Biggest profit obstacles?

[takeout]

The recent takeout discussions got me wondering what everyone thought were the biggest obstacles to achieving a long-term profit. Some that immediately come to mind are takeout, competition, breakage, taxes, expenses, time, discipline. What am I leaving out and how would you rate them in order of importance?

[Larry Hamilton]

The items in your list shouldn't be called "obstacles". An obstacle is something you can work around, overcome or learn to beat. These are more accrately described as costs.

Your list includes takeout, taxes and breakage. These costs are hidden. They occur in the bowels of the track where a little guy with a bow tie and round rimmed glasses touches ever dollar that comes in and goes out. Every dollar that comes is carved up into three main pieces by the little guy. It is the house's money, so to speak. The first house that must be paid is the state. They get their piece no matter who wins. Their piece comes from allowing this activity to occur. The second piece goes to the owners of the track and special local prize funds. These occur because the owners of the track "allowed" many of his "friends" to run their pets for money. They also provide the facility to gamble on the outcome. The piece that is left is ours. The little guy says to himself, "I aint gonna go to the trouble to calculate the payout to the penny. Rather, i am going to round down to the nearest dime or so. Besides, it will help my bottom line to skim the pot."

It is interesting to note, that all three pieces are carved out of each dollar and WE HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT--accept it and move on to stuff where you do have control.

I am the competitiion. You have no control over who I am or how good I am. Neither do you have any real control over expenses, time or discipline as the items are all the cost of doing business. If you cut any of these, you are reducing your chances of profiting. Does anyone think they can make more money by spending less time studying? if you do, then you must also know how much time is involved in a win and at what point does a loss become a win, in terms of time--unanswerable! You spend as much time as it takes.

How about expenses? What are you going to do? Not eat that hot dog? Dont buy that book? Not get that DUI driving home from the track? Walk home? Not gamble with the rent?

How about discipline? That, too defies categorizing. What is "some" discipline? You are either disciplined or you are not and my definition could easily be different than yours.

Well, since I peed on the wholel parade, what are some obstacles, over which the individual does have control? Difficult to put in a box, The term "obstacle" usually refers to a path. Having a path suggests there is only one way to profit--stay on the path.

This leads me to a conclution I often use with day-to-day life outside of horses--START WITH THE ANSWER YOU WILL ACCEPT. Describe what it would take to achieve acceptable results, working front to back, back to front and sometimes sideways too. Define your list. Measure what you list. Know the relationship between every item on your list and why it is necessary.. Refine your list--start over. Finally, implement your list. Obstacles are those things which would prevent you from following this line of attack. I have listed somethings I consider obstacles:

Spouses who want more of your attention, time, interest, money. Beyer said it best--women and gambling dont mix. No matter he recanted by saying he became involved with a gambling women--it is a distraction.

Cheap advice. It's everywhere! Who do I listen to? Who do I tune out? If an would-be advisor has painted himself to be a liar or weak-minded, can I ever trust anything he says?

Education. I know that I must have a smattering of statistics, probability and math beyond adding beaten lengths to time. I must do this! The best formal education I know of is a Masters in System Management.

Honesty. Can I look in the mirror and describe my limitations. DO I play with "what if" to the extent that a losing day turns into a profit during the drive home? Do I say things such as, "I pick as well as anyone, I just dont seem to get the money management right." Do i think that If I bet more, all my losses will disappear in my winnings?


Good exercise in introspection, this will be fun to discuss.

[karlskorner]

Actually I have no qualms about "takeout", it is part of the structure that allows me to participate. Management provides me with a decent plant to conduct my business, a fair amount of races from which I can draw an opinion and we deal on a "cash only" basis.

I cannot think of another business that provides the public with the amount of profit they are receiving. If General Motors was making less than Ford Motor Company, would you buy a Chevrolet rather than a Ford?

I have suffered the high takeout at Hialeah (now defunct) and worked around it. The difference between a 15% and a 17% takeout on win bets is minimal at the end of the year when you close the books.

