these beliefs. Choosing races, carefully and periodically, may be the key.

This is getting away from the point of the thread, but still, thank you, MarkG, for your post, from one who doesn't depend on wagering--not for a living.

[markgoldie]

I've known, in business for over twenty years, it has taken money, to make money. It still does. But this same mindset has not transferred well to gambling/recreational horseplaying. At least, not for me. I need to rethink, not so much my handicapping, as my conservatism. Spreading in, or taking on other exotic wagers (beyond an exacta or an occasional pic 3) has been indicative of my lack of willingness to invest more. Too, I've felt to spead indicates my inability to narrow the wager, hence, a weakness. Trying to key a horse, has proved useless, the majority of the time in any trifecta.

I've probably lost, by not trying, more than I've won, due to these beliefs. Choosing races, carefully and periodically, may be the key.

This is getting away from the point of the thread, but still, thank you, MarkG, for your post, from one who doesn't depend on wagering--not for a living.
Grits: First off, stay within your comfort zone and betting means. This is more important than anything else. In complex gimmicks,you need a larger bankroll backup because to do it correctly, the effort is windfall-driven. There are streaks and you must be prepared to lose lots of races in a row.

Just playing wide will not lead to to grind-out profits. For example, let's say that by playing wide you are able to approach a 60% strike rate. To do this, you would have to use lots of favorites in all positions. So in some races, you will hit and lose money. When you combine the races in which you hit and lost with the races where you failed to cash, it's nearly impossible to grind a profit. In fact, playing wide and using favorites is a prescription for disaster because you are playing into a very bad underlay situation.

My methodology of playing into chaos and eliminating favorites especially in upper positions provides a much lower strike rate. I don't keep statistics on it but I'd be very surprised if it was even 40%. With such a strike rate, all hope of grinding is out the window. You make some "nice" hits, but the year is really made by the number of blockbusters you get. In a good year, you'll get a handful. In a bad year, only a few.

I just didn't want you to think that playing gimmicks and spreading the action is a cure-all for anything. Trust me, the grass always looks greener on the other side. There are times when I'm suffering a bad streak when I start to envy the win bettors. Wouldn't it be nice, I think, to play some win system with a 50% strike rate and a flat ROI (where I could just scoop the rebate). A bad day would be when I had a .80 ROI and a good day when I had a 1.2. What kind of pressure is that? None. Like a vacation in the Bahamas. But then I realize that these guys have bad losing streaks as well. It's just a matter of definition and expectation. They lose 6 or 8 in a row and you have to hide the sharp objects.

GL Mark

[DRIVEWAY]

I've been at the track with someone that plays exotics in the following manor.

He chooses a key horse and five contenders. The key horse by definition has to be 8-1 or better. Hopefully, a lot better.

His expectation is that one of the five contenders will run in the money 95% of the time.

He prefers 10+ horses in the race. He prefers the tracks with big pools.

The wager structure

A=Key Horse
C=Five Contenders
X=All

A boxed with C in the exacta for $5 dollars Bet $50.00
A X C Trifecta With 11 horses cost for a dollar Bet $50.00
C X A Trifecta With 11 horses cost for a dollar Bet $50.00

I've seen him sign away a storm and I've seen him at the ATM.

Sometimes he bets A(Big Odds) to win. With his exotic structure, he can hit both the exacta and trifecta. If neither A or C wins he loses. He doesn't complain when that happens (X A C result).

You don't want to be near him, if he wins(unofficial) and they start blinking horses.

He claims to be profitable. When A runs in the money, he normally cashes.

[riskman]

Thanks oexplayer and markgoldie for your informative posts in this thread. Both players wagering mainly on vertical propositions with monthly turnover in the 250K range. Volume plus rebates = nice profit if you can maintain a loss ratio near break even. When you think about it, this may be one of the few paths available to earn any serious money wagering in the parimutuel pools.
Higher takeout in verticals transforms into higher negotiated rebates. The risk is also increased as you extend upward from exacta, tri and super.The wagers become complex with more creative combinations required in the various slots.Definitely not a scenario for the deficient in spirit and courage.

[PaceAdvantage]

PA, I think he just wants to bring attention to his blog.No kidding...originally, BillW immediately removed this thread as shameless self-promotion, but I, being the giant dumbass that I am, brought it back....

[Jeff P]

There are lots of good threads where the topic of what it takes to be a professional is talked about. I did a search using keywords for some of the more recent ones I remember and came up with these:

Playing for Profit with Small Bankroll: Part1 Starting and Wagersize:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=50136

Putting pressure on myself:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29357

Q. for Dave S., C.J., Traynor, or others: blackjack vs. handicapping:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29589


I'm sure there are others.

-jp

.

[proximity]

I'm sure there are others.


i don't believe he/she is a fan of rebates (?), but i find a lot of the posts from sjk to be steeped in the realites of day to day play.

[Tom Barrister]

No kidding...originally, BillW immediately removed this thread as shameless self-promotion, but I, being the giant dumbass that I am, brought it back....

At least you learned from the experience and gave the ax to his SECOND thread that was doing the same exact thing.

[Fastracehorse]

I get on these tremendous roles. The trick is, when U have a losing day, U have to dampen the losses. How do U do that?

I give myself a healthy but loseable bankroll everyday I play, which was 6 days a wk during the Spa/Dmr run ( glad back to 5 ).

I'm a very Psychologically controlled player - we all are. I need a modest bankroll so I bare down, once i'm on a roll it can b healthy.

I luv all types of wagering, place and show aren't really part of my vocab though. Everyday bankroll is different from high % plays, (must bet significant wagers.)

That's my method, i always have 2 b on top of my game mentally or i'm fu****, no computers, 'Not that there's anything wrong with that.'

fffastt

[Grits]

Grits: First off, stay within your comfort zone and betting means. This is more important than anything else. In complex gimmicks,you need a larger bankroll backup because to do it correctly, the effort is windfall-driven. There are streaks and you must be prepared to lose lots of races in a row.

Just playing wide will not lead to to grind-out profits. For example, let's say that by playing wide you are able to approach a 60% strike rate. To do this, you would have to use lots of favorites in all positions. So in some races, you will hit and lose money. When you combine the races in which you hit and lost with the races where you failed to cash, it's nearly impossible to grind a profit. In fact, playing wide and using favorites is a prescription for disaster because you are playing into a very bad underlay situation.

My methodology of playing into chaos and eliminating favorites especially in upper positions provides a much lower strike rate. I don't keep statistics on it but I'd be very surprised if it was even 40%. With such a strike rate, all hope of grinding is out the window. You make some "nice" hits, but the year is really made by the number of blockbusters you get. In a good year, you'll get a handful. In a bad year, only a few.

I just didn't want you to think that playing gimmicks and spreading the action is a cure-all for anything. Trust me, the grass always looks greener on the other side. There are times when I'm suffering a bad streak when I start to envy the win bettors. Wouldn't it be nice, I think, to play some win system with a 50% strike rate and a flat ROI (where I could just scoop the rebate). A bad day would be when I had a .80 ROI and a good day when I had a 1.2. What kind of pressure is that? None. Like a vacation in the Bahamas. But then I realize that these guys have bad losing streaks as well. It's just a matter of definition and expectation. They lose 6 or 8 in a row and you have to hide the sharp objects.

GL Mark

Markg, I understand, well, what you're saying. Spreading and gimmicks are a quick way to lose substantial sums of money. And grinding it out wouldn't be a chosen pathway. It would boil down to, only, the right opportunity presenting itself. And for my preference, it wouldn't be a number of different circuits, a number of times a day, or even every day. Moving, slowly, with much study, a better path.

Women, can sit on their hands for extended periods of time. Watching and waiting for the right opportunities. And that can be a good thing.

Thank you again.

[Partsnut]

PaceAdvantage Quote:
Originally Posted by Space Monkey
PA, I think he just wants to bring attention to his blog.

No kidding...originally, BillW immediately removed this thread as shameless self-promotion, but I, being the giant dumbass that I am, brought it back....
Today 05:47 PM

Tom Barrister Quote:
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage
No kidding...originally, BillW immediately removed this thread as shameless self-promotion, but I, being the giant dumbass that I am, brought it back....

At least you learned from the experience and gave the ax to his SECOND thread that was doing the same exact thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are many people that follow my blog and in your infinite wisdom feel it necessary to surpress a perfectly harmless post, it is your privledge to do so.
Some may consider your actions as dictatorial.
Despite this, it will still be read by many that care to read what I post and there are quite a few.
I'll let the readers decide if I'm out of line.

I don't need the coverage, I have plenty.

[Tom Barrister]

I'll let the readers decide if I'm out of line.

I don't need the coverage, I have plenty.

You must not have enough coverage if you've felt the urge to post TWO links to YOUR site here on the forum in two separate threads.

The other quoted text sounds like many other lines, like this one:

PaceAdvantage:
If I like a particular product I will freely express my opinion even though it may not be one of your advertisers. If I dislike a product and it is one of your advertisers products, I will freely express my opinion as well.


