students never stop learing

[46zilzal]

I have spent the last 6 months working on an area of weakness in my game. During that time I have tried to realize that GAMBLING on an outcome is no different when the stratum one bases it upon is a boxing match, a Final Four basketball game, the World Series etc etc.: it is all about understanding WHEN it is worth putting your hard earned money down in predicting the outcome of an event once you UNDERSTAND, as much as you can, the possible OUTCOMES (plural), that event can produce and then realize the options on predicting that.

One of my sources of education has been out mutuels manager, who gave me a wonderful parallel example. "Image you are a baseball player trying very hard to get to the show. Intellectuality, you understand that the game requires two talents: hitting (let's liken that to handicapping) and fielding (let's liken that to wagering). All day long you study pitchers, the physics of a curve ball, the make up of the swing or even get down to the picky nature of the wood in the bat, all the while, hardly ever, working out how you position yourself for a bunt, how to protect the foul line, or practice knowing where the outfield wall is when you are running backwards. You have made yourself a true expert in hittng and have not tapped a bit of your potential as a fielder. No wonder you are never going to be a professional. Can you understand the parallel?"

Horse racing is no different a basis for wagering that any other sport or event. If you remain a rookie in the second skill, you will never get to the (racing) SHOW.

[DJofSD]

I recall Doc tried to cover the subject of wagering on a couple of occasions. The end result always seem to morph into a selection process for the race and falling back onto the tried and true bet two horses to win, 60/40 or dutch to the odds. Occasionally, Brohamer would discuss how he might bet a selection to place.

[markgoldie]

This is quite correct and as I have stated on numerous occasions, if you want to excel at the wagering aspect, you MUST look to gimmicks. The reasoning is simple: There are more and better possibilities for finding value, aka. overlays, aka. market anomalies, aka. market inefficiencies. But betting to win is SO much easier that it provides a crutch to those who have spent their careers working on their hitting. Excelling at wagering on gimmicks takes a bit of work- not as much as overall handicapping, but a considerable amount of work nonetheless. And finally, there is the development of what I like to call the "gambler's mentality." You have to be ready to bet differing amounts depending on the opportunity you see, AND you have to be able to step out strongly when the opportunity is very good. Another great gambler's attribute is the ability to wager on an outcome that you do NOT believe is the most likely to occur.

[Greyfox]

Another great gambler's attribute is the ability to wager on an outcome that you do NOT believe is the most likely to occur.


46Zil....Students never stop learing???? How about learning.

MG - That wagering on an outcome that you don't believe will happen takes courage. I only do that as an "insurance wager" when I know reasonable Pick 3 or Pick 4 is coming to me if a particular set of horses win.
In effect, I guarantee that I'm going to make money that day by covering with a few boomers.

[castaway01]

Good posts 46 and markgoldie (good harness posts Mark, not my thing but you do nice work)

[46zilzal]

Good posts 46 and markgoldie (good harness posts Mark, not my thing but you do nice work)
Trivia question for you both
What do Man O'War (T-bred)
Some beach Somewhere (pacer)
and Muscle Hill (trotter) have it common?

[Greyfox]

Trivia question for you both
What do Man O'War (T-bred)
Some beach Somewhere (pacer)
and Muscle Hill (trotter) have it common?

4 legs, head, and tail, :D

[46zilzal]

All ran 21 times

ALL won 20 starts

[raybo]

This is quite correct and as I have stated on numerous occasions, if you want to excel at the wagering aspect, you MUST look to gimmicks. The reasoning is simple: There are more and better possibilities for finding value, aka. overlays, aka. market anomalies, aka. market inefficiencies. But betting to win is SO much easier that it provides a crutch to those who have spent their careers working on their hitting. Excelling at wagering on gimmicks takes a bit of work- not as much as overall handicapping, but a considerable amount of work nonetheless. And finally, there is the development of what I like to call the "gambler's mentality." You have to be ready to bet differing amounts depending on the opportunity you see, AND you have to be able to step out strongly when the opportunity is very good. Another great gambler's attribute is the ability to wager on an outcome that you do NOT believe is the most likely to occur.

Great post!! I agree, "gimmicks" offer much more in the way of value than WPS. The reasons you gave pretty much sum it up. It is much easier to wager to win or place or show, but, can you make a profit? Possibly, but the odds are, tremendously, against you.

Although it's impossible to answer the question, "Are more successful players playing to Win, Place, or Show or are they playing Exotics?". Except for the syndicates, I would almost give odds that most other successful players are wagering in exotics.

So, under this assumption, what do you want to do, take the easy way out, and fail, or use your "noggin" and succeed?

[Trotman]

Markgoldie and Raybo I agree nothing ventured nothing gained the exotics are the game. I have found on occassion where I thought the odds of a horse should be and the public writes it off,high odds then the exotic is big
while they throw the win tickets away I'm at the windows cashing. In fact every time I'm betting the exotics are first.
Good post :ThmbUp:

[SchagFactorToWin]

I agree completely. I started handicapping around 1980. I found I could actually pick winners at a decent rate but I kept losing money. I was all handicapping, with no money management skills, so I got away from it.

Last year, I took it up again. My handicapping method still works but, this time, I'm focusing on a systematic exacta wagering method. The result? A profit for the last ten months.

Why the change of focus? When I started back up, I found this forum. PA has, by far, the best horse racing information available.

[raybo]

I agree completely. I started handicapping around 1980. I found I could actually pick winners at a decent rate but I kept losing money. I was all handicapping, with no money management skills, so I got away from it.

Last year, I took it up again. My handicapping method still works but, this time, I'm focusing on a systematic exacta wagering method. The result? A profit for the last ten months.

Why the change of focus? When I started back up, I found this forum. PA has, by far, the best horse racing information available.

I have no doubt that using a well thought out exacta method would be a step that might lead one into the black, versus WPS. I also have no doubt that if the same thought process used in developing an exacta method were to be extended to trifectas, the newly successful exacta player would not only be successful but more so. And then, if you take it one more step up to superfectas you can multiply the degree of success many times over.

This is the process I took, from WPS to exactas, to trifectas, and finally to superfectas, and the difference, in each level of success, is astounding!

[andicap]

i totally agree with the main concepts of this thread, but the baseball analogy is a faulty one.

Why not just become a designated hitter?

To me, the better comparison with sports lies with the age of specialization. Defensive linemen in the NFL who can rush the passer but can't stop the run make huge amounts of money. Left-handed pitchers who come in to get a single out are highly prized.

In handicapping/wagering you can do the same by focusing your time and energies on becoming an expert on say, turf racing and ignoring the other surfaces. Or learn everything about playing trifectas -- but play little else.

You may not be a "complete horseplayer," but like Charles Haley you'll make good money. (Why don't I do this? -- lack of discipline. ego, etc.)