Karl

[Rick Ransom]

Great rant Larry. I have more time than most, but I still have trouble budgeting it between playing what I already know versus studying to learn something I don't know. I don't have any family problems since my wife likes horse racing and I don't have children at home.

On opinions of others, I'll keep listening to them or reading what they write only if I've been able to verify that something they said was true. If I already know that everything they say is false (especially with famous authors), I just won't waste time on them anymore. One of the most valuable things for me was seeing results of large scale studies that showed that most factors people talk about don't work. It saves a lot of time to not be searching up blind alleys all the time.

I was also lucky to be able to spend time with people who really knew how to win and were willing to share the knowledge. As a matter of fact, that's why I'm here. I can learn more by participating in this group than I can reading 100 handicapping books.

I'd like to see all of the tracks reduce their takeout to about 10%, but not less since I don't want any of them to risk going out of business. If I recall correctly, I believe that was about the level they had when the tracks first opened. Also, several economists have recommended this as the proper level to optimize profits. But I'm in favor of whatever works. I don't want to wind up with only three tracks running and televising all of the races with no live audience.

[karlskorner]

Rick;

You stated that you would liike to see all tracks reduce their takeout to 10%, which you belive was the amount deducted when they started.

You could also buy 5 gal. of gasoline for $1.00 at that time and the purse for the Kentucky Derby was $50,000.

Karl

[Figman]

According to NYRA Chairman Barry Schwartz speaking on the Capital District OTB show out of Saratoga today, NYRA has been tracking the pari-mutuel payouts with the old and newly reduced takeout percentages. Sometime today, the public got over the $2 million mark total in payouts more than they would have gotten with the old higher percentages.

I think the amount of tax you pay on winnings is the biggest obstacle.
I don't mind the takeout for the track,but when I get the winnings in my hand,I'm expected to report to the Goverment how much I've won,and be taxed accordingly.
And to help me out,after winning 600 or more dollars,the track is required to take information on me to make sure I fess up at the end of the year.
Why should I have to pay tax on money that has already been taxed?The money has been taxed by the fed and the state,since I assume all the horseplayers are spending their paychecks,and its their money I've won.
Oh well,thats an issue that could go on forever....

Don't pay attention to takeout,like karlskorner said ,the amount is minimal to the individual bettor over the course of a year,(unless you bet hundreds of thousands of dollars a year)

Expenses are realitively cheap,form ,admission,thats all required.The Coke ,hot dog,etc. are not.

Time is a big factor,you need it to figure the race ,how to bet the race ,and time to keep record of how you are doing,for the day or for the year.And keep records of the horses,if thats a handicapping factor to you.

Discipline is tied with time ,if you don't have discipline you won't make a profit.I have heard it called "having an Iron Ass",and if you dont have it sometime ,you end up betting too many races and winning small amounts that are not in relation to their odds of happening.

[Rick Ransom]

karlscorner,

Sorry, but your logic is flawed. Prices of gasoline and purses are subject to inflation because they are measured in dollars. I was talking about a percentage, which has nothing to do with inflation.

[karlskorner]

Rick;

Lets say the average overall takeout at any given track is 20%. Now for our purposes here, lets divide this in 3rds, the local and state government takes it's share, the horsemen (purses) takes it's share and the balance is left for the track, along with it concession profits, parking and admission etc. to maintain the plant, pay it's employees, advertise, show a profit, etc.

The purpose of lowering the take out is to induce regular players to come back, intice new players with "new money" and give reason to regular players to bet a little more and play longer, as their bankroll will last if the takeout is reduced.

Meanwhile, the OTB's and offshore groups who pay 3 to 5% for the signal are enjoying the same 20% takeout.
Rick Ransom you put $100,000 through the machines today, we are going to give you a 10% rebate and they still make a decent profit and you picked up a few bucks. Why do you thing Frank Stronch is willing to pay $350 million for NYC OTB's ? You may call it inflation or percentage, I call it money.

In the next decade there will be 1 or 2 plants on each coast and a couple of tracks in the middle and they will be supported and owned by OTB's.