I can't be the only "reader" who gets the impression that you feel that you're above the rules of this forum.

One such rule, as I understand it, is that members aren't allowed to post repeated links to their own websites, unless they become paid advertisers. BillW felt that it was a rules violation because he deleted the thread. PA cut you some slack, which is his privilege, and put it back, asking you why you couldn't just post the contents here instead of linking to it. That's a valid question, and your answer was less than satisfactory, in my opinion. I had the exact same opinion as Spacemonkey (you're drawing traffic to your blog). I'd be surprised if more than a few others didn't get the same impression.

Now, PA gave you another two hints by deleting your second thread which made yet another link to the same site (yours), and by saying that he made a mistake not leaving the first thread in the trash. And your answer is:


Some may consider your actions as dictatorial.


The rules apply to everybody, not just to you, something that you've never quite gotten into your head. I remember the never-ending plugs for PaceAppraiser last year, after PA told you to cease. Now the same basic thing is happening here; you're plugging your site, profit or not.

PA has a lot more patience with you than I'd have, but my estimate is that said patience will run out soon if you keep breaking the rules that the rest of us are obliged to follow.

[Tom Barrister]

With my rant out of the way.....

In my opinion, winning involves two related elements: grinding out value plays on a continual basis, and pouncing on the few golden opportunities that come along. The grinding pays the bills, the golden opportunities that win are what pad the bankroll.

As far as WHAT to bet, it depends on what wagers you have to work with, and what horses you can form valid opinions on. You need to fit your selections to the available wager types (i.e. exacta)----not the other way around.

[fmhealth]

Hey OEX, a big WELCOME BACK! I've missed your insightful missives. BTW, keep your OEX eye on BHP & BIIB. Also, copper could just be the "new gold". Be well!

[CincyHorseplayer]

With my rant out of the way.....

In my opinion, winning involves two related elements: grinding out value plays on a continual basis, and pouncing on the few golden opportunities that come along. The grinding pays the bills, the golden opportunities that win are what pad the bankroll.

As far as WHAT to bet, it depends on what wagers you have to work with, and what horses you can form valid opinions on. You need to fit your selections to the available wager types (i.e. exacta)----not the other way around.

I tell ya,I've been really falling in love with the rolling daily double lately.Talk about max ROI.You isolate I contender in the 7/2-6-1 range and you can do some bigtime damage with little dough.

[speculus]

...... I say that the brain makes decisions based on mathematical probabilities, which even if we don't realize it, can be quantified by numbers.....

I would like to put a mild dissent to this otherwise good post by Markgoldie.

The human brain is genetically programmed NOT to make decisions based (exclusively) on mathematical probabilities, that's the reason we need help from math, logic and computing devices.

In principle, it is impossible for human brain to work purely as a math machine, devoid of any influence from (conscious & subconscious) emotions and memories which may be affecting our preferences (and therefore, final decisions) much more than we would like to think.

[speculus]

Finally, I agree that the game has gotten tougher. The casual money is drying up, probably due to the recession.

Historically, there have been four industries (if you may call them industries is another debatable point, but presuming you do) that have never been affected by recession, but only by poor product and poor service, and horse racing is one of them.

The other three are alcohol, drugs and prostitution!

[proximity]

The other three are alcohol, drugs and prostitution!

do these industries offer rebates? :)

[speculus]

do these industries offer rebates? :)

Alcohol: NO
Drugs: Don't know.
Prostitution: Too old to find out now! ;)

[oexplayer68]

The young man has it right in my opinion. Playing one track or circuit with a disciplined/ structured approach to vertical wagering is a must. I have followed this approach since 1992 and have been profitable all but two years. One of those years, last year, I could not play because of health issues.

I am a Hobbyist and have been since 1965. However, being a Hobbyist, doesn't preclude one from doing the same things that professionals do. There are thousands of non professional golfers trying to emulate the Pros everyday and many of those play very competitively on their home courses/ circuits. ;)

Good for you Bruddah! That is an outstanding track record. Whether it's for fun, a hobby, or a full-time job, being profitable is what it's all about.

Specializing in a particular track or circuit is a sure way to have at least a slight edge over other players. I know I can tell you riding styles for every rider at the tracks I play. Throw in trainer moves and biases that continuously repeat themselves, and it makes the game that much easier.

Continued good luck to you with both your wagering and health!

[oexplayer68]

If you can't handle the harsh reality of what goes into being a professional gambler, then, maybe it's not for you.

It's easy to sit there and fantasize about spending your days at the track where you don't have a boss and you can't be fired. It's another box of twinkies to deal with an extended losing streak when you have bills to pay.

Say what you want about a day job, but, I've been at my current one for eight years and have yet to have a negative paycheck.

Very well said! It takes a very unique, or strange person to play this game for a living. Like they say with the market, "scared money always loses."

I have a buddy that works at Home Depot who I'm trying to help him subsidize his income. I tell the guy to hit something hard, and he bets $5 to win with a $2 exacta. The stuff I give him generally gets there yet he won't up his bets, even though he's knows how well I do. Bottom line is the guy just doesn't have the wherewithall or risk tolerance to step outside his comfort zone. I even offered to bankroll him free of charge, but he declined.

So unfortunately this guy is just happy with his $14 an hour job, and could never make it at this game full-time. That's ok, and perfectly fine mind you. It's helped me understand just how important a factor both your mind and confidence level truly are. So I see now that one good quality I seem to have is that nothing ever fazes me whether I'm going great or can't hit a thing. I just keep on firing, knowing that it will turn around.

Good luck!

[oexplayer68]

Reading this post was nearly unbelievable for me since it almost exactly describes myself. I can't remember having heard from this poster before even though he's been a member since 2005. I've been here only since May and I guess I like to post a whole lot more since most of my methodology has been put out on the forum in the past.

I play verticals almost exclusively. Sometimes horizontals especially with carryovers. Seems like we bet about the same amount (3m annually). Maybe I get a better rebate because he focuses on tracks where he gets a better kickback. I don't because my provider takes the exact same 10% of the track takeout and rebates the rest no matter what or where I play. So playing into a high-takeout pool is no issue because I get that much more of a rebate. I average about a 13.5% rebate on all bets and I have a consistently negative ROI. My best years are roughly -2%. I'm sure I could get a better ROI on straight bets but what he says is true. Bet size destroys the price and the gimmicks offer much better rebates because the track takeout is so much higher.

He's young. I'm old (63). Even though I am not automated (like him), we have an apparent philosophical difference about the possibilities of automation. He says it can never match what he sees with his eyes. I say that the brain makes decisions based on mathematical probabilities, which even if we don't realize it, can be quantified by numbers. In fact, numerical quantification is far more accurate over the long haul. Such quantification can be done with targeted data mining. Kasparov is a genius who said exactly the same thing as the poster until a computer destroyed him once and for all in chess. He'd said that a computer would never beat him because at his level, the game was more art than science. In defeat, Kasparov explained what he'd learned. He said he dominated other human players because they made mistakes in judgements now and then. But the computer was relentlessly accurate. Same with handicapping. We make hundreds of shaded decisions which are never applied equally. Those shades of decision could be researched for accuracy and then applied relentlessly through automation. I am very interested in doing this someday.

Other small differences. I don't play specific circuits. I am much more interested in field size (larger the better) and bet layout, by which I mean either (1) the degree of contention (higher the better) or (2) vulnerability of the favorite. Most of my best scores are made with the favorite off the ticket. As I've said before, the biggest overlays in the sport are in large-combination gimmicks on non-favorite types. Playing a specific circuit or two would cut my opportunities way down. Another drawback to playing a specific circuit is that you develop mental biases about it. These mindsets make it difficult to be properly flexible because you actually know too much, or think you do.

Wager structuring. Agree with the poster that this is critical. I have written about this before on the forum. In most races, weak E and E/P types are the best eliminations. S and P types are the best inclusions for underneath positions. They are often great value at huge prices because the public errs in consistently playing as if a 20-1 S-type to win is 20-1 not to make the ticket all together. How do I know this? The prices tell me it's true. As far as ticket width, it's not a problem for me. I play wide but that's a function of the type of race I play. If I can't play wide, I'd rather skip the event. I very rarely use a "key" horse because of the uncertainty principle that any horse will perform in a given race. Exceptions are price horses that I really like in the given scenario. Also, (and this could be important to the poster and others who play complex verticals) try dual key horses in certain situations to reduce bet size.

Finally, I agree that the game has gotten tougher. The casual money is drying up, probably due to the recession. Also, out-of-work computer programmers are taking up the game. These guys get good fast and are not gambling for recreation. As for self-control, this is an issue which could demand an entire book. The short version is never, ever vary your bet-size structure. You can vary bet size but only depending on a pre-determined basis based on opportunity of the individual wager.

Well Mark, like they say, great minds think alike LOL.

I like your rebate schedule! That's actually very unique.

I agree about looking for larger-sized fields with vulnerable favorites as that is where the boxcar payouts usually happen. That said I've made a lot of good hits, especially recently with chalk on top of overlays in the 2/3 hole. Personally I just play the race the way it's presented, as unless it's a really small field there is usually some sort of opportunity.

Concerning the software stuff, I just don't see how a computer program can spot things such as current biases, rider switches from a "send at all costs" guy to someone who can relax a horse, evaluating turnbacks and stretchouts, and so much more. I've read where some people just use it as a tool or supplement to the form, which makes sense to me in a way, but I can't comprehend how a piece of software can outperform someone with experience who really understand how a horse race is run.

Oh, you are right on when you talk about how different running styles comprise the outcome of a race. Add to that that a lot of jockeys typically try for the win and thus sacrifice second or third to an off the pace runner. I play only dirt, speed-favoring tracks, so you see this type of setup regularly.

It's scary to think what the game will be like in another five or ten years. I used to play Canterbury every day as it has always been my favorite track. The pools have become so small there, that I cannot wager like I usually do, which led me to move away from there this year. I fear it's just going to get worse, especially for the mid to small tracks.

Best of luck!

[oexplayer68]

Thanks oexplayer and markgoldie for your informative posts in this thread. Both players wagering mainly on vertical propositions with monthly turnover in the 250K range. Volume plus rebates = nice profit if you can maintain a loss ratio near break even. When you think about it, this may be one of the few paths available to earn any serious money wagering in the parimutuel pools.
Higher takeout in verticals transforms into higher negotiated rebates. The risk is also increased as you extend upward from exacta, tri and super.The wagers become complex with more creative combinations required in the various slots.Definitely not a scenario for the deficient in spirit and courage.

Hey Riskman,

When I first decided to go pro, I read about a guy on the internet that played this way. I don't remember his name, but the guy just fired at em', lost a few points, and made it up and more with rebates.

After that I looked at my ROI on Brisbet, and I was showing a 9% positive ROI on trifectas over a three-year period. Now, keep in mind that I was not getting any rebates, so it occured to me that even if I had some variance in that ROI, it would most likely not go down much below square. My percentages on everything else except exactas was in the red, so I knew what my strengths and weaknesses were.

The greatest move I ever made was betting with Pinnacle for a couple of years. The money wasn't in the pool, and they rebated me 7% on every dollar I wagered. Now when you are playing Great Lake Downs, Canterbury, Emerald, ect; that money not being in the pool is the best rebate you could ever get on tri's and super's. I read where Rook and a couple of others had their wagers pooled and even duplicated, however that never happened to me for some reason.

Now some people do great at their jobs, and that's terrific, but I could never ever make the money that I make anywhere else. In Texas someone with a business degree is lucky to make 50K per year, and then they have to deal with all of the corporate BS.

I'll tell you one thing playing full-time for a few years does, at least to me, is it takes the fun out of the game. I remember how excited I used to get when I nailed a big tri, and I just don't have that any more. Maybe that's good.....I don't know, but it's much more of a job now than it used to be. '

Thank you for the kind words. Best of luck to you!

[oexplayer68]

Hey OEX, a big WELCOME BACK! I've missed your insightful missives. BTW, keep your OEX eye on BHP & BIIB. Also, copper could just be the "new gold". Be well!

Thanks for the tips fmhealth! I've got a little FCX, so that is my copper play. You see inflation on the radar? I'm digging energy here, and am long Natural Gas futures along with the Canadian Royalty Trusts; HGT et. al.

[PaceAdvantage]

PaceAdvantage:

I like the board and it's content.

I prefer to know where the comments to my posts are coming from.
For the most part, the comments are made respectfully even though they may disagree with me, their comments are well taken and appreciated.

I am trying avoid any pissing contests or flame wars with people on this board that hide their identity and those that have over inflated egos and look to belittle others. I have no need for these type of people and will do my utmost to ignore their comments.

If I like a particular product I will freely express my opinion even though it may not be one of your advertisers. If I dislike a product and it is one of your advertisers products, I will freely express my opinion as well.

Those that want to read what I have to say will do so and those that don't, won't.In other words, you want people to visit your blog, so you'll pimp it out here on PaceAdvantage....I get it....

And I hope you're not implying that one can't talk freely about products, whether good or bad, advertiser or not? Because I have ample evidence in the archives of people talking badly about current and past advertisers, as well as people talking kindly about products that are not and/or never were advertisers.

[Partsnut]

PaceAdvantage: In other words, you want people to visit your blog, so you'll pimp it out here on PaceAdvantage....I get it....

And I hope you're not implying that one can't talk freely about products, whether good or bad, advertiser or not? Because I have ample evidence in the archives of people talking badly about current and past advertisers, as well as people talking kindly about products that are not and/or never were advertisers.

I think you've got the wrong idea. All I did was post an article That stated what works for me and it was with honest intentions to "share" with others.
If I offended you, I'll openly extend my apologies to you. My total interest is betting horses. I have no financial interest in any product. I do feel that if something works, people should know about it.
My blog is solely for my entertainment and the many friends that I have accumulated. Your implication that I would pimp anything is completely uncalled for and probably goes against your own rules which I noticed you tend to ignore when it comes to some of your faceless, know it all and egotistical posters.

Please let me know where I can find the rules for posting and I will read them and abide by them.

[andymays]

PaceAdvantage:

I think you've got the wrong idea. All I did was post an article That stated what works for me and it was with honest intentions to "share" with others.
If I offended you, I'll openly extend my apologies to you. My total interest is betting horses. I have no financial interest in any product. I do feel that if something works, people should know about it.
My blog is solely for my entertainment and the many friends that I have accumulated. Your implication that I would pimp anything is completely uncalled for and probably goes against your own rules which I noticed you tend to ignore when it comes to some of your faceless, know it all and egotistical posters.

Please let me know where I can find the rules for posting and I will read them and abide by them.



Nice! :bang: :ThmbDown:

[ryesteve]

Please let me know where I can find the rules for posting and I will read them and abide by them.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/TOS_PrivacyStatement.html

Note bullet #8

[DeanT]

Chip Reese (RIP) one of the most successful gamblers out there told a story: He was on his way to visit his mother for a holiday of some sort. He stopped on the way for a poker game and won $20,000. It was cash of course. When he got to his mother's house he had to put it somewhere, so he threw it in the freezer. He had a good time and went home. Some months later, his mother called. She said 'I found a loaf of money in the freezer; is it yours?'

I thought that was telling. If you make a 20k score and have the ability to look at it as a part of your bankroll, or simply a score keeping device, one can be ok. If that 20k is a means to pay off a mortgage, or use to buy something, or something you would think about, it will be tough to be professional in racing/gambling, imo.

[Tom Barrister]

PaceAdvantage:

Your implication that I would pimp anything is completely uncalled for and probably goes against your own rules which I noticed you tend to ignore when it comes to some of your faceless, know it all and egotistical posters.

Please let me know where I can find the rules for posting and I will read them and abide by them.

We aren't implying anything. We're flat out stating that you're pimping your blog, which is a violation of the TOS. Here is the exact wording from the Terms of Service page:


You may only include URLs or active links to commercial & non-commercial sites for the purpose of expanding on comments or providing additional information as part of regular forum interactions.


You weren't doing that. You were flat posting an external link to your blog as the start of the thread. PA asked you why you didn't just post the contents of the blog here in the forum (so that everybody could read it without being obligated to visit your site), which would be acceptable, since it's your content (e.g. not copyrighted by somebody else). That should have been a clue to any intelligent person that it was okay to post the blog here and NOT OKAY to link to it in the future. So what did you do? When this thread appeared to have run its course, you posted a SECOND thread with a SECOND link to your blog. Hello? You didn't get the general idea the first time?

Then, when you're called on it, you do what all angry teenagers do: you called PA a dictator and accused him of playing favorites (by ignoring rulebreaking by others) and thus violating his own ToS, while pointing fingers at everybody else.

It certainly appears that you think you can do as you please here, and if you can't, your next move is to flame the founder of this forum and the people who disagree with your actions. If it were me in charge, your ass would have already been gone from here, because this isn't the first time you've done this (re: the PaceAppraiser endless-commercial from a while back). PA has far more patience for your temper tantrums and name-calling than I do.

[markgoldie]

I would like to put a mild dissent to this otherwise good post by Markgoldie.

The human brain is genetically programmed NOT to make decisions based (exclusively) on mathematical probabilities, that's the reason we need help from math, logic and computing devices.

In principle, it is impossible for human brain to work purely as a math machine, devoid of any influence from (conscious & subconscious) emotions and memories which may be affecting our preferences (and therefore, final decisions) much more than we would like to think.
This is a favorite subject of mine. I agree with what you say in your post and since my post was rather long and touched on so many different subjects, I was less than precise.

When it comes to handicapping horses, the exercise is fundamentally mathematical. Why? Because we are seeking to interpret the numbers that are provided in the past performances. (And I realize I am slighting those who handicap purely by astrology, appearance, smell, or whatever else).