Karl

[so.cal.fan]

If the track takeout was 10% on every bet, horseracing would be the best gambling game on the planet!
We would all have more money in our pockets than we do now.
More important, the handle would be out of this dimension after the word got round the world!
Our industry would no longer need to worry about competition for any other source. We would again be NUMBER ONE.

[Larry Hamilton]

hmmmmmmm, I just thought i was peeing on the parade, in reality, I must have been peeing in the wind...

[GR1@HTR]

Human emotion....ie trying to get even on bets after a few losing streaks...

and

Action bets

[so.cal.fan]

I agree GR1
Control of your emotional ups and downs is imperative if you want to be a winner.
I'll always remember an old article I read in a horseracing magazine, I wish I could remember the author.
He described two fatal states for the horseplayer:
The JOB complex-where you start wondering "will I ever win another bet-ever?"
The MESSIAH complex- where you win a few and think you can walk the infield lake!
I think we all need to practice balance. If that sounds Zen, oh well. We need to work on it.

[tanda]

As to expenses, I played 46 tracks last week (using two spot play methods, not comprehensive handicapping) and generated 54 bets (actually I was willing to bet more, but only 54 qualified at the odds I required). I used BRIS unlimited PPs at $27 for the week and will receive a discount of 20% off that figure. Then, I will deduct my expenses against winnings. So, at my marginal rate of 40%, the PPs cost about $13 for the week. They are my only expense.

I have no problem with the take, the tracks need to make money and pay purses. I just have a problem with the governments cut. They should earn money like they do in other industries,: by taxing sales at the tracks, income of track employees, horsemen, etc., corporate taxes by the tracks and taxing income of winning bettors. They do that already PLUS get an additional tax.

The argument is that they "let racing exist". You can make that argument about any industry. Believe it or not, there is no constitutional prohibition on outlawing the software industry (as an example). So why doesn't the state get a "take" from every purchase IN ADDITION to the other taxes in already gets? After all, the take would compensate for the fact that it lets "software" exist.

Because it would be bullshit. But to most people, we are a bunch of degenerate gamblers whose pastime/profession should be tolerated by the rest of society only if we are willing to pay a tax for the privilege of being allowed to exist. We have to bribe the state to allow the pastime. Imagine if the fast food industry or any other "legitimate" business had to get a license from the state and the state had the exclusive rights to determine who could enter the market AND on what terms, i.e. what prices it could charge, etc., and the licenseholders had to pay the state a cut of every transaction BEFORE paying all the other "normal" taxes. Society would be outraged. But, after all, we are different. I just want the industry treated like other industries.

As to Superfecta's argument about paying taxes on winnings, I have no objection (other than my philosophical opposition to all taxes) because it is income and occurs everywhere. Yes, the money I win has been taxed previously, but so has the money that McDonald's earns (its customers presumably paid income tax on it), but MickeyDees still pays corporate income taxes and sales tax on the transaction. But, how about the lottery? First, it pays 60 cents on the dollar, then you pay income taxes on the winnings. Superfecta would be really be pissed about that.

You got that right tanda!
Slight disagreement tho, Mc dees(or any other company ) makes a product ,thats why they should pay taxes.
In para-mutuel betting,we are betting against each other,no product is made or sold.In effect,we are all throwing our money in a barrel,the track takes a cut for providing the barrel,and we who are right divide up whats left.Thats what I don't like.Someone else reaps the benefit of our wager.
I could say the same for lotteries but I don't like them;}

[tanda]

Superfecta,

I am a libertarian who disagrees with all taxes, so this is not meant as a defense of the income tax on gambling earnings.

However, gambling earnings are essentially investment income. I consider my betting to be a form of investment and run it as a business. I am a value investor and apply many of Warren Buffett's, Benjamin Graham's, Phil Fisher's, etc. investment techniques in my handicapping and money managment. Whether it is stocks or horse wagers, I attempt to purchase undervalued investments.

In fact, as most of us are aware, many forms of what is considered "legitimate" investment (futures trading, day trading, momentum trading) are much more speculative (and closer to the public's idea of gambling) then a disciplined, intelligent handicapper's wagering on horses.