Digesting all the numbers leads us to the strength of the individual horse. This strength is a mathematical function of some combination of the numbers which comprise his past performance. Whether or not we think of it as a number is irrelevant because any strength comparison can be boiled down to a number (such as a percentage difference). By the way, this is why figs and numbers like Bris' Prime Power are so popular since they seek to boil a lot of complicated numbers down to one. This is what the brain seeks- clarity from chaos.

Now. When most handicappers are confronted with a variable which they consider important, they form a mental impression. For example, let's say that a player relies on Beyer figs to give him an ballpark idea of the horse's ability. But they see some things about the horse which are important and are not incorporated in the Beyer number. Let's say there's a favorable jockey switch, the horse is adding blinkers, he's 75 days from his last race, and he's running on dirt although he seems to be better on grass. What does the mind do with this information? Well, the usual is that an overall impression, either positive or negative is derived from this information. It then must be applied to the raw reckoning of the horse's basic strength which was provided by the Beyer number. Even if the handicapper does not write down a new, adjusted number, that's what the mind is attempting to do. Now. Multiply this by all the horses in the race who have their own extraneous plusses and minuses, and I think you can see how the mind is not going to arrive at something very accurate. Worse, when a subsequent race presents itself, there will be no guarantee at all that the mind applies the extraneous variables in any sort of consistent way.

So I completely agree with you that the mind fails in this attempt and as you say, needs help because it is not a purely mathematical machine. But my point is, with regards to this problem, it needs to be.

The more contentious question coming from the above example is whether or not the extraneous variables can be incorporated by means of a number. I say yes and the simplest way to prove it is the following: Since the problem is mathematical, as long as the mind recognizes that a variable is important, it is already seeking (in its own way) to put a mathematical value on it. I wrote on another post that when one person is describing something quantifiable to another, they use phrases like: somewhat, pretty much, not too much, very, not very, a whole lot, a tad, a bit, etc., etc. Often, the frustrated listener says, "Well on a scale of 1-10, what would you say?"

So this was my point. The mind is seeking a numerical-application number to a numerical problem and when it applies the answer, that answer is numerical in nature and effect, even if it is not thought of as a specific number by the mind. But, since it's nature is clearly numerical, it can always be expressed numerically. This, I feel is inarguable. Those that argue the reverse are doing so because they can't envision how such a number could be accurately found or how it could be incorporated close to post time. But all these variables can be quantified and through data mining, far more accurately than the mind's anecdotal impressions. And with the speed of computers, they can be incorporated very quickly.

[Cratos]

For those that have an interest.
Please click on the following link to view my post:
http://wp.me/ppTmJ-1p

A happy and safe labor day to all.

If you going to play this game to pay the mortgage (i.e., become a professional player) you must in my opinion decide on what type of gambler you are. According to Kenneth Arrow, the Nobel Prize winning economist who argues in his theorem on individual risk that there are three (3) types of risk: (a) Risk-Preferred, (b) Risk-Against, and (c) Risk-Neutral.

I bring this up because horseracing in terms of making money is about risk and if you don’t know where you fall on the risk continuum, you will probably not be a successful horseracing gambler no matter how good of handicapper that you are.

Once you have an understanding of your gambling risk profile you need to ask yourself if you have the discipline to control it. Opportunity in horse betting is rare and it doesn’t make any difference if it is flat win betting (my choice) or exotic betting, you must have the discipline to seize the opportunity.

You must also have patience and a good work ethic. That is you must be able to wait for that “rare opportunity” and work hard to find it.

If you have met the aforementioned criteria you must have a bankroll that is consistent with your goal of revenue earning. Yes, I understand that a $2.00 bettor can hit a boxcar exotic and be financially set for a long time, but the odds of that happening is very long; synonymous to hitting the lottery jackpot.

Another suggestion is become a loner. Many bettors lose because they “bet by committee.” This is okay if you and a group of friends go the track to enjoy the sport as a spectator and lay a few wooden nickels for fun. But if the mortgage, car payment, and all other financial liabilities are dependent on your winnings; then you must put in the effort and task to win as you would do with any other job.

Someone mentioned in one of the other posts in this thread that the bettor should wager at the larger tracks. I don’t disagree with this because the mutuel pools are larger, but with ITW and OTB wagering you don’t have to be physically at the big racetracks. However two of the best wagering venues are the KY Derby and the Breeders’ Cup races.

[speculus]

This is a favorite subject of mine. I agree with what you say in your post and since my post was rather long and touched on so many different subjects, I was less than precise.

When it comes to handicapping horses, the exercise is fundamentally mathematical. Why? Because we are seeking to interpret the numbers that are provided in the past performances. (And I realize I am slighting those who handicap purely by astrology, appearance, smell, or whatever else).

Digesting all the numbers leads us to the strength of the individual horse. This strength is a mathematical function of some combination of the numbers which comprise his past performance. Whether or not we think of it as a number is irrelevant because any strength comparison can be boiled down to a number (such as a percentage difference). By the way, this is why figs and numbers like Bris' Prime Power are so popular since they seek to boil a lot of complicated numbers down to one. This is what the brain seeks- clarity from chaos.

Now. When most handicappers are confronted with a variable which they consider important, they form a mental impression. For example, let's say that a player relies on Beyer figs to give him an ballpark idea of the horse's ability. But they see some things about the horse which are important and are not incorporated in the Beyer number. Let's say there's a favorable jockey switch, the horse is adding blinkers, he's 75 days from his last race, and he's running on dirt although he seems to be better on grass. What does the mind do with this information? Well, the usual is that an overall impression, either positive or negative is derived from this information. It then must be applied to the raw reckoning of the horse's basic strength which was provided by the Beyer number. Even if the handicapper does not write down a new, adjusted number, that's what the mind is attempting to do. Now. Multiply this by all the horses in the race who have their own extraneous plusses and minuses, and I think you can see how the mind is not going to arrive at something very accurate. Worse, when a subsequent race presents itself, there will be no guarantee at all that the mind applies the extraneous variables in any sort of consistent way.

So I completely agree with you that the mind fails in this attempt and as you say, needs help because it is not a purely mathematical machine. But my point is, with regards to this problem, it needs to be.

The more contentious question coming from the above example is whether or not the extraneous variables can be incorporated by means of a number. I say yes and the simplest way to prove it is the following: Since the problem is mathematical, as long as the mind recognizes that a variable is important, it is already seeking (in its own way) to put a mathematical value on it. I wrote on another post that when one person is describing something quantifiable to another, they use phrases like: somewhat, pretty much, not too much, very, not very, a whole lot, a tad, a bit, etc., etc. Often, the frustrated listener says, "Well on a scale of 1-10, what would you say?"

So this was my point. The mind is seeking a numerical-application number to a numerical problem and when it applies the answer, that answer is numerical in nature and effect, even if it is not thought of as a specific number by the mind. But, since it's nature is clearly numerical, it can always be expressed numerically. This, I feel is inarguable. Those that argue the reverse are doing so because they can't envision how such a number could be accurately found or how it could be incorporated close to post time. But all these variables can be quantified and through data mining, far more accurately than the mind's anecdotal impressions. And with the speed of computers, they can be incorporated very quickly.

Very well put, MG. Thanks. I agree 100%. :ThmbUp:

[fmhealth]

OEX, please feel free to be my guest at TUP if you're out this way in the winter. I'm at Turf Paradise almost everyday. BTW, not only do I believe that inflation will come roaring back, I believe it's already here.

Continued success & be well!

[Fastracehorse]

If you going to play this game to pay the mortgage (i.e., become a professional player) you must in my opinion decide on what type of gambler you are. According to Kenneth Arrow, the Nobel Prize winning economist who argues in his theorem on individual risk that there are three (3) types of risk: (a) Risk-Preferred, (b) Risk-Against, and (c) Risk-Neutral.

I bring this up because horseracing in terms of making money is about risk and if you don’t know where you fall on the risk continuum, you will probably not be a successful horseracing gambler no matter how good of handicapper that you are.

Once you have an understanding of your gambling risk profile you need to ask yourself if you have the discipline to control it. Opportunity in horse betting is rare and it doesn’t make any difference if it is flat win betting (my choice) or exotic betting, you must have the discipline to seize the opportunity.

You must also have patience and a good work ethic. That is you must be able to wait for that “rare opportunity” and work hard to find it.

If you have met the aforementioned criteria you must have a bankroll that is consistent with your goal of revenue earning. Yes, I understand that a $2.00 bettor can hit a boxcar exotic and be financially set for a long time, but the odds of that happening is very long; synonymous to hitting the lottery jackpot.

Another suggestion is become a loner. Many bettors lose because they “bet by committee.” This is okay if you and a group of friends go the track to enjoy the sport as a spectator and lay a few wooden nickels for fun. But if the mortgage, car payment, and all other financial liabilities are dependent on your winnings; then you must put in the effort and task to win as you would do with any other job.

Someone mentioned in one of the other posts in this thread that the bettor should wager at the larger tracks. I don’t disagree with this because the mutuel pools are larger, but with ITW and OTB wagering you don’t have to be physically at the big racetracks. However two of the best wagering venues are the KY Derby and the Breeders’ Cup races.

I am risk-preferred baby :)

fffastt

[xtb]

For those that have an interest.
Please click on the following link to view my post:
http://wp.me/ppTmJ-1p



I'm curious, what makes you think you're qualified to give advice about something you are unable to do? Isn't your day job selling parts? And aren't you past retirement age?

[Hank]

This is a favorite subject of mine. I agree with what you say in your post and since my post was rather long and touched on so many different subjects, I was less than precise.

When it comes to handicapping horses, the exercise is fundamentally mathematical. Why? Because we are seeking to interpret the numbers that are provided in the past performances. (And I realize I am slighting those who handicap purely by astrology, appearance, smell, or whatever else).

Digesting all the numbers leads us to the strength of the individual horse. This strength is a mathematical function of some combination of the numbers which comprise his past performance. Whether or not we think of it as a number is irrelevant because any strength comparison can be boiled down to a number (such as a percentage difference). By the way, this is why figs and numbers like Bris' Prime Power are so popular since they seek to boil a lot of complicated numbers down to one. This is what the brain seeks- clarity from chaos.

Now. When most handicappers are confronted with a variable which they consider important, they form a mental impression. For example, let's say that a player relies on Beyer figs to give him an ballpark idea of the horse's ability. But they see some things about the horse which are important and are not incorporated in the Beyer number. Let's say there's a favorable jockey switch, the horse is adding blinkers, he's 75 days from his last race, and he's running on dirt although he seems to be better on grass. What does the mind do with this information? Well, the usual is that an overall impression, either positive or negative is derived from this information. It then must be applied to the raw reckoning of the horse's basic strength which was provided by the Beyer number. Even if the handicapper does not write down a new, adjusted number, that's what the mind is attempting to do. Now. Multiply this by all the horses in the race who have their own extraneous plusses and minuses, and I think you can see how the mind is not going to arrive at something very accurate. Worse, when a subsequent race presents itself, there will be no guarantee at all that the mind applies the extraneous variables in any sort of consistent way.

So I completely agree with you that the mind fails in this attempt and as you say, needs help because it is not a purely mathematical machine. But my point is, with regards to this problem, it needs to be.

The more contentious question coming from the above example is whether or not the extraneous variables can be incorporated by means of a number. I say yes and the simplest way to prove it is the following: Since the problem is mathematical, as long as the mind recognizes that a variable is important, it is already seeking (in its own way) to put a mathematical value on it. I wrote on another post that when one person is describing something quantifiable to another, they use phrases like: somewhat, pretty much, not too much, very, not very, a whole lot, a tad, a bit, etc., etc. Often, the frustrated listener says, "Well on a scale of 1-10, what would you say?"

So this was my point. The mind is seeking a numerical-application number to a numerical problem and when it applies the answer, that answer is numerical in nature and effect, even if it is not thought of as a specific number by the mind. But, since it's nature is clearly numerical, it can always be expressed numerically. This, I feel is inarguable. Those that argue the reverse are doing so because they can't envision how such a number could be accurately found or how it could be incorporated close to post time. But all these variables can be quantified and through data mining, far more accurately than the mind's anecdotal impressions. And with the speed of computers, they can be incorporated very quickly.

Beautiful beautiful,Mark you are the Descartes of handicapping.;)

[badcompany]

didn't mean to come off as being critical of your game. given your history of success, you'd probably be fine with about a $50,000 bankroll and a decent rebate. i just don't see the consistency in gambling that others do...... and to me that's at least part of what this "making a living" stuff implies....

Is this really enough?

From my own perspective, I'd have to pull about 2.5K a month (30k a yr) just for living expenses and that doesn't include the health insurance policy I'd have to buy to replace the employer based one I have now, or the ~15% of my income that I save. And let's not forget that you do have an obligation to pay taxes on your winnings.

[ryesteve]

Is this really enough?Well, let's use some very conservative estimates. Let's say you're betting one half of one percent of your bankroll per race... and let's say you bet 20 races a day on average. On saturdays in August it might be way more, and on tuesdays in January it might be less, but like I said, let's be conservative. So, with a $50k bankroll, you'd be churning $5k a day. At that level of annual play, you'd probably be able to get 10% in rebates, so in rebates alone, you'd be pulling in over $180k a year, which is far above the threshhold you've set.

[badcompany]

Well, let's use some very conservative estimates. Let's say you're betting one half of one percent of your bankroll per race... and let's say you bet 20 races a day on average. On saturdays in August it might be way more, and on tuesdays in January it might be less, but like I said, let's be conservative. So, with a $50k bankroll, you'd be churning $5k a day. At that level of annual play, you'd probably be able to get 10% in rebates, so in rebates alone, you'd be pulling in over $180k a year, which is far above the threshhold you've set.

You could also be broke in a month.

[ryesteve]

You could also be broke in a month.If you're betting .005 of your bankroll, and you go broke in a month, you're obviously barking up the wrong tree, so discussions of bankroll sizing are irrelevant.

[badcompany]

If you're betting .005 of your bankroll, and you go broke in a month, you're obviously barking up the wrong tree, so discussions of bankroll sizing are irrelevant.

Maybe my math is wrong.

One half of one percent or 1/200 of your bankroll, 50K, is $250. Betting 20 races a day would mean you stand to lose a maximum of 5k or 10% of your roll in a single day. Under those conditions, is it so hard to go broke in short order, especially if you bet gimmicks with a low hit percentage?

Am I miscalculating, here?

[ryesteve]

gimmicks with a low hit percentage?

Am I miscalculating, here?No, you're adding a new variable to the equation. If we're talking about low percentage wagers, then .005 is too aggressive. I may be wrong, but I don't think many pros operating a low percentage strategy that is characterized by extended runouts with large hits every once in a while.

[DeanT]

If you started with 50k and bet 150k a month and lost it all, even if you bet exotics, I would think you are the unluckiest dude in the land.

[badcompany]

If you started with 50k and bet 150k a month and lost it all, even if you bet exotics, I would think you are the unluckiest dude in the land.

We're talking about your livelihood, here. You have to take into account doomsday scenarios. Whether it's a month or a year is irrelevant. What would you do if you did go broke? Where would you get another 50k? The median American household income is ~45k a year before taxes, and, if you could get that money so easily why would you risk it on something as tenuous as betting horses?

This is why you need the "naysayers" in these threads, because the rose-colored-glasses-guys never ask the tough questions and gloss over the inconvenient truths.

[ryesteve]

This is why you need the "naysayers" in these threads, because the rose-colored-glasses-guys never ask the tough questions and gloss over the inconvenient truths.What are you talking about? Your question didn't start out, "Can one earn a living at this?". You were asking if $50,000 was a large enough starting bankroll. If the question has turned to bankroll sizing, I think we need to presuppose that the handicapper in question knows what he's doing. Losing your entire bankroll in one month is NOT a "doomsday scenario" for this person; it's evidence that he is a handicapper who does NOT know what he's doing, which renders all discussion of bankroll-sizing moot. The only thing a larger bankroll would afford THAT player is the opportunity to lose even more money.

[badcompany]

What are you talking about? Your question didn't start out, "Can one earn a living at this?".

No, that's just the topic of the thread. My question is an extension of that topic.

IMO, 50k isn't nearly enough, especially in your scenario in which you can lose 10% of your bankroll in a single day. I don't care how great of a handicapper you are, you will have nasty losing streaks that make you want to pull your hair out.

[Robert Fischer]

why not make it an even 100K?

[ryesteve]

you will have nasty losing streaks that make you want to pull your hair out.Again, if you are betting one half of 1%, and we're not talking low-hit-rate exotics, and you manage to burn through $50k, that's not a losing streak, it's evidence that you're not a winning player.

[CBedo]

Chip Reese (RIP) one of the most successful gamblers out there told a story: He was on his way to visit his mother for a holiday of some sort. He stopped on the way for a poker game and won $20,000. It was cash of course. When he got to his mother's house he had to put it somewhere, so he threw it in the freezer. He had a good time and went home. Some months later, his mother called. She said 'I found a loaf of money in the freezer; is it yours?'

I thought that was telling. If you make a 20k score and have the ability to look at it as a part of your bankroll, or simply a score keeping device, one can be ok. If that 20k is a means to pay off a mortgage, or use to buy something, or something you would think about, it will be tough to be professional in racing/gambling, imo.Most of the very successful "gamblers" I have ever known (like Chip), have all had the quality of having almost total disregard for the value of a dollar (how else do you forget 20k in a freezer?). Dollars are just something used to bet and keep score, like chips in poker. They are not afraid to make the wagers they need to make because of fear of losing it.

P.S. I was lucky enough to play some poker with Chip, and he was not only a great card player, but a great guy as well. His calm cool and nice guy demeanor at the poker table would lull people to sleep where he would murder them at the table.