Yes, I oppose the capital gains tax and income taxation of dividends and other investment income. But, I believe your point is that the taxation of gambling earnings is inconsistent or unique. Unfortunately, it is entirely consistent with our country's policy of taxing investment income and, thus, not unique or unusual.

Therefore, I make no argument that gambling income taxation is unfair beyond the general point that ALL taxation is unfair.

[Rick Ransom]

karlscorner,

I don't want racetracks to go out of business. Whatever takeout level optimizes their profits is best, I just think the correct level is lower than it is now. The 10% I mentioned was what I read somewhere that the takeout was in the 1930's. I can't verify that, but maybe someone else can. Whatever it was, business was booming then, so it may have been the correct level. Another thing I don't know is whether taxes and costs percentage-wise are higher today than they were then. If they are, then the optimal level may be higher.

If OTB's are getting a signal for less than what it takes to produce it maybe they should raise those fees. As to off-shore betting, I'd always prefer to bet directly into the tracks if they would let me, because it's in my best long-term interest for the horse racing industry to be profitable.

So we don't really disagree on anything. What I was trying to say was that if costs have gone up, it's not due to inflation.

[Barchyman]

Originally posted by tanda


Yes, I oppose the capital gains tax and income taxation of dividends and other investment income. But, I believe your point is that the taxation of gambling earnings is inconsistent or unique. Unfortunately, it is entirely consistent with our country's policy of taxing investment income and, thus, not unique or unusual.



It is true that both investment and gambling income are taxed. However, I am still allowed to take a capital loss (though restricted) on investments where losses exceed gains even when they are not my primary source of income, and can carry the excessive loss over to future years to apply to gains in those years. It would be nice if there was that consistency in the law when it came to gambling.

Tom

[tanda]

Barchyman,

I agree.

[karlskorner]

Rick;

The only lines longer than the ticket punchers line at the tracks in the 30's were the hunger lines at the soup kitchens, when the takeout was 10%. We were in the midst of a depression, people were desperate, they went to the track because they were unemployed and it was the only means they had of trying to make a few bucks.

My Random House Dictionary defines inflation: "A persistent, substantial rise in the general price level, resulting in a fall of purchasing power, caused by any of various factors, as money supply, wages and industrisal output". The cost of gasoline at $1.75 per gal. to run the water truck and tractors around the track in order to maintain it, that's inflation. Trainers fees on a daily basis of $80.00 to $120.00, that's inflation. The wages paid to the help to run and keep the plant clean, that's inflation. The huge costs of purchasing a yearling and prepare him/her for the track, that's inflation.

As I said earlier, all the 10% 'takeout" will do is prolong the bankroll of the everyday player, who in the end will lose it all. It is a known fact that 5-6% of the players are winners for the day, week, month or year, the rest are losers.

Karl

[Rick Ransom]

karlscorner,

My point was not that inflation doesn't exist in prices of things that racetracks use. If the handle of racetracks went up at the same rate as inflation in general then 10% of this inflated amount would be more dollars. You would not need 15% to stay even with the purchasing power of the dollar.

As I said before, it's possible that costs and taxes for tracks are a higher percentage of the handle now but I still don't think it's because of inflation. It's entirely possible that the handle hasn't gone up as much as inflation, but that would be because the sport is less poplular now than it was then. There are many reasons for this besides the Depression, the main one being the increased popularity of team sports.

I'm not sure what you're trying to read into what I'm saying, but my point is a very simple one. 10% of $500,000 buys the same goods and services as 10% of $100,000 if the dollar is worth 5 times less in the first case.

Tanda,
I thought the money that is taxed through investments is money that comes from other sources beside fellow investors.
This is where I think investing differs from gambling.Investments in the stock market come from the strength of the economy,and strength of the business that sell stock .So it would make sense that if my stock in Pepsi goes up,it is not at the expense of Levi stock ,so I am profitting with money that is infused into the market,not money that is already there.
Thats why I think the Austrailians got it right because they do not tax the money won at the track,they tax it after the winner puts the money into the economy.
Anyhow I know this tax on winnings will never be abolished,I just like to point out how I feel this is an unfair tax ,and how "gambling" gets the worst rap around.Don't get me started on the morality of gaming,it can get ugly! <G>

[karlskorner]

Rick;

OK we agree in part. But let me give you an example, CRC this past Saturday mailed out 40,000 "FREE" Club house passes, which included "FREE" parking, "FREE" $1.50 extended program, a "FREE" beer stein, Italian food fest, bands, singers, pony rides, petting zoo and much more. Not quite 9000 showed up, subtract the usual 5000 to 6000 that attend on Saturday and you have about 8% of your mail outs attending, which I guess is a fair return on mail outs. The mutual pool increased not quite $100,000 or about 10% of a usual Saturday at CRC. The only thing left to do is pay people to attend, they even gave out $5.00 mutual tickets on other occassions, same thing.

If I understand your $100,000 and $500,000 example the mutual pool would have to increase 5 times in order to come out with the same monies. Never happen. Besides should the 'takeout" ever be reduced to 10% the Dakota and Hong Kong "whales" would eat us up alive to make up for the 10% rebates they are receiving from the OTB"s etc. by driving down the mutal payout to a 3 to 5% ROI, which they are satisfied with and you and I are not. As I have stated earlier all the 10% "takeout" will do is extend the life the bankroll of the 95% who are losers.

Karl

[tanda]

Superfecta,

Did I imply gambling is immoral? I hope not. If so, buying insurance is immoral. Or an attorney taking a case on contingency is immoral. After all, those are also forms of gambling.

Karlskorner,

You seem to be saying that a high take is actually beneficial. I am not sure how a big bettor can reduce the ROI for me. If they bet too much relative to a runner's chances, that actually helps me. If they find a legitimate longshot and bet it down to fair odds, it would tend to push other runners into an overlay. In fact, with a low take, their action would be much more likely to create overlays on other runners than it does now.

For example, the higher the take, the more a runner needs to be overbet to create an overlay. With a low take, it would take less action to create overlays. Thus, big bettors would create overlays with their action more so than they do now. Remember, now if a runner is bet to fair odds, an overlay is not created. But with a lower take, it is more likely than an overlay would be, if another runner was slightly overbet. So, I would welcome big bettors with a low take. Just as I do now. Money does not give you control of another's ROI or your own. Only skill does. After all, a negative ROI cannot be converted to a higher ROI by betting more.
Therefore, I do not fear big bettors, only skillful bettors (big or small).

Also, "whales" do not control this game as much as you think. The overall handle is too large.

[karlskorner]

Tanda;

I agree with you up to a point. You are assuming "they" have not found your selection/selections, but remember they are using a "shotgun" method covering many bases with huge amounts of money. What was a satisfactory wager on your part could turn into a disaster should they choose the same horse/horses within a minute of post time. Their ROI is unacceptable to you and I.

Karl

[Dave Schwartz]

This is just an opinion...

I have been playing a selection system of late that demands as accurate a look at the toteboard as possible.

What I am noticing is that with about 1 minute or 2 to post the low odds horses are going lower and the others have a tendancy to move upward a bit.

My opinion is that it is not "the whale" but rather people trying to guess what the whale is doing that is causing this action.

I believe that there is a strong portion of the wagering public that is waiting to see which way the tote will move and at the slightest movement they jump.

The ironic part is that it seems to be improving my results. LOL

So, whoever you are, please continue doing what you are doing.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[tanda]

Dave,

I have noticed the same phenemonom. If you play a horse at 3:1 with 1 minute (or even at post), you had better be prepared to get 5:2. Also, if you like a longshot at 10:1, but he is 8:1 a minute before post, then stay tuned, because he may get to 10:1.

Also, I do extensive paper testing in addition to actual bets. Realizing that off odds are different than one minute odds, I now record how low odds bets do within a range. If I wanted 5:2 on a horse in a paper test, I will record a play a 5:2, but also keep a separate record of the results when those types go at 2:1. I know that some of those 2:1 shots would have had my money on them, even though I would have bet them at 5:2 when they are entering the gate. I do not have a set formula for incorporating those bets into my "official" paper test records, but it is helpful to have some idea of what my results would have been if I bet half of those 2:1 shots.

[Dave Schwartz]

Tanda,

Glad to get some confirmation on my "gut" feeling.

We are also moving in the same direction. In another month or so we will be capturing the totes real time (instead of the copy/paste method we use now). At that time we will be able to catch every flash. This could be a great time to add this to our database so that we might build a "2-minute strategy" (or 5 minutes or whatever) so that we can expect to wager at that time instead of the now impossible to get "final" odds.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Rick Ransom]

karlscorner,

The $100,000 and $500,000 example was in reference to inflation, that is say $100,000 in 1935 had the same value as $500,000 today. Five times is probably not enough actually.

I don't think that decreasing the take would ever have that much effect, but handle might go up by 20% if the optimal level was found. I'm inclined to agree that 10% is probably not right, but 14% seems to be working at Saratoga so maybe 12 or 13% would be better. I'm glad to see them experimenting and I'll be happy with whatever turns out to be most profitable for the tracks.

You do have a good point about decreasing take attracting marginally profitable large bettors. If it is true as some say that most pro's are making 5% or less then it could be a major factor. None of the winning players I've known would have settled for that small a margin, but they didn't have huge bankrolls either.

Actually you don't even want anyone that loses less than average in the pool since even they lower the odds on good horses. But the guys that lose a little tend to bet low or disappear. If you turn a small loser into a winner, he'll start betting more.

Looking at my own records, takeout doesn't seem to be a big factor in profitability. My local track, Turf Paradise has a 20% takeout but is very profitable, probably because we don't have any big players with a small pool and high takeout.

Another thing people should look at is the size of the fields. A good example is Northern California tracks. They only have the 15.33% takeout, but so many races with 5-6 horses that you won't find nearly as many good bets as elsewhere.

[takeout]

After reading all the posts and doing a little soul searching, I would have to think that ultimately my biggest obstacle is myself. Discipline, for me, can be a real toughie. I continue to work at it. I'm still trying to achieve an "iron ass" without becoming too complacent in the process.

I also find betting to be a formidable obstacle. It just never seems to come naturally. The only thing that seems to come naturally about betting is doing the wrong thing. I shutter to think of some of the opportunities that I've missed by having the right horses but blowing the bet. How many times have you had people come up to you out of the blue at the track and show you some trifecta ticket that had the right horses lined up every way but the way it hit? This would be acceptable if it came in chalky but that's usually not the case.
Originally posted by Rick Ransom
Great rant Larry. I have more time than most, but I still have trouble budgeting it between playing what I already know versus studying to learn something I don't know.

That was a great rant, Larry. Lots of good points in there.

Rick, I have the same time problem of playing versus learning. I think that's an excellent point. Also, you said: "I was also lucky to be able to spend time with people who really knew how to win and were willing to share the knowledge." Can you talk about that a little more without giving away the store?

[Tom]

I agree with that. The mental game is the hardest part of this for me. It is too easy to get distracted or lose focus after a tough beat, or a tough series of beats. It is easy to cut corners and get lazy with your handicapping.
Tom

[Rick Ransom]

takeout,

I've probably mentioned it before, but you may not have seen it. From 1976-1983 I lived in Las Vegas and knew a couple of guys from New York who really turned me around. One of them, Dennis, was working with me as a programmer but had played full time for a couple of years before. The other guy, Sal, was always a full time pro for all of the 7 years that I knew him. He played at the same place where I hung out for a while but was barrred for being too successful (while we were watching). He was making $200 bets, which was pretty large at the time, usually the maximum you could get down anywhere.

Dennis arranged for us to use the Sal's racing forms for research on some of our methods. While I was doing research I also looked at his plays, which he had marked in the form, and reverse engineered the rules. Then I checked them on an independent set of data and verified that they really were winning methods. These were very selective spot plays that would get 2-3 plays a day at all of the east coast tracks.

He also gave us another spot play involving claims that had too low a win % (18-20) for him to play any serious money on. His main methods were in the 25-35% range with 20-30% profit. Dennis and another guy played that method for several years every day and showed a nice profit. I played it on weekends and at lunch sometimes in Vegas and have played it on and off since then. Last time I checked it's still winning. You have to play all of the tracks in the country to get an adequate amount of plays though, so I don't use it much.

Dennis was a very creative and experienced horse player and was continually coming up with ideas that I helped him check. So, talking to him and doing research on good ideas gave me a pretty good idea of what works and what doesn't. We also met several other winning players over the years and traded some ideas with them. The race books are a much better place to meet winners than the track for some reason. Las Vegas, especially, has more than it's share of winning players.

[takeout]

Rick,

Thanks a lot. I'm fairly new so I must've missed it the first time around. That's a very interesting background.

I've never been to Vegas but I don't wonder that many winning players are concentrated there. Just seems right. I remember reading about that one place that wasn't pari-mutuel that went out of business. Must've been some tough players in there.

I envy those of you with computer backgrounds. Most of my research is done the old fashion way and the blind alleys take just as much time as the good stuff. I got a computer to get PPs and charts. Maybe one of these days I'll learn to do something else with it.;)

[Rick Ransom]

takeout,

Good ideas and no computer will get you farther than no good ideas and a computer. A huge database with everything in it is an advantage in checking ideas quickly but it does require a considerable amount of time and money to maintain.

But you don't necessarily need to do all of that. My database is small and nothing goes into it without showing some promise in a manual pilot study first. Then I'll check it for a while and see if it holds up. If not, which is usually the case, I'll take out the irrelevant data. Since I was a programmer for so long, I use a low level programming language (C) rather than database queries or scripting languages because it is faster and so much more flexible. I have tested some pretty bizarre ideas this way.

[takeout]

Originally posted by Rick Ransom
Good ideas and no computer will get you farther than no good ideas and a computer.

There is still something that I like about sitting down with a stack of PPs (I used to say Forms) and running down some idea or angle, trainer MO or what have you. A lot of it comes to nothing but that makes the "nuggets" all the more exciting. Don't know if I'll ever make the transition to computer so I hope I can come up with a decent idea now and then. Now you've got me thinking about playing versus learning something new versus learning something new on the computer.:eek:

[Rick Ransom]

takeout,

Having actual PP's to look at gives you the opportunity to not only see if you would have won but also to speculate on why the winning horse may have beat you. Also, checking angles with a database can be misleading if you're not careful about checking the winners prices. A big longshot along with a lot of other short prices wouldn't have looked so good on paper.

I'm not anti-database at all though. Most of the database guys posting here know how to do it right. Most probably have a long background of playing manually before they used databases.

For me, it's a case of how I want to spend my time. Since I spent too many years reading 1000 page books about the latest software, I'm not willing to invest the time to learn, for example, Access inside out. And if you don't learn it well, you'll spend a lot of time later trying to get yourself out of trouble.

What I'd like to see is someone make a huge database available online for confidential queries. I think I'd pay for that if it was a reasonable price.

[takeout]

Originally posted by Rick Ransom
What I'd like to see is someone make a huge database available online for confidential queries. I think I'd pay for that if it was a reasonable price.
That sounds like a good idea. Reasonably priced would be key. One of the things that would worry me though is the accuracy of some of the data like race conditions and workouts. There was a horse in the first race last night at CT (B's Flying Halo) that showed a workout on August 11th at "Ing". According to the chart of training tracks in the little Sports Eye book, that stands for Ingleside Az. Can't say for certain that it's a mistake but the horse has never been further than Pen on the paper. I saw one a few months ago where the horse had a recent work in California and had never raced outside of CT! :eek: As far as the race conditions go, well, some of them are just wrong.

Maybe this is something to do with computer stuff that I don't know about but I still can't believe that no one sells pdf results charts with the all important "last ran" section in them. They should be sold as a separate item, pay as you go.

[Larry Hamilton]

A word from a guy with a big data base.

Recently, a friend of mine asked me how much money I thought i had in my data base. Off the top of my head, I figured I was spending 500-600 a month for 3 years..and it dawned on me I had a substantial monetary investment investment. Then i though of all the hours I have in it.

I am actually speaking for everyone with a db here.

Now, guys, i dont want to be controntational, i only want to point out this monster is a huge investment for me (us)...Do you really think I (we) want to dicker for a reasonable price (in your opinion) so you can ask it a few questions? (with me as the translator so to speak). I will do it at my leasure if I want to free, but I doubt we could come to terms on what a "reasonable price" is.

[ceejay]

Originally posted by takeout

That sounds like a good idea. Reasonably priced would be key. One of the things that would worry me though is the accuracy of some of the data like race conditions and workouts. There was a horse in the first race last night at CT (B's Flying Halo) that showed a workout on August 11th at "Ing". According to the chart of training tracks in the little Sports Eye book, that stands for Ingleside Az. Can't say for certain that it's a mistake but the horse has never been further than Pen on the paper. I saw one a few months ago where the horse had a recent work in California and had never raced outside of CT! :eek: As far as the race conditions go, well, some of them are just wrong.

Maybe this is something to do with computer stuff that I don't know about but I still can't believe that no one sells pdf results charts with the all important "last ran" section in them. They should be sold as a separate item, pay as you go.


A few comments:
How do you define "reasonable price?" I suspect that DB consultants are pretty expensive even if they don't have the investment in the data. For example, I have a service that I use for data searches in my business (not horses) that charges $100/hr with $100 minimum (and I think that it is "reasonable").

Data integrity is a huge issue. I suspect though that QC on the loading side is near impossible due to volume so the user must beware.

If you want good pdf charts with last run data, you can get them (if a subscriber) from DRF.com for about a week following a race. Not pay as you go but if you use them the $30/month package which gives you 20 cards/month is, I think, a fair value.

[Tom]

There are already huge data bases out there that would fit the bill here-namely Equibase of DRF?
It is a logical extension of their business to sell racing information. I have suggested for years that DRF offer track profiles and par time type data. For example, a report I want to see is what are the running times for
6 furlong races at $10,000 at Pimlico for the last year.
The money to maintain the database is already spent, the investment would be to set the ability to query it.
And it could be funded by the charges for the data.
Problem is, they seem more eager to sell pre-packaged data reports than anthing else.
Tom

[takeout]

Originally posted by Tom

It is a logical extension of their business to sell racing information.

Exactly. I'd be happy if they would just sell me what they already have. I've always wondered why the track program, which shortchanges the player severely on certain info, contains other info that I cannot buy from the PP sellers such as a first page index by horse, owner, trainer and jockey. That's a pretty useful thing when burrowing back through the stacks to try to find something.

I wouldn't mind seeing PPs sold in some piecemeal fashion where I could choose what I wanted and toss what I didn't. I know everyone approaches the game in their own way and this could also be a tracking tool for the PP sellers to see what's being used and what is not. Maybe they could then use that info to develop other products. Is anyone using any of the Equibase pay products? I doubt it. Am I wrong?

[Tom]

Sorry or the plug-ITS does have the best PP's through their software, though. Formulator is better than the printed paper, but still needs more work to catch up to ITS. Even DRF doesn't offer the same things in electronic form as it has in the printed copy (ie, Today's races with the last 3 Beyers for each starter).
As for Equibase pay-for products-no way no how.
I would be happy if Equibase could get the late scratches before noon everyday. With so many tracks starting to run at 12:30-1:00pm nowadays, we have to get the scratches earlier than we are.
Tom

[Rick Ransom]

I'm not looking for a database consultant. All I want to do is queries. Log on and type in some SQL or something and get some reports. I doubt if it would be worthwhile for an individual to set up, but probably easy for BRISNET or HDW or one of the others.