[proximity]

Is this really enough?

From my own perspective, I'd have to pull about 2.5K a month (30k a yr) just for living expenses and that doesn't include the health insurance policy I'd have to buy to replace the employer based one I have now, or the ~15% of my income that I save. And let's not forget that you do have an obligation to pay taxes on your winnings.

it is at least a start.

if he rolls 50k even once a month and gets a 5% rebate, he'll make the 30k a year you need to live in manhattan....... and i hope he doesn't need this much in cincinnati. :)

[DeanT]

We're talking about your livelihood, here. You have to take into account doomsday scenarios. Whether it's a month or a year is irrelevant. What would you do if you did go broke? Where would you get another 50k? The median American household income is ~45k a year before taxes, and, if you could get that money so easily why would you risk it on something as tenuous as betting horses?

If you need money to pay the rent, and cant afford to lose $50,000, it should not be your starting bankroll.

Most of the very successful "gamblers" I have ever known (like Chip), have all had the quality of having almost total disregard for the value of a dollar (how else do you forget 20k in a freezer?). Dollars are just something used to bet and keep score, like chips in poker. They are not afraid to make the wagers they need to make because of fear of losing it.

P.S. I was lucky enough to play some poker with Chip, and he was not only a great card player, but a great guy as well. His calm cool and nice guy demeanor at the poker table would lull people to sleep where he would murder them at the table.

I was wondering when you would pop in here CB! Nice to hear from you on this. I heard (anecdotally of course) good things about Chip. He died far too young.

[CBedo]

I was wondering when you would pop in here CB! Nice to hear from you on this. I heard (anecdotally of course) good things about Chip. He died far too young.I guess I should have added that most "professional" poker players I know are more or less broke the majority of the time because of their total disregard for the value of the dollar. They tend to substantially overbet their bankrolls! Over the past few years, many of the ones that are doing well are doing so because of interests outside of their card playing.

[Warren Henry]

I guess I should have added that most "professional" poker players I know are more or less broke the majority of the time because of their total disregard for the value of the dollar. They tend to substantially overbet their bankrolls! Over the past few years, many of the ones that are doing well are doing so because of interests outside of their card playing.
Unfortunately, some of the very good poker players are horrible at other gambling endeavors. That coupled with their disregard for the value of the dollars keeps some of them broke.

How can we convince more of them to play our game? :D

[CBedo]

Unfortunately, some of the very good poker players are horrible at other gambling endeavors. That coupled with their disregard for the value of the dollars keeps some of them broke.

How can we convince more of them to play our game? :DCraps is easier. :lol:

[Lead Pipe]

Most of the very successful "gamblers" I have ever known (like Chip), have all had the quality of having almost total disregard for the value of a dollar (how else do you forget 20k in a freezer?). Dollars are just something used to bet and keep score, like chips in poker. They are not afraid to make the wagers they need to make because of fear of losing it.

P.S. I was lucky enough to play some poker with Chip, and he was not only a great card player, but a great guy as well. His calm cool and nice guy demeanor at the poker table would lull people to sleep where he would murder them at the table.
Who was better chip reese or stu ungar?

[CBedo]

Who was better chip reese or stu ungar?I came along after Stuey, but from people I talked to, his ability to read people was scary. I think I read somewhere that he won better than 1 our of every 4 big buyin poker tournaments he ever played. The first WSOP main event he won, I don't think he had ever played no limit before. From what I've heard, many of today's uber aggressive, put your opponent to the test strategies, Stu used well before they were popular (explaining some of the success). Unfortunately, his battles with cocaine addiction kept us from really knowing how good he could have been.

Chip might not have been a better "pure" card player, but his overall thinking and gambling abilities are legendary. When Doyle Brunson says you are the greatest ever, that carries some weight.

FYI, Nolan Dalla's book about Stuey is a pretty good read.

[DeanT]

CB,

Chip was a good money manager was he not? I know he branched out into betting baseball late in life and made a killing, so he must have been good, no?

I wonder, how much success in poker is money management and the ability to stay off tilt? Is it as much, or more, or less important than in racing?

I think Ungar was a tilt guy and Reese was not. I wonder who would be the better player when that is added to the mix?

[macdiarmida]

Warren Henry wrote:
How can we convince more of them to play our game?
Exactly! Plus lawyers, doctors, pro athletes, etc. who may be superb in their calling, but often assume they are as good at everything else besides their profession.

Have professional conventions and poker tournaments hosted at the racetrack, maybe.

[BMeadow]

There is no "one way" of making a living at the track. Instead, consider some helpful attributes:

1. A way to accurately evaluate each race (or series of races) that interest you, whether you use software, the Form, or your own method.

2. The discipline to play only those horses or combinations which you perceive to be overlays which will mean passing many races, some of which you would have won had you bet.

3. The creativity to make the proper type of bet considering the particular circumstances of the situation (keying a horse for fourth, throwing out the second choice, using A's and B's and C's for multi-horse wagers, playing the daily double but not necessarily the win bets in either leg, betting a certain favorite to show, etc.).

4. A method of bet-sizing that considers factors such as your effect on the pool, your bankroll, the types of bets you make, the amount of value for the particular bet, your emotional big-bet threshhold, and several other factors.

5. The insistence on getting strong rebates, betting at Betfair, and similar deals which have a major effect on the bottom lines of nearly all the full-time players these days (including me).

6. A very large bankroll. If you have only $10,000 and bet a fairly safe 2% of your bankroll per bet and bet 8 races a day four days a week for 40 weeks a year, you're putting only $256,000 through the windows, which won't qualify you for much in rebates; if you do manage to get a 3% rebate and win 2% straight up (a much tougher long-term feat than some posters here may think), you'll make less than $13,000 annually. You can of course bet higher amounts, more races per day, more days, and more weeks--but there's no guarantee that this higher handle will help you win.

[proximity]

6. A very large bankroll. If you have only $10,000 and bet a fairly safe 2% of your bankroll per bet and bet 8 races a day .

how safe is this 2 % is my question?

betting this on 8 overlays a day, i could lose all 8 and that would be 16% of my bankroll right there. (of course i know i'm the only player on here who can lose 8 races in a row.:rolleyes: )

if this was the stock market this 16% would be one of the largest single day declines ever, but it's ok for my racing bankroll?

[lamboguy]

this is a great thread. if everyone that said they are winning are actually winning, how come the handles are down 15% year to date? and since parimutual racing is a zero sum gain where is the money coming from that all you people are winning?

it seems to me that all you winners have complex sheet and computer programs that are setup to beat this game. i have been told that drugs make horses run faster, how do you put that in your programs since one jurisdiction is different than the other concerning medications?

personally, i don't use racing forms, sheets or any type of numbers to derive my wagers and i lose on a consistan basis. i say that because i am doing different things than most here. during this last saratoga meet there were plenty of 2yo maiden races that i had or knew of 3 or more horses in the race and i might have won 2 races for a big net loss.

the people that read racing forms and use sheets and numbers to derive their selections are way down now. where is the "dumb money" coming from. i look around and have now figured out that i am the dumb money in the game.

i am very stupid, and if there really are people out there that make a living betting parimutual horseracing my hat goes off to you and i truly hope you continue on your winning ways.

[proximity]

this is a great thread. if everyone that said they are winning are actually winning, how come the handles are down 15% year to date? and since parimutual racing is a zero sum gain where is the money coming from that all you people are winning?
.

maybe the tracks have been cracking down on the late cancellations you're always talking about? this would decrease the handle, but make it easier for a greater number of bettors to win....

[Partsnut]

There is no "one way" of making a living at the track. Instead, consider some helpful attributes:

1. A way to accurately evaluate each race (or series of races) that interest you, whether you use software, the Form, or your own method.

2. The discipline to play only those horses or combinations which you perceive to be overlays which will mean passing many races, some of which you would have won had you bet.

3. The creativity to make the proper type of bet considering the particular circumstances of the situation (keying a horse for fourth, throwing out the second choice, using A's and B's and C's for multi-horse wagers, playing the daily double but not necessarily the win bets in either leg, betting a certain favorite to show, etc.).

4. A method of bet-sizing that considers factors such as your effect on the pool, your bankroll, the types of bets you make, the amount of value for the particular bet, your emotional big-bet threshhold, and several other factors.

5. The insistence on getting strong rebates, betting at Betfair, and similar deals which have a major effect on the bottom lines of nearly all the full-time players these days (including me).

6. A very large bankroll. If you have only $10,000 and bet a fairly safe 2% of your bankroll per bet and bet 8 races a day four days a week for 40 weeks a year, you're putting only $256,000 through the windows, which won't qualify you for much in rebates; if you do manage to get a 3% rebate and win 2% straight up (a much tougher long-term feat than some posters here may think), you'll make less than $13,000 annually. You can of course bet higher amounts, more races per day, more days, and more weeks--but there's no guarantee that this higher handle will help you win.
__________________
Barry Meadow

Barry, thank you for your opinion, to me it is the most credible opinion I've seen posted on this thread. I have read your book and believe you are the best authority on this subject. Thank you for participating. Your book is great and I use it as a reference and on a daily basis. One can only learn from you. :ThmbUp:

[lamboguy]

maybe the tracks have been cracking down on the late cancellations you're always talking about? this would decrease the handle, but make it easier for a greater number of bettors to win....that would be a good thing for the game if that were true

[badcompany]

how safe is this 2 % is my question?

betting this on 8 overlays a day, i could lose all 8 and that would be 16% of my bankroll right there. (of course i know i'm the only player on here who can lose 8 races in a row.:rolleyes: )

if this was the stock market this 16% would be one of the largest single day declines ever, but it's ok for my racing bankroll?

The #1 reason people blow up in Poker, The Stock Market and Horseracing is overbetting their bankroll, yet, you have "experts" here recommending betting $200 a race on a 10K roll.

[fast4522]

As usual I agree with something everyone has said on this subject. My take on this is people try to use software as the one size fits all, and in the end fail. You can make in excess of 20K part time without putting in 250k during the year. Betting to win cashing some and winning others and putting that huge amount back and forth brings some kind sick past time to thought, better left to those who wish to become blind doing it. I do feel it is the score once or twice a week that is needed sign job or not in order to be profitable. I will admit that its normal for me to have $5 to $25 bet to win on the bombs when they come in, but I often avoid the win pool like the herps for lack of value. I agree with my friend that the Sartin does not work as a primary means of being profitable, but do think it is a good secondary means. To explain the last statement is to say it is excellent as a vantage point of looking at the races. What works for one may not work for all. To suggest one vantage point is better than another is a stretch indeed. I would suggest you can be very profitable without rebates, betting to win, or doing what someone else posts. That being said, the most effective method I have found over the years is once you have won $250 us dollars leave, walk, run, or just do something else. Here is the logic in the last statement, most players forget what a days pay is. If I clip a gimmick in the second or third its see ya time. The expensive part of the sport of kings is the time involved, you can grind $100 to $200 in a very long day or just take the early luck and walk out the door when you get it. On many a nice day I have folded my laptop and packed it after clipping the first race and making $150 in 15 minutes. I may have planned to spend the afternoon in the Sports Book but when faced with short time with profit I manage my time to not make minimum wage. Talk of money management, system management goes so far. Personal control and time management is the key to this game.

[Robert Fischer]

The #1 reason people blow up in Poker, The Stock Market and Horseracing is overbetting their bankroll, yet, you have "experts" here recommending betting $200 a race on a 10K roll.

There isn't anything inherently wrong with betting $200 on a 10K roll. The estimated hit percentage hasn't been included in your example, and it would be necessary for most who bet on a formula. Also the idea of ruin point (which isn't that popular as far as i can tell).
but more popular is a fixed percentage, and 2% is generally excepted as ok.

My personal opinion is that 200K could range from slightly low to slightly high depending on the estimated hit percentage and where your ruin pint is. Insufficient information given.

[CBedo]

how safe is this 2 % is my question?

betting this on 8 overlays a day, i could lose all 8 and that would be 16% of my bankroll right there. (of course i know i'm the only player on here who can lose 8 races in a row.:rolleyes: )

if this was the stock market this 16% would be one of the largest single day declines ever, but it's ok for my racing bankroll?As usual, it depends on the hit rate and the expected returns. If you have a 20% hit rate, I think you'll lose 10 in a row about 1 time in 10, but if your methodology is postive expectation, this would just be part of the "normal" swings and over a a group of 100 bets or more, it would be a blip. The issue is whether you can handle it psychologically. It's definitely easier if you believe in what you are doing. In my case, the automated model I'm letting run is making 100s of bets a week, and it's fairly low return, so over any 10 bet sequence, I actualy expect to lose money about 40% of the time, which can make for a disheartening day, but it doesn't affect my betting going forward.

And comparing the decline to a day in the stock market doesn't really make that much sense since how many days in the stock market over a 8 position portfolio do you have the chance to double or triple your money in a day? The risk reward profile is much different.

[proximity]

The #1 reason people blow up in Poker, The Stock Market and Horseracing is overbetting their bankroll, yet, you have "experts" here recommending betting $200 a race on a 10K roll.

some are even recommending $500!!

[PanamaPete]

In staying with the topic of this thread I would like to submit. It is very possible for one to garner an excellent living from paramutual wagering (investing). However, IMHO there are some basic rules that must be followed.

1. This must be treated as a business, period. If you are looking for a hobby or recreational handicapping and a beer with the guy's, I suggest just have fun and forget about any profit.

2. You must keep excellent books. By that I mean records everything. Record not only your handicapping skill but every penny spent in that endeavor. If you are going to eat a snack mark it down.

3. If you are going to a track or an OTB, keep in mind this is a business. Do not discuss your affairs with anyone. Bragging rights about winning are for amateurs. By all means do not imbibe alcohol while working. You couldn't do it on a job and this is a job.

4. Tipping sellers when you hit a good mutual is optional. Bear in mind sellers don't tip when you lose. Besides, you are giving away your hard earned profits.

There's more if there is any interest.
pp

[andymays]

In staying with the topic of this thread I would like to submit. It is very possible for one to garner an excellent living from paramutual wagering (investing). However, IMHO there are some basic rules that must be followed.

1. This must be treated as a business, period. If you are looking for a hobby or recreational handicapping and a beer with the guy's, I suggest just have fun and forget about any profit.

2. You must keep excellent books. By that I mean records everything. Record not only your handicapping skill but every penny spent in that endeavor. If you are going to eat a snack mark it down.

3. If you are going to a track or an OTB, keep in mind this is a business. Do not discuss your affairs with anyone. Bragging rights about winning are for amateurs. By all means do not imbibe alcohol while working. You couldn't do it on a job and this is a job.

4. Tipping sellers when you hit a good mutual is optional. Bear in mind sellers don't tip when you lose. Besides, you are giving away your hard earned profits.

There's more if there is any interest.
pp


All good points Pete! :ThmbUp:

Patience and Discipline!

[fast4522]

Personal control and time management is the key to this game.
This thread was originated by a true gent who does it his way in order to live within his own skin, I adapt my play in order to live within mine.
Rules are good for people to follow in single file, if you prefer to adapt yours to be a robot then go for it.

[rokitman]

All good points Pete! :ThmbUp:

Patience and Discipline!
And no sex until after you win!

Remember?

[46zilzal]

4. Tipping sellers when you hit a good mutual is optional. Bear in mind sellers don't tip when you lose. Besides, you are giving away your hard earned profits.

.
NEVER understood this. The seller NEVER risked any money, never spent the time it takes as an apprentice to learn the games (capping and gambling)

[DanG]

NEVER understood this. The seller NEVER risked any money, never spent the time it takes as an apprentice to learn the games (capping and gambling)

Good thread and I hope this doesn’t side track the conversation into tellers; but…

Personal choice, but if your playing in the same place consistently it can be to your benefit to take care of them just as you would Valet parking, or a waitress imo.

• Case in point #1; we tried to use the same teller at the Palm’s whenever possible and she would go out of her way to help us if the lines were deep in different ways. Canceling / changing wagers late and calling bets live it can really help if the puncher learns your personal cadence with complex wagering.

• Case in point #2: My brother’s best friend growing up wouldn’t leave them a nickel if he hit for 10 million and 5 cents. If they hesitated giving the change, he would scream “get a real job” as loud as you could imagine. To each their own I guess.

• Case in point #3: The cheat…we have all seen the teller who cheats and Tampa Greyhound track had one for years on the 2nd floor of the grandstand side that would often hold back a portion of the return hoping you just walked away. For these types; a Paulie Walnuts massage in the parking lot is too good for them.
http://www.tvscoop.tv/paulie%20%282%29.jpg

[BMeadow]

To clear up any confusion, I never recommended betting 2% of your bankroll on a particular play. This is far too high a percentage for most players on most bets.

In fact, I have bet charts in my book Money Secrets At The Racetrack which cover the various amounts you could safely bet to win with a $2,000 bankroll, depending on hit rate and the perceived amount of overlay on a play. Extrapolating this to a $10K bankroll, if you make a horse 2-1 to win (33% chance of winning) and he goes off at 3-1, you would bet $100; if he goes off at 4-1, you would still bet only $125. And if you make a horse 7-2 to win (22% chance of winning) and he goes off at 6-1, you would bet just $65--again, far below 2% of bankroll even though you consider the horse a strong overlay.

If you bet 3-5 shots to show (and are a winning player, whether before or after rebates, and this may be a questionable assumption unless you've been doing this a long time), you can safely bet far more than 2% of your bankroll on a particular play. But if your typical play is on horses going off at 10-1 or higher, you need to be much, much more conservative; thinking you can bet 2% of your bankroll on these plays is a certain path to run. And if you think you can bet $200 pick 6's with a $10K bankroll, good luck on that plan!

So, to clear up any confusion: Bet sizing depends on a number of factors. The higher the hit rate on a particular type of play, the more you can safely bet; the lower the hit rate, the less you can safely bet. Many players have been done in by overbetting, believing that have a big edge when they have only a small edge, or none at all.

I should have been more clear in my example.

In any event, most players who attempt to do this as a serious business should have a back-up plan. If you have only a $10K bankroll, for instance, you're probably better off betting at levels as if you had only a $5K bankroll. This way, if you lose it all, you still have a backup bankroll to work with.

If you keep winning over an extended period of time, your bankroll will grow accordingly anyway.

For those interested, my website is www.trpublishing.com

[PanamaPete]

To continue with this topic. Don't get sidetracked with this tipping question. If you feel better giving away some of your hard earned profit, by all means do so. My personal preference is not to start the habit and then it's not hard to later break. However, I don't have this problem because my play is strictly via computer. There is a major reason for this I will get into later.

I want anyone reading this to understand, this is what works for me. However, YMMV.

The generalized rules I previously discussed were just good business practices. Without a good accounting system you will never know how you stand. If it's not accurate, why bother?

My feelings are that the more automatic whatever procedure you chose the better. Years back I would sit and ponder past performances for hours trying to come up with an edge. Those days are now long past. Choosing handicapping as a profession does require in the beginning long hours. However, sooner or later you come to an understanding of what this all about. Once you find a niche that is reasonable successful you zero in on that single procedure and follow it until it becomes second nature. If that constitutes a robot, then so be it. (I will get into niches later.) Without finding that one niche, you are subject to one of the major downfalls of all handicappers. If you allow your handicapping to become time consuming, strenuous and stressful you are subject to burn out. Once burn out set's in you will get careless, you will eventually lose your desire to be successful and consequently lose your bankroll.

This get's back to my reasoning for not going to a track or an OTB. I have not watched a race in years. Paramutual investing with Thoroughbred horse is nothing more than a vehicle to profits. If I could find a way to be successful using armadillos instead of horses it would be fine with me. Besides, when you watch a race it effects your emotions. The up's and down's of observing winning or losing is murder on your nerves. Why put yourself thorough all that stress? Do not allow yourself to get emotionally involved over any one race. Once your money is down all your emotions will change nothing, you either win or lose. Understand this, the outcome of a single race is meaningless. It's the whole meet that determines where you are. ROI is the name of the game. Checking at the end of the day, or even the next is sufficient. If this is your chosen profession and you are successful it will become fun instead of a job. However, plan on going to work five days a week.

More later, maybe.
pp

[proximity]

.... For these types; a Paulie Walnuts massage in the parking lot is too good for them.
http://www.tvscoop.tv/paulie%20%282%29.jpg


i'm gonna assume those don't come with "happy endings!!";)

[Hank]

To continue with this topic. Don't get sidetracked with this tipping question. If you feel better giving away some of your hard earned profit, by all means do so. My personal preference is not to start the habit and then it's not hard to later break. However, I don't have this problem because my play is strictly via computer. There is a major reason for this I will get into later.

I want anyone reading this to understand, this is what works for me. However, YMMV.

The generalized rules I previously discussed were just good business practices. Without a good accounting system you will never know how you stand. If it's not accurate, why bother?

My feelings are that the more automatic whatever procedure you chose the better. Years back I would sit and ponder past performances for hours trying to come up with an edge. Those days are now long past. Choosing handicapping as a profession does require in the beginning long hours. However, sooner or later you come to an understanding of what this all about. Once you find a niche that is reasonable successful you zero in on that single procedure and follow it until it becomes second nature. If that constitutes a robot, then so be it. (I will get into niches later.) Without finding that one niche, you are subject to one of the major downfalls of all handicappers. If you allow your handicapping to become time consuming, strenuous and stressful you are subject to burn out. Once burn out set's in you will get careless, you will eventually lose your desire to be successful and consequently lose your bankroll.

This get's back to my reasoning for not going to a track or an OTB. I have not watched a race in years. Paramutual investing with Thoroughbred horse is nothing more than a vehicle to profits. If I could find a way to be successful using armadillos instead of horses it would be fine with me. Besides, when you watch a race it effects your emotions. The up's and down's of observing winning or losing is murder on your nerves. Why put yourself thorough all that stress? Do not allow yourself to get emotionally involved over any one race. Once your money is down all your emotions will change nothing, you either win or lose. Understand this, the outcome of a single race is meaningless. It's the whole meet that determines where you are. ROI is the name of the game. Checking at the end of the day, or even the next is sufficient. If this is your chosen profession and you are successful it will become fun instead of a job. However, plan on going to work five days a week.

More later, maybe.
pp

Interesting Pete.Do you watch the races later or never watch?

[TurfRuler]

(And I realize I am slighting those who handicap purely by astrology, appearance, smell, or whatever else).

I know I'm rich when I can laugh at what someone else has to offer and can smile the rest of the day for their thought. I know I'll keep this little point of view for my bankroll.

[PanamaPete]

I will sometime watch a big stakes races on cable but never races I am working.
pp

[andymays]

I will sometime watch a big stakes races on cable but never races I am working.
pp


Do you watch Race replays and do any trip handicapping before you make your final selections?

[Track Collector]

My feelings are that the more automatic whatever procedure you chose the better. Years back I would sit and ponder past performances for hours trying to come up with an edge. Those days are now long past. Choosing handicapping as a profession does require in the beginning long hours. However, sooner or later you come to an understanding of what this all about. Once you find a niche that is reasonable successful you zero in on that single procedure and follow it until it becomes second nature. If that constitutes a robot, then so be it. (I will get into niches later.) Without finding that one niche, you are subject to one of the major downfalls of all handicappers. If you allow your handicapping to become time consuming, strenuous and stressful you are subject to burn out. Once burn out set's in you will get careless, you will eventually lose your desire to be successful and consequently lose your bankroll. I agree 100%. :ThmbUp:

This get's back to my reasoning for not going to a track or an OTB. I have not watched a race in years. Even if your selection is via a database method, one can still learn things about a particular track by visually watching a number of races (including ones you did not wager on) that are not readily discernable by reviewing the data.
pp

Track Collector

[JoeLong]

BUMP! for return study, thanks.

[banacek]

If you keep winning over an extended period of time, your bankroll will grow accordingly anyway.

For those interested, my website is www.trpublishing.com (http://www.trpublishing.com/)

Barry, any plans for a new book on racing..always enjoy your writing..and it's been a long time since there has been a solid new handicapping book published.

[PanamaPete]

I want to devote this post to narrowing the scope of handicapping to specific tracks. Again, this is just my opinion.The first piece of data is how well the mutual's are paying at a specific track. Lower level tracks are sometime easier to handicap than the major tracks. This is due to the poor quality of horses. When an outstanding horse comes along everybody is on him. You may think your handicapping is superior at the smaller tracks but bear in mind most other handicappers are good at these tracks also. Consequently, they pay lower mutual's. The nature of paramutual wagering is such that a person does not wager against the house (track). The wagering is among the others wagering. The track is a broker, or simply takes a cut along with the State. When there is not very much money spread around (handle) the mutual's are smaller. This is especially true with the exotics. This is not to say money cannot be made at the smaller tracks. However, for my method of play the class "A" are the most profitable.
pp

[WinterTriangle]

I think we need to presuppose that the handicapper in question knows what he's doing. Losing your entire bankroll in one month is NOT a "doomsday scenario" for this person; it's evidence that he is a handicapper who does NOT know what he's doing

I agree.

Millions of small businesses go under every year. There is always, when objectively evaluated, a reason.....a skill, asset, or something overlooked, by the entrepreneur that could have been avoided.

One of my friends had a thriving internet business with a niche product, enough to support her family of 4 plus her husband, for many years. Then, one day, the major supplier of her product pulled the plug. The end. Fatal mistake on her part, she over-relied on one supplier. It was inconceivable to all of us, because one could not imagine a good businesswoman DOING that. In other words, all along, while it appeared she was doing so good, there was a fatal error INHERENT in her business plan, lurking and just a matter of time before it sunk her.

Most *doomsday* scenarios are just that. They aren't doomsdays, they are self-created fatal errors.

Because *doomsdays*, in reality, just don't happen often, in nature, or in life.

[speculus]

If you allow your handicapping to become time consuming, strenuous and stressful you are subject to burn out. Once burn out set's in you will get careless, you will eventually lose your desire to be successful and consequently lose your bankroll.

pp

Almost the same thoughts I had expressed in a mail that I wrote to one of my students in August last year; and co-incidentally, re-published it on my blog (http://prakashgosavi.blogspot.com/2009/09/how-finoo-was-born-logic-and-reson.html) just two days ago in trying to explain why I am opting for a six-minutes a day handicapping method after being a (losing and then mildly successful) speed & pace handicapper for so many years.

I am sure you ARE on the right track. :ThmbUp: