Why is this game so hard to beat?

[thaskalos]

Not too long ago, I watched a televised interview featuring Al Francesco, a legendary figure in the world of gambling. Francesco is a renowned blackjack expert, and he is responsible for creating the blackjack "team play" concept, which has terrorized the casinos since the late 60's.

He was the man who recruited and trained blackjack "icon" Ken Uston, who became the game's most famous (infamous?) player. Francesco expressed how betrayed he felt when Uston started writing tell-all books about his teams and their practices...which made it impossible for the teams to operate without intense scrutiny from the casinos.

And then the interview took an interesting turn. Francesco revealed that another passion of his is horseracing. He said that, in the mid 70's, he employed a mathemetics professor, who was also a computer expert, and whose job it was to feed vast amounts of horseracing data into a super-computer, in an attempt to create an odds line more accurate than that of the racing public's.

"Our work showed some initial promise", he said, "but the positive results were not sustainable over time." More research and testing was scheduled to be done...but Francesco was betrayed anew when the professor, one William Quirin(!), jumped ship and preceeded to write a book about their research, which quickly became a best-seller in the field.

"My battle-for-profit in the arena of horseracing continues as we speak", Francesco said, "but ultimate victory has remained elusive."

All this got me thinking. Why haven't the computers been more successful in beating OUR game...especially in the area of creating an odds line more accurate than the public's?

Computers have been used to create poker-bots, which are capable of beating all but poker's most elite players. They have defeated reigning chess and backgammon champions. The notorious "computer group" used powerful computer systems which brought so much destruction to Las Vegas bookmakers, that the whole sports-betting landscape has changed forever.

In blackjack, computers have created winning "counting" systems which have forced the casinos to either ban the "counters" or change the rules of the game.

Even in roulette, computers have been used to track and identify "biased" wheels, making it possible to win there too!

Why can't the computers successfully attack OUR game? What makes this game so hard to beat...for man and machine alike?

[Overlay]

Offhand, I'd say that it's the amount of information relevant to determining the outcome of any race that both the savviest human handicappers and the most sophisticated computer programs don't (and can't) know, combined with all the random, unforeseen, unpredictable events that occur during the running of a race.

Also, the pari-mutuel nature of racing causes information that does prove profitable to soon be overbet into negative returns (especially if it's designed to narrow races down to the one horse most likely to win, rather than looking at the actual winning chances of all the horses and combinations in the field relative to the odds established on them by the public, in order to detect the presence of wagering value).

And then add to that late odds drops resulting from off-track/internet/simulcast wagering that even make finding value more difficult to achieve consistently.

[lamboguy]

Not too long ago, I watched a televised interview featuring Al Francesco, a legendary figure in the world of gambling. Francesco is a renowned blackjack expert, and he is responsible for creating the blackjack "team play" concept, which has terrorized the casinos since the late 60's.

He was the man who recruited and trained blackjack "icon" Ken Uston, who became the game's most famous (infamous?) player. Francesco expressed how betrayed he felt when Uston started writing tell-all books about his teams and their practices...which made it impossible for the teams to operate without intense scrutiny from the casinos.

And then the interview took an interesting turn. Francesco revealed that another passion of his is horseracing. He said that, in the mid 70's, he employed a mathemetics professor, who was also a computer expert, and whose job it was to feed vast amounts of horseracing data into a super-computer, in an attempt to create an odds line more accurate than that of the racing public's.

"Our work showed some initial promise", he said, "but the positive results were not sustainable over time." More research and testing was scheduled to be done...but Francesco was betrayed anew when the professor, one William Quirin(!), jumped ship and preceeded to write a book about their research, which quickly became a best-seller in the field.

"My battle-for-profit in the arena of horseracing continues as we speak", Francesco said, "but ultimate victory has remained elusive."

All this got me thinking. Why haven't the computers been more successful in beating OUR game...especially in the area of creating an odds line more accurate than the public's?

Computers have been used to create poker-bots, which are capable of beating all but poker's most elite players. They have defeated reigning chess and backgammon champions. The notorious "computer group" used powerful computer systems which brought so much destruction to Las Vegas bookmakers, that the whole sports-betting landscape has changed forever.

In blackjack, computers have created winning "counting" systems which have forced the casinos to either ban the "counters" or change the rules of the game.

Even in roulette, computers have been used to track and identify "biased" wheels, making it possible to win there too!

Why can't the computers successfully attack OUR game? What makes this game so hard to beat...for man and machine alike?
when you bet blackjack in a casino you are betting against the house.if you know your stuff counting cards you can reduce the house percentage and put it in your favor. when you are betting on horses other than minus pool betting you are betting against others that have as good an opinion, as good a computer, as good a pace and speed figure as you have. then you pay the percentage to play and your random bets work out to be a stiff percentage against you. if you are good enough to play minus pools you can beat the house, a matter of fact you sometimes have a good shot at beating the game betting against the minus pool. i just said that because there are more big minus pools today than i have ever seen, alot of times i have spotted mistakes in the bet in recent times. i am not about to share my system with you because that is what i do all day, i bet on and against the minus pools.

[Greyfox]

Why can't the computers successfully attack OUR game? What makes this game so hard to beat...for man and machine alike?

To a point computer 'cappers do successfully attack this game.
However, horses aren't machines. There are various tactics that computers can't pick up that indicate a horse might be sitting on a big race. Jockeys fall off, animals get kicked, the surface changes, runners ship, information on layoffs is not always available, horses mature, some bounce, and so on.

[acorn54]

under the right conditions of plenty of dumb money, large parimutuel pools and reasonable take out rates it has been done for quite awhile in hong kong by bill benter and others using a computer.

[Stillriledup]

As long as racing secretaries card races where 4 or 5 horses are within tenth of a second of each other in talent, no way a computer can predict, with certainty, who's going to win, be 2nd ,etc.

[CincyHorseplayer]

There is a huge emphasis on the reading of players in poker but if you "read" a horse,a trainer,a jockey it is considered an obscurity.I'm not a professional horseplayer but I am a winner.The difference here is poker chips don't have heartbeats and form cycles.These guys want an absolute mathematical formula,when subjective thinking dominates the winner's circle.

[bigmack]

Whenever I've tried to 'beat' something I knew I had little chance of success.

[therussmeister]

As long as racing secretaries card races where 4 or 5 horses are within tenth of a second of each other in talent, no way a computer can predict, with certainty, who's going to win, be 2nd ,etc.

Computers, or humans, don't have to predict with certainty who's going to win, be second, etc. They just have to deal with probabilities. After all computers systems for blackjack or poker don't predict, with certainty, which card is coming off the top of the deck.

[thaskalos]

Computers, or humans, don't have to predict with certainty who's going to win, be second, etc. They just have to deal with probabilities. After all computers systems for blackjack or poker don't predict, with certainty, which card is coming off the top of the deck. That's my point...

[ronsmac]

Funny you talk about Bill Quiran. My father knew him from the late 70's and early mid 80's in NY. He was better at writing books than as a profitable horse player. Most of his students did the majority of the research work for his first two books.

[Light]

In casino games, WYSIWYG. Not so in horseracing. The variables are much greater.

[andymays]

Unforseeable random events make the game hard to beat.

For example:

The ninth at Hollywood yesterday (5-15) when the #2 figures to clear and does but the jock on the #5 falls off his mount and the horse rushes up to the lead and screws me. No way to handicap that event. It's one of many unusual events that seem to happen everyday.

[Show Me the Wire]

Horse racing, as a gambling game, is not based on equal or fixed probabilities.

[thaskalos]

Unforseeable random events make the game hard to beat.

For example:

The ninth at Hollywood yesterday (5-15) when the #2 figures to clear and does but the jock on the #5 falls off his mount and the horse rushes up to the lead and screws me. No way to handicap that event. It's one of many unusual events that seem to happen everyday. Yes...but that is the chaos factor, and it exists in other sports too. Why have the computers been successful in sports-betting? Is it because they predict all the random events there?

[Light]

Sports betting is 50-50,horseracing is not.

[cj]

There is a really simple reason racing is tougher. You are betting against other people that adjust when factors are discovered that give the bettor an edge. Things work for a while, but then they are overbet and you have to adapt.

[horses4courses]

Intangibles.

They are what makes this game so irresistible, yet frustrating, at the same time.

You can crunch numbers with the best of them, but being able to think outside the box is, often times, just as important.

The people who do the best at winning in this game, manage their money the best.

[DeanT]

Takeout.

There are thousands upon thousands of professional horseplayers in Britain on betfair with a population of 90M. There are many less than that here in 21.8% pari-mutuel blended takes; with a population ~4X that. The vast majority have no shot to beat that here, but there a larger subset do.

[andymays]

Yes...but that is the chaos factor, and it exists in other sports too. Why have the computers been successful in sports-betting? Is it because they predict all the random events there?


When you combine the chaos factor with the takeout it makes for a tough hill to climb.

The other thing is that if you're gonna make a good score and you're gonna be successful you have to take a stand on horses at 10-1 or more and single them in exotics and bet them to win. Spreading too much in exotics and having exotics for a dollar or 10 cents doesn't get it done.

[Trotman]

Two of William Quirin's students who took part in his research are successful handicappers and the truth be known he did not handicap all that long before throwing in the towel and admiting there was in his mind no way of sustaining long term profit. Outside of a few books and the Mattel Handicapper that was it, but the studies gave us food for thought.

[JustRalph]

There is a really simple reason racing is tougher. You are betting against other people that adjust when factors are discovered that give the bettor an edge. Things work for a while, but then they are overbet and you have to adapt.


The goalposts keep moving too. Polytrack is the latest thing that changed the game. I have only been playing since around 2001 and I have seen a huge change in the game. From the types of races carded, to the ability of the public. I think it is much tougher than it was 8 yrs ago.

[BlueShoe]

Sports betting is 50-50,horseracing is not.
Not quite. In spread betting you put up 11 in order to win 10. That is a 4.545% house vig. In order to break even you must pick 52.38% winners. Not as easy as it sounds. If we horseplayers had the same takeout as sports bettors we would be giddy with sheer delight.

[Hanover1]

When we can get the horses input on the variables, we will be onto something........

[cj]

The goalposts keep moving too. Polytrack is the latest thing that changed the game. I have only been playing since around 2001 and I have seen a huge change in the game. From the types of races carded, to the ability of the public. I think it is much tougher than it was 8 yrs ago.

Of course I was just assuming the takeout is the obvious #1 reason, so I was trying to look past that. I should never forget to mention the heinous takeout though.

You are right though. The game is always changing.

[ranchwest]

There are three primary reasons why horse race wagering is a tough proposition:

1) The takeout is onerous.

2) The game is dynamic, not only because rules and structures change, but also because horses come and go and move around the class ladder and switch surfaces, etc. You don't find this sort of dynamic aspect in other gambling propositions to the extent it is present in horse racing.

3) Most people like to focus on one particular betting interest and that presents problems in horse racing. In horse racing, it is a race that has a myriad of influences from the match-ups of the entire field of horses. You can't just go through the match-ups of, say, the Celtics and Cavaliers. Imagine a basketball game with 10 hoops and 10 teams playing. Or maybe even 20 hoops and 20 teams playing. That's horse racing. You have to figure out what all of those different horses are likely to do within a single race. Then, next time, they're usually going up against an entirely new group. Just imagine if the NBA re-drafted all of its players every day.

[Light]

Not quite. In spread betting you put up 11 in order to win 10. That is a 4.545% house vig. In order to break even you must pick 52.38% winners. Not as easy as it sounds. If we horseplayers had the same takeout as sports bettors we would be giddy with sheer delight.

What I meant by 50-50 in sports betting was you just have to choose between 2 teams and your chances are theoretically 50-50. And that was to answer thaskalos question of why computers can predict outcomes in sports betting more succesfully than the winner of a horserace where you might have a competitively matched 10 horse field. If horseracing was only a match race between 2 horses,I'm sure we'd all be more successful.Not necessarily profitable but its alot easier to handicap a 2 horse field than a 10 horse field. Of course we wouldn't get the odds we get in horse racing but those crappy under/over odds you get in sports betting. That's why in horseracing,you have to take advantage of the higher odds available to balance out the higher risk involved.Those who say they bet who they like, dont understand the mathematics of this game.

[plainolebill]

That's a great analogy ranchwest. I also think the large betters - whales - have taken some of the value out and made things a little more difficult, especially if you're the kind of player who tries to make a go with the most obvious contenders. The odds are beaten down to parade rest most of the time.

[Stillriledup]

Sports betting is 50-50,horseracing is not.

Horse racing is approx 50-50 if you bet on 4-5 shots. If you bet on 20-1 shots, its not.

This is why racing is better...in sports betting, no matter how great your 'edge' happens to be, you still can only exploit them at the rate of 9 to 10. In racing, the sky is the limit on what 'edge' you can exploit.

[GARY Z]

volatility is based on flesh and bones of horses and , quite often, trainers
and jockeys :eek:

[The Judge]

I can't remember the name of the guys who were successful in Hong Kong before they were ran out, but they made millions before they were asked to leave town.

Aren't some players doing the same thing here with automatic computer plays (cherry picking ) and rebates.

[kenwoodall2]

For the answer, just look at the new tread about watching the toteboard and see how many only do part of their handicapping! THe lazy and losing way is to to pick all races the same and not adjust for odds, changes, and conditions. You might be surprised how many people play the same "monster horse" who is overworked. in a thunderstorm!
Because they do not bet early speed at Charlestown (79%wired last week!). Or, they do not read Brisnet "At a Glances" "MEET: 4.5f Dirt 189 58% E Rail/Ins

[Robert Fischer]

a lot(40%? but generating profitable spot plays) can be done with computers, but few have any clue what the hell they should be crunching.

[garyoz]

Aren't some players doing the same thing here with automatic computer plays (cherry picking ) and rebates.

Believe there are several successful syndicates. They reportedly account for much action and make money based on whale rebates. Very similar to high frequency trading in the equity markets (which accounts for more than half the trading volume). Use similar methodologies.

Part of the problem in statistical modeling for racing is that too much effort was spent in areas that are not very useful (IMHO) when applied to racing such as regression analysis and neural networks. The process ends up driving the work, instead of the results driving the work.

[46zilzal]

a lot(40%? but generating profitable spot plays) can be done with computers, but few have any clue what the hell they should be crunching.
Most insights occur from behind ones eyeballs....a factor that a computer will never be able to gain as we can from OUR adaptive unconscious.

[Valupix]

1) Monster take outs
2) Monster take outs
3) Monster take outs
4) ultra small pools
5) small fields
6) scratch epedemic
7) late entry/scratch info
8) too many tracks (fuels small fields)
9) too many races (fuels small fields)
10) too many betting options (fuels small pools)
11) AE list
12) MTO list

[SMOO]

When we can get the horses input on the variables, we will be onto something........

Sorry Wilbur, Mr. Ed is dead.

[BlueShoe]

..in sports betting, no matter how great your 'edge' happens to be, you still can only exploit them at the rate of 9 to 10.
Once again, not quite. There is the money line to consider if you like the underdog to win the game straight up, not just cover the pointspread. The larger the spread, the longer the odds if you take the dog to win the game.

[skate]

If the Puter is so good, as to make you a winner, then the same Puter(in someone elses hands) is able to take back whatever you won.

you have yourself going against 15,000 other Puters.

Which does not mean 'you cant win',

[Light]

Horse racing is approx 50-50 if you bet on 4-5 shots. If you bet on 20-1 shots, its not.



4-5 shots don't win 50% of the time. I believe they place 50% of the time.

[Robert Goren]

You need to know something that the computer betters don't. I believe Alan Woods said once that his edge was watching replays. I think you can get an edge by watch the post parade and spotting sore horses, but you need to know what to watch for. JMO

[horses4courses]

The best method of profiting from hidden factors is to get information from a talented clocker. Not an easy task, as they seek to earn a living themselves.

I have seen, however, consistently good information being supplied by certain sources for a fee. The "fee" has often been in the form of getting down on "live" horses away from the track.

Professional gamblers, who bet the races, need good sources.
Clockers, and trainers, sometimes fill that role.

Crunching numbers effectively is important in successful handicapping.
Having reliable sources in identifying hidden factors, is also an edge.

[Robert Goren]

Most days knowing what I am betting is a huge edge. It is an automatic toss. If I am on a big favorite you might be able to dutch the other horses.;)

[Wickel]

volatility is based on flesh and bones of horses and , quite often, trainers
and jockeys :eek:

The takeout, racing surface, small fields and other variable all contribute to horse racing being a tough game, but Gary Z hit the nail squarely on the head. You can't turn horses on and off like machines. And there's no controlling the human factor. Despite the sometimes huge disparity in talent from the very best to the worst of the worst, it's impossible to gauge what's coming in the next race.

[skate]

The takeout, racing surface, small fields and other variable all contribute to horse racing being a tough game, but Gary Z hit the nail squarely on the head. You can't turn horses on and off like machines. And there's no controlling the human factor. Despite the sometimes huge disparity in talent from the very best to the worst of the worst, it's impossible to gauge what's coming in the next race.

Welp, you say "no control", but that's a fact in every other gamble also.

Its a gamble, it is a guess, you really do not know the next card.

So, aside from hitting the nail, why can people win with puter in some games but not in others?

[ranchwest]

If the Puter is so good, as to make you a winner, then the same Puter(in someone elses hands) is able to take back whatever you won.

you have yourself going against 15,000 other Puters.

Which does not mean 'you cant win',

Computers utilize ones and zeroes. Everything else comes from humans. Some humans can get more out of computers than others.

[Cratos]

Not too long ago, I watched a televised interview featuring Al Francesco, a legendary figure in the world of gambling. Francesco is a renowned blackjack expert, and he is responsible for creating the blackjack "team play" concept, which has terrorized the casinos since the late 60's.

He was the man who recruited and trained blackjack "icon" Ken Uston, who became the game's most famous (infamous?) player. Francesco expressed how betrayed he felt when Uston started writing tell-all books about his teams and their practices...which made it impossible for the teams to operate without intense scrutiny from the casinos.

And then the interview took an interesting turn. Francesco revealed that another passion of his is horseracing. He said that, in the mid 70's, he employed a mathemetics professor, who was also a computer expert, and whose job it was to feed vast amounts of horseracing data into a super-computer, in an attempt to create an odds line more accurate than that of the racing public's.

"Our work showed some initial promise", he said, "but the positive results were not sustainable over time." More research and testing was scheduled to be done...but Francesco was betrayed anew when the professor, one William Quirin(!), jumped ship and preceeded to write a book about their research, which quickly became a best-seller in the field.

"My battle-for-profit in the arena of horseracing continues as we speak", Francesco said, "but ultimate victory has remained elusive."

All this got me thinking. Why haven't the computers been more successful in beating OUR game...especially in the area of creating an odds line more accurate than the public's?

Computers have been used to create poker-bots, which are capable of beating all but poker's most elite players. They have defeated reigning chess and backgammon champions. The notorious "computer group" used powerful computer systems which brought so much destruction to Las Vegas bookmakers, that the whole sports-betting landscape has changed forever.

In blackjack, computers have created winning "counting" systems which have forced the casinos to either ban the "counters" or change the rules of the game.

Even in roulette, computers have been used to track and identify "biased" wheels, making it possible to win there too!

Why can't the computers successfully attack OUR game? What makes this game so hard to beat...for man and machine alike?

Horse race gambling is not HARD to beat, it is a game that is legalized by many governmental entities in such a way that it is HARD to play.

For instance in New York there are privatized OTBs whereas in Pennsylvania the OTBs are owned and run by the respective racetracks. In California there is synthetic surface racing, but for the rest of the country (with some exceptions) it is dirt and turf racing surfaces. The drug problem in racing is a disillusion at best if you think it is under control.

The mutuel take is the major hurdle that every winning bettor has to overcome for long term winning success at the race track.

However taxing of the winning wagers installed by the governmental entities is another barrier to profits at the racetrack If you win at odds of 300-1 or greater the racetrack has to withhold taxes. However if you make a cumulative bet that yields the same winning amount you can circumvent the taxman.

But to directly answer your question, you will have to be a good gambler and a good handicapper with money and patience to “beat” the races.
Being a good gambler you should be astute enough to assess risk ( I not taking about odds) and being a good handicapper you should be astute enough to assign risk (I am talking about odds).

I believe having enough money to wager and absorb losses; and having the reserves to continue to wager until you win will give you the patience needed to win or “beat” the races.

[jamey1977]

You need to know something that the computer betters don't. I believe Alan Woods said once that his edge was watching replays. I think you can get an edge by watch the post parade and spotting sore horses, but you need to know what to watch for. JMO
Computers don't pass races either. we can pass any lousy race we want. Passing races, disqualifying lousy plays. We can do it all. Computers can't do this. We can also throw out our plays and bet the favorite automatically if we think we're gonna get our butts kicked. We can pass anything and do anything and that gives us an edge. Anybody who says profiting can not be done. Yeah, for them.

[Pace Cap'n]

Once again, not quite. There is the money line to consider if you like the underdog to win the game straight up, not just cover the pointspread. The larger the spread, the longer the odds if you take the dog to win the game.

However, it costs twice as much to bet the money line. Twenty cents on the money line, compared to ten cents on the spread.

[garyoz]

There is a parallel problem in the equity market. Trading volume is way down and there is a significant retail investor outflow from equity mutual funds. High Frequency Trading dominates trading. Problems range from the flash crash to bots that roam the markets looking to trigger technical analysis pivot points taking out stops and limit orders by trigging small trades at prices that result in retail investor losses. Options are completely dominated by high frequency trading with elegant trading strategies implemented the millisecond that theoretical valuations step out of line. Computers are colocated with exchange servers for the purposes of millisecond advantages.

I actually think racing bettor is probably less disadavantaged than the small stock trader--but I suppose that is debatable. The issues are the same and they are not going away.

[Robert Goren]

There is one thing for sure. You have to be smarter than the average bear to make money in either market.

[lamboguy]

you guys are making this game alot tougher than it is. all you need to be able to master is when to bet a horse to win or when you should bet him for show.

this is what the whole game boils down to anyway. if you want to take big spreads on pick bets and trifecta and exacta bets then all you are is a guy that likes action that thinks you can pick them better than someone else's computer can, in the long run the game will spit you out.

i can turn back the clocks when they first started trifecta bets at dogtracks. they started with one trifecta for the whole night. then it developed in 3 then the whole card. the track take was initially less than wps in seabrook dogtrack, so the bet was had some value. i remember running up there to play them when the smallest bet was $3.00. i hit tons of them where a 6/5 ran second and the trifecta paid $5800, race after race. i used to spend $256 a race wheeling the dog first and second and won on a consistant basis with the move with decent handicapping. then the takeout took a steep rise to over 20% and the payoffs got smaller and i quit the dog game. today i hardly ever see trifecta's pay over $2000. those things have to be horrific bets these days no matter how you play them as far as payoffs are concerned.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Lambo,


I agree that we tend to make this game tougher then it is. I believe that a successful long-term gambler needs to play instinctively...no rules. Play only edges, sometimes the edges are low priced and at times are not according to the individual sequence or race. I have seen a couple of real professionals operate through out the years and I could never pin point exactly what their next move was. The fact that they were highly disciplined and confident was very important as they made their moves through out the days betting activity.

[lamboguy]

most things in this game take alot of work. for instance if you were playing monmouth park the whole summer and you played the best horse in the race coming off the rail at less than 2-1 you would have 90% of your body in the grave by now. samething with other tracks throughout the country. now if you were smart enough to mark those horses down that got beat on a dead rail and waited for them to show up someplace else you will do good. those horses will not look that good on paper and you will get good prices on those horses. what i was trying to bring out is that you have to be extremely good to play multiple exotic wagering.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

most things in this game take alot of work. for instance if you were playing monmouth park the whole summer and you played the best horse in the race coming off the rail at less than 2-1 you would have 90% of your body in the grave by now. samething with other tracks throughout the country. now if you were smart enough to mark those horses down that got beat on a dead rail and waited for them to show up someplace else you will do good. those horses will not look that good on paper and you will get good prices on those horses. what i was trying to bring out is that you have to be extremely good to play multiple exotic wagering.

Extremely good to beat the exotics and also at times lucky. Since I don't know how to control luck I use the exotics to improve the win wager ROI with limited combinations in the exacta, doubles and occasional Pick 3's.

[fmolf]

most things in this game take alot of work. for instance if you were playing monmouth park the whole summer and you played the best horse in the race coming off the rail at less than 2-1 you would have 90% of your body in the grave by now. samething with other tracks throughout the country. now if you were smart enough to mark those horses down that got beat on a dead rail and waited for them to show up someplace else you will do good. those horses will not look that good on paper and you will get good prices on those horses. what i was trying to bring out is that you have to be extremely good to play multiple exotic wagering.
i agree i think the reason p3' and 4's are so popular is that you can be wrong with a great majority of your horses but still win money.This is just plain gambling because it means you really do not have a firm opinion on the races in the sequance.The real pro's that i have known bet mostly in the win and place pools and maybe i say maybe make two bets a day.Patience is a much needed skill that is not often mentioned.

[lansdale]

Not too long ago, I watched a televised interview featuring Al Francesco, a legendary figure in the world of gambling. Francesco is a renowned blackjack expert, and he is responsible for creating the blackjack "team play" concept, which has terrorized the casinos since the late 60's.

He was the man who recruited and trained blackjack "icon" Ken Uston, who became the game's most famous (infamous?) player. Francesco expressed how betrayed he felt when Uston started writing tell-all books about his teams and their practices...which made it impossible for the teams to operate without intense scrutiny from the casinos.

And then the interview took an interesting turn. Francesco revealed that another passion of his is horseracing. He said that, in the mid 70's, he employed a mathemetics professor, who was also a computer expert, and whose job it was to feed vast amounts of horseracing data into a super-computer, in an attempt to create an odds line more accurate than that of the racing public's.

"Our work showed some initial promise", he said, "but the positive results were not sustainable over time." More research and testing was scheduled to be done...but Francesco was betrayed anew when the professor, one William Quirin(!), jumped ship and preceeded to write a book about their research, which quickly became a best-seller in the field.

"My battle-for-profit in the arena of horseracing continues as we speak", Francesco said, "but ultimate victory has remained elusive."

All this got me thinking. Why haven't the computers been more successful in beating OUR game...especially in the area of creating an odds line more accurate than the public's?

Computers have been used to create poker-bots, which are capable of beating all but poker's most elite players. They have defeated reigning chess and backgammon champions. The notorious "computer group" used powerful computer systems which brought so much destruction to Las Vegas bookmakers, that the whole sports-betting landscape has changed forever.

In blackjack, computers have created winning "counting" systems which have forced the casinos to either ban the "counters" or change the rules of the game.

Even in roulette, computers have been used to track and identify "biased" wheels, making it possible to win there too!

Why can't the computers successfully attack OUR game? What makes this game so hard to beat...for man and machine alike?

thaskolos,

Benter and Woods, who have been much discussed here (and Woods sometimes posted), are, to my knowledge, the most successful professional gamblers of our time - they made roughly $750 million from horserace handicapping via computer. Many other players and teams have copied their extremely successful use of logit modelling, and are among the 'whales' against whom you are now competing, as Gary Oz pointed out. This is part of the reason the game is so tough. As Dave Schwartz pointed out, you really need to be world class to make money consistently in this game.

Cheers,

lansdale

[TrifectaMike]

It's not Logit. It's all about data structure and which data.

thaskolos,

Benter and Woods, who have been much discussed here (and Woods sometimes posted), are, to my knowledge, the most successful professional gamblers of our time - they made roughly $750 million from horserace handicapping via computer. Many other players and teams have copied their extremely successful use of logit modelling, and are among the 'whales' against whom you are now competing, as Gary Oz pointed out. This is part of the reason the game is so tough. As Dave Schwartz pointed out, you really need to be world class to make money consistently in this game.

Cheers,

lansdale

I nearly vomit every time I read that they owe their success to a Logit Model

Mike

[lansdale]

TFM,

I wasn't aware that the word logit could provoke such a violent reaction, but I agree with the point and I think many have posted along the same lines here. Logit (or probit) is not a magic bullet, and obviously many have taken this route unsuccessfully. For me, one of Benter's most interesting points, and one often ignored, is the profoundly counterintuitive nature of much of the data, and the grindingly slow process of arriving at the correct factor weights before he was in the black.

Cheers,

lansdale

[fast4522]

I have been around the track, sports book, known many at both and answer this question as if I was looking out at a fishbowl. So many seem to follow the chalk every play, so many will always bet against the chalk even if its rock solid. So many have some old codgers ways etched between their ears they know no other way that will ever work for them. The answer is that we are our own worst enemy, few have ice cold blood that it takes to not let odds affect us negatively. Plus the takeout & breakage is a uphill battle unless emotions are in check.

[Stillriledup]

I think one of the reasons the game has gotten harder to beat is that the racing secretaries are not interested in creating 'hard' races. They're interested in doing what's right for the owners. This is an owners game and the races are usually carded as such. There is very little meat on the bone with all the sophisticated speed figures out there in the racing world. Even money shots are usually accurately priced as are 20-1 shots. Sure, 20-1 shots win, but if the horse has a 5% chance to win, there's really no value.

The only real way to beat this game is to make a MONSTER score and live off that score for years until you make another monster score. You gotta hit a pick 6 for a couple hundred grand once every 2 years to stay in the black. Unless you're getting a nice rebate, you can't nickel and dime this stuff and expect to win. You can't be betting conservative bets and trying to stick 100 to win on 2-1 shots and expect to keep showing long term profits.

You need to score HUGE in my opinion to be a long term winner.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I think one of the reasons the game has gotten harder to beat is that the racing secretaries are not interested in creating 'hard' races. They're interested in doing what's right for the owners. This is an owners game and the races are usually carded as such. There is very little meat on the bone with all the sophisticated speed figures out there in the racing world. Even money shots are usually accurately priced as are 20-1 shots. Sure, 20-1 shots win, but if the horse has a 5% chance to win, there's really no value.

The only real way to beat this game is to make a MONSTER score and live off that score for years until you make another monster score. You gotta hit a pick 6 for a couple hundred grand once every 2 years to stay in the black. Unless you're getting a nice rebate, you can't nickel and dime this stuff and expect to win. You can't be betting conservative bets and trying to stick 100 to win on 2-1 shots and expect to keep showing long term profits.

You need to score HUGE in my opinion to be a long term winner.

What do you mean by this? And how has it changed from say 30 yrs ago?

[Trotman]

I have been around the track, sports book, known many at both and answer this question as if I was looking out at a fishbowl. So many seem to follow the chalk every play, so many will always bet against the chalk even if its rock solid. So many have some old codgers ways etched between their ears they know no other way that will ever work for them. The answer is that we are our own worst enemy, few have ice cold blood that it takes to not let odds affect us negatively. Plus the takeout & breakage is a uphill battle unless emotions are in check.
Are you speaking of your own short comings ?

[Stillriledup]

What do you mean by this? And how has it changed from say 30 yrs ago?

Maybe it hasn't changed, maybe this stuff was going on 30 years ago. It just seems like maybe there's less horses and the owners have more power.

[thaskalos]

Absolute concentration is the key, IMO...at least as far as my own game is concerned.

With the betting options currently available, the player has to be very diligent in his work. The onerous takeout of this game demands that the horse player be as close to perfect as possible, if he is to profit from it. Careless mistakes are punished severely.

Unlike the poker player, the horse player is not strictly playing against the other players.

He is also playing against the "house"...and that makes our game much tougher to beat.

Without concentration and discipline...all the handicapping skills in the world will be of little use.

[fast4522]

Not at all, I know when I am in the zone. The phrase I will refer to is a "fly on the wall". To know when you are sharp is half the battle.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Maybe it hasn't changed, maybe this stuff was going on 30 years ago. It just seems like maybe there's less horses and the owners have more power.

More power over what?

[DeanT]

More power over what?

Takeout, as in CA.

50 years ago owners had zero power. The takeout rate was 10% at NYRA, with 5% going to the track and purses and 5% to the gvt. Then it kept going up as gvts and tracks took more. But there was never, ever an increase of takeout just for purses.

Now in CA we see exactly that. While we have always had gvts, and others trying to raise takeout for things, now the owners have one all to themselves.

It is easy to raise purses. Just cut your dates, then purses go up. But they do not do that. they want the same 6 horse fields, but for more money. How? Raise the take.

[Stillriledup]

More power over what?


More power over what they used to have is what i'm guessing.

[Saratoga_Mike]

More power over what they used to have is what i'm guessing.

So you said you thought owners had more power, but you aren't sure over what?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Takeout, as in CA.

50 years ago owners had zero power. The takeout rate was 10% at NYRA, with 5% going to the track and purses and 5% to the gvt. Then it kept going up as gvts and tracks took more. But there was never, ever an increase of takeout just for purses.

Now in CA we see exactly that. While we have always had gvts, and others trying to raise takeout for things, now the owners have one all to themselves.

It is easy to raise purses. Just cut your dates, then purses go up. But they do not do that. they want the same 6 horse fields, but for more money. How? Raise the take.

What specific owners in CA lobbied for the higher takeout? And by owners, I assumed Stillriled meant horse owners, not the track owners. Perhaps I'm mistaken?

[DeanT]

What specific owners in CA lobbied for the higher takeout?

The thoroughbred owners of California, headed by Arnold Zetcher.

When the takeout hike was leaked early:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/58142/horseplayer-group-battles-calif-takeout-hike
"I hate it," said HANA president Jeff Platt when contacted July 29. He believes higher takeout will reduce the handle because people will be less likely to wager, and he points to a big downturn in handle at Los Alamitos Race Course after it received approval for a 2% takeout increase this year as an example.

"I feel it is the wrong action to take," Platt said. "They should be lowering (rates), not increasing them."

While discussions of the takeout increase have apparently been ongoing between Thoroughbred owners, the tracks, and Perez's office, nothing has been brought publicly to the CHRB, which has a legislative committee headed by board chairman Keith Brackpool. Arnold Zetcher, recently elected chairman of the Thoroughbred Owners of California, said it would "be a little premature to be talking about it."

"The document is still in the formative stages," Zetcher said. "At the proper time, I'll be more than happy to talk about it."

[Saratoga_Mike]

The thoroughbred owners of California, headed by Arnold Zetcher.

When the takeout hike was leaked early:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/58142/horseplayer-group-battles-calif-takeout-hike

Got it - I dont really follow anything Cali racing related. My interest went from nominal to zero when they switched surfaces.

[Stillriledup]

What specific owners in CA lobbied for the higher takeout? And by owners, I assumed Stillriled meant horse owners, not the track owners. Perhaps I'm mistaken?

I meant horse owners, i doubt anyone will think i meant track owners since i was specifically talking about race carding. Apologies for the confusion,i was talking about horse owners.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I meant horse owners, i doubt anyone will think i meant track owners since i was specifically talking about race carding. Apologies for the confusion,i was talking about horse owners.

Okay - Dean provided a good answer, I thought.

[garyoz]

Don't want to take the thread off-topic, but I think High Frequency Trading is very similar to the racing syndicates. This article popped up in my correspondence today. It is an academic examination of the effect of HFT on the stock market. I don't really buy all the conclusions. But HFT is accounting for the majority of trades in the stock market, much like racing syndicates and betting.

http://pointsandfigures.com/?p=2963

[Saratoga_Mike]

Don't want to take the thread off-topic, but I think this High Frequency Trading is very similar to the racing syndicates. This article popped up in my correspondence today. It is an academic examination of the effect of HFT on the stock market. I don't really buy all the conclusions. But HFT is accounting for the majority of trades in the stock market, much like racing syndicates and betting.

http://pointsandfigures.com/?p=2963

Interesting topic - you should start a new thread for it.

[speculus]

you guys are making this game alot tougher than it is. all you need to be able to master is when to bet a horse to win or when you should bet him for show.


Never were truer words spoken! :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[pandy]

A computer handicapping can beat the races but there has never been a computer handicapping system that will win just by betting the top ranked horse. However, if you use a good computer handicapping system properly, looking for horses that are ranked high but are overlays, it can be profitable and just as good if not better than a top handicapper. It always comes down to the same thing, VALUE.

[badcompany]

Don't want to take the thread off-topic, but I think High Frequency Trading is very similar to the racing syndicates. This article popped up in my correspondence today. It is an academic examination of the effect of HFT on the stock market. I don't really buy all the conclusions. But HFT is accounting for the majority of trades in the stock market, much like racing syndicates and betting.

http://pointsandfigures.com/?p=2963

The stock market is the same game it has always been. In the past, you had brokers and traders, who accounted for 90+% of the trades, fighting over nickels and dimes. Today, with HFT, those same participants are fighting over pennies and fractions of pennies.

[lurker]

I know the largest bettor on Betfair. He never watches a race except to root. His comuter program comes up withy a fair value number. when his number is less than what the track is offerng he bets the horse down to his number, when his number is higher he books the horse. All of the wagers are placed automatically by a robot.

[PaceAdvantage]

I know the largest bettor on Betfair. He never watches a race except to root. His comuter program comes up withy a fair value number. when his number is less than what the track is offerng he bets the horse down to his number, when his number is higher he books the horse. All of the wagers are placed automatically by a robot.The only hard part is coming up with a good fair value number.

The rest is easy.

[Actor]

Two reasons:

The take-out keeps growing. This aspect has been thoroughly discussed and I need not add anything.
It's a game between you and the other players. As attendance shrinks the first to go are the non-handicappers who stick a pin in the Form. The handicappers leave at a lesser rate. Barry Meadow wrote "42% of the money is bet by 1.5% of the players." I would not be surprised to learn that today 60% of the money is bet by 10% of the players. Percentage wise, the competition (the other players) is getting tougher.

As the influence of these two factors increases I foresee a time when the game will indeed become unbeatable.

[Actor]

There is one thing for sure. You have to be smarter than the average bear to make money in either market.
Not necessarily. You can make money in equities through random selection. You can't do that at the track.

[Dave Schwartz]

As I have stated publicly, 14% of the money is wagered by 6 players.

[pandy]

I know a lot of people think it's tougher to win now and I understand the reasons, but it depends on the type of bettor you are. It you are a speed handicapper who bets prime contenders in the 2-1 to 5-1 odds range, yes, it is tougher because everyone uses speed figures and there aren't as many overlays in that area. But if you are a longshot bettor, the figure horses are bet heavier than they were years ago, so there are more overlays in the low-speed figure longshot area. So it depends. If there is a horse that has a stand out 'fig" it may go off at 7-5 now. Back in the days before everyone had good figs that same horse may have been 2-1 or even 5-2. But, that horse will still lose two out of three times and if you are going against it, you are getting better odds on the other horses. So it's really a matter of how you bet. I am no longer a speed handicapper, so for me it's better now.

[Canadian]

i can turn back the clocks when they first started trifecta bets at dogtracks. they started with one trifecta for the whole night. then it developed in 3 then the whole card. the track take was initially less than wps in seabrook dogtrack, so the bet was had some value. i remember running up there to play them when the smallest bet was $3.00. i hit tons of them where a 6/5 ran second and the trifecta paid $5800, race after race. i used to spend $256 a race wheeling the dog first and second and won on a consistant basis with the move with decent handicapping. then the takeout took a steep rise to over 20% and the payoffs got smaller and i quit the dog game. today i hardly ever see trifecta's pay over $2000. those things have to be horrific bets these days no matter how you play them as far as payoffs are concerned.


lambo,

I always wondered about dog tracks. To me no matter how stupid the horse racing community is, dog tracks have to be worst. I don't know what it cost to race a dog, or even operate a dog track, but it has to be far less then racing a horse or operating a dog track. I looked at takeout rates a while back and I think the dogs had the highest takeout average of anywhere. Why they wouldn't use their lower overhead to their advantage is beyond me.

I kind of enjoy watching the dogs.... I just can't believe how stupid the sport is goverened.

[TrifectaMike]

There are still opportunities left in this game. While it is true that the Whales have changed the nature of game. The change is mainly due to the fact that the Whales create the favoritism amongst the horses in any particular race.

You can compete against them successfully, but not if you intend to compete across the entire spectrum of races. In order to compete successfully, you will be esssentially required to become a specialist. No, not a specialist in a particular type of race, nor any any particular track. You need to become a specialist in odds ranged based methodology,

What exactly is an odds ranged based methodology?

Select an odds range. Let's for example choose 5 to 7-1. Now, go ahead and use the tools available to you to analyze winners of races that fit into that odds range.

Thre are some very smart people in this forum that are have a working
knowledge of Regression, NN, GA's , Impact Values, Likelihood Ratios, Decision Trees and Probability. Why not use that expertise to study winners in an odds range.

Essentially your model has to reflect accurately a slice of the racing pie.

Mike

[lamboguy]

As I have stated publicly, 14% of the money is wagered by 6 players.i think you have that part right dave.

[Stillriledup]

I can never get in trouble bumping a fantastic post from Gus, can i? :D

Time to revisit this topic, 3 years later, has the game gotten harder, easier or has it stayed the same?

[green80]

However, it costs twice as much to bet the money line. Twenty cents on the money line, compared to ten cents on the spread.

on the spread line the bookmaker's take is actually about 4.5% not 10%.
For example, you lay 110 to win 100 on team A. I lay 110 to win 100 on team B. The bookmakers handle is $220. On that he makes $10 or approx. 4.5%.

[lamboguy]

its a lot tougher today, for me anyway. i can't wait for Hong Kong, i need a change of venue's and sleeping habits.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I think the game for me has gotten easier since 2010 but I think it is simply that I've gotten comfortable with my seasonal routine and have every nuance of bets,betting,odds brackets,% progressions accounted for.I've changed to thinking long term which relaxes me and my profit potential is going up as I rarely touch my bet money.Being as comfortable and proficient on big stakes days,Triple Crown or Breeders Cup or at low level tracks like Beulah is important.It took a lot of years just to learn the lay of the land(tracks) and figuring out what works there or what my tastes are.Brief breaks,mid April,post Labor Day,post BC do me a lot of good.Overall I think it's just repetition that has me at ease and playing well and loose.My average mutual has gone up by nearly 4.00 too in the last 18 months while only sacrificing 6% in hit rate.The other thing is if anything is overbearingly negative in my life outside the game I abstain from playing.If you've ever been on a self destructive losing streak you know this tidbit does a world of good.

[Exotic1]

I can never get in trouble bumping a fantastic post from Gus, can i? :D

Time to revisit this topic, 3 years later, has the game gotten harder, easier or has it stayed the same?

Absolutely. Most of his posts are not time bound, imo.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

Well, since many feel that higher takeouts are the root cause for this game being so hard to beat, myself included, than the game must be getting harder than it was three years ago. With the exception of some lower takeout pick 5 bets, fees and takeout rates and the infamous Illinois "surcharge" and the like are all higher, as .gov and racetracks everywhere seek more "revenue".

January 1st it gets worse.

For me personally, I would say the difficulty is about the same. Definitely harder today than 20 years ago, but about the same over the last three years.

The thing that changed for me this year is the lower handle, due to the insane suspending of ADW wagers in Illinois for the first five months this year, including the Derby and the Preakness.

2014 will probably be lower still, as I will probably expand my boycott of Illinois tracks to other venues....

[classhandicapper]

One of the things that makes the game tougher for me is increasing information. That's counter intuitive. But as you start increasing information you start increasing the number of mild inaccuracies that can compound themselves into major errors and have a tougher time weighing it all.

The most basic example is looking at multiple sets of speed figures.

Intuitively you would think having multiple sets might help you find potentially problem figures and help your focus your bets on legit overlays, but it often leads to confusion because it's often not clear which figure is correct. Look at 3-4 sets of figures and you will often think you are handicapping 3-4 different races. That's when you really start getting confused. :lol:

[Cheap Speed]

Whats the old saying? A man with with one watch always knows what time it is, a man with two watches is never quite sure :D

[redeye007]

To say the least, morning line oddsmakers have totally destroyed the value of BRIS figures. I guess they are trying to show everyone how smart and skillfull they are. In an 8 horse field 6 entrants are separated by no more than a 1/2 point, at least that's how they see it. I have seen situations where without using BRIS figures a horse could never be selected as a morning line favorite and guess what, it's the morning line favorite. It's too bad these guys don't know how to read a racing form. Trying to find a horse with a good starting price is virtually impossible using BRIS figures thanks to these guys. As little as 5 years ago players had a tremendous edge over the public using software and BRIS figures but these guys have done a good job eliminating that edge. And possibly the trainers see this too and have changed their training methods. The introduction of synthetic race track surfaces also changed the game. I treat them the same as turf and that works well for me. As always though, the horse with a good class advantage that is in condition running on it's surface at it's distance can always be counted on to win every time. :)

[mountainman]

Hard game to beat? Let's just say 5-tons of wild-eyed, jittery t-bred dispatched from a standing start with another species whipping and slashing astride them does not lend itself to predictability.

And also, in the final analysis, no matter how time-tested or inspired our handicapping formulas, we can never completely guage a horse's physical condition- or forsee issues hidden behind a wall of past performances. We scream for "transparency," but the beasts our game is built on just don't lend themselves to that. They're too mercurial and mysterious in nature.

[raybo]

Hard game to beat? Let's just say 5-tons of wild-eyed, jittery t-bred dispatched from a standing start with another species whipping and slashing astride them does not lend itself to predictability.

And also, in the final analysis, no matter how time-tested or inspired our handicapping formulas, we can never completely guage a horse's physical condition- or forsee issues hidden behind a wall of past performances. We scream for "transparency," but the beasts our game is built on just don't lend themselves to that. They're too mercurial and mysterious in nature.

I agree, but the way I see it, the reason this game is so hard to beat, for most, is that players are always looking for a "cure all", something that works for every track they want to play, every type of race, distance, surface, class, age/sex, field size, etc.. Those players who recognize and tailor their methods with the individuality of all those factors in mind, probably has a much better chance of succeeding.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I agree, but the way I see it, the reason this game is so hard to beat, for most, is that players are always looking for a "cure all", something that works for every track they want to play, every type of race, distance, surface, class, age/sex, field size, etc.. Those players who recognize and tailor their methods with the individuality of all those factors in mind, probably has a much better chance of succeeding.

Ray that's completely not true.I look at horses in a universal way I look at boxers.They have the same attributes like jab.right hand,ring generalship,heart,determination etc etc.And it's universally applicable.I use it and apply it and change my venue regularly.While everybody is building databases to make a 1st bet I have cashed on the confusion in the 1st few weeks of a meet.To me odds drop when everybody gets serious.There are crystalized performance standards exhibited by horses that will never be out of fashion..That's the illusion.The way of thinking about horses can change but as animals what they are capable of never will and the further anybody gets away from it.It will eventually lead to wrong.

[mkkash]

Horse racing, as a gambling game, is not based on equal or fixed probabilities.

If you look inside an hour glass what do you see?

I have an ability to see how to solve op problems but not my own.

Horse Racing is not a gambling game , It is truth an exact science or art form. I once said that a gambler is one that does not know how to play.
While investors expect a huge return on their investment.

It has been said that 98% of the people who gamble on HR loose.
Who do you think the 2% are that go to the bank with a pocket full
of play dough?

Thirty years ago when I first got the fever and a taste of have a little
want some more (play dough), I was walking the grounds of Hollywood
Park near the club house looking some what disappointed a gentleman
asked me with a big smile " How much did you get?"

I did not answer him because he thought I was one of the crowd.

There are people in the know that know what this game is about and
how to invest a small amount to win big, huge chunks of play dough.

This is a well oiled machine that has been scooping up the cash all
around the world,

You can become one of them. You have to think, study and experiment
using new ideas and soon you will see the light.

Mr. Smith told me that I could be as good as the pros, but I had to study.
I buy the book investing at the race track from him. He had a book store
downtown.

Well I brought the books, gadgets, systems and tips just to discover a clue,

I am still on the path and I have faith that someday my dream will be a
reality.

Horse players are the sport of Kings.

More to come...

M K Kash

"Make A Pocket Full Of Play Dough"

[thaskalos]

If you look inside an hour glass what do you see?

I have an ability to see how to solve op problems but not my own.

Horse Racing is not a gambling game , It is truth an exact science or art form. I once said that a gambler is one that does not know how to play.
While investors expect a huge return on their investment.

It has been said that 98% of the people who gamble on HR loose.
Who do you think the 2% are that go to the bank with a pocket full
of play dough?

Thirty years ago when I first got the fever and a taste of have a little
want some more (play dough), I was walking the grounds of Hollywood
Park near the club house looking some what disappointed a gentleman
asked me with a big smile " How much did you get?"

I did not answer him because he thought I was one of the crowd.

There are people in the know that know what this game is about and
how to invest a small amount to win big, huge chunks of play dough.

This is a well oiled machine that has been scooping up the cash all
around the world,

You can become one of them. You have to think, study and experiment
using new ideas and soon you will see the light.

Mr. Smith told me that I could be as good as the pros, but I had to study.
I buy the book investing at the race track from him. He had a book store
downtown.

Well I brought the books, gadgets, systems and tips just to discover a clue,

I am still on the path and I have faith that someday my dream will be a
reality.

Horse players are the sport of Kings.

More to come...

M K Kash

"Make A Pocket Full Of Play Dough"

Famous last words... :)

[barn32]

In theory, it should be impossible to lose at horse racing.

Why? Because you don't have to ante.

[Robert Goren]

Betting on the ponies is a game of percentages. Horse A will walk out the gate ?% of time. Horse B will get the lead on the first turn ? % of time. The jockey on horse C will ride like he has never been on a horse before ? %. Etc, etc etc. It all matter of putting the percentages together. Once you do that, then it is like a crap game. You simply put your money where you make the most profit. You have to better than the crowd in put together those percentages. If there were no takeout it would be easier, but it still doable even with about a 20% takeout. It just take longer to make a fixed amount of money. There are several ways (maybe many ways) to get to same numbers. In the end, all winners's numbers look a like when you get through the chaff. They have to.

[VastinMT]

As I have stated publicly, 14% of the money is wagered by 6 players.

Since we're bumping and updating . . . have these figures changed since you posted this, Dave?

[burnsy]

Intangibles.

They are what makes this game so irresistible, yet frustrating, at the same time.

You can crunch numbers with the best of them, but being able to think outside the box is, often times, just as important.

The people who do the best at winning in this game, manage their money the best.

BING and O.........This is true in ALL gambling. I'm a decent black jack player and a novice poker player. I can win at poker with a bunch of "average joes" in a house game but i have a couple friends that can kick my ass. Both made the World series in different years off of a 125$ online game. Discipline and managment is the key to ANY game of chance. I know horse racing so i practice this on horse racing. The guys i know that are GOOD at poker (and horses) can sit there and fold for hands until they have something or think others have crap. I PASS WAY more races than i play. They crunch the numbers and know how many blinds they can "give up" before they are in trouble. But they are constantly trying to figure out how others (at that table) play the game. You have to have discipline, some math skills and a little bit of bettors intuition (thinking out of the box). The power of observation.

Its a mistake i see people make on here. They think you can win by being good with numbers or a computer (hard work). One guy even made fun of me because i talked about drinking beer and having a good time at the track. Its not an "art" he said, well it damn sure ain't a science because theres about a billion ways a race can go and a million ways you can handicap it. I already know which races i'm betting and how much i may lose before hand. I keep records of every bet. This person didn't understand that anyone thats any good at any gambling.......is good at math. The gambler that makes money has DISCIPLINE, knows when to pull the trigger or to sit it out and they learn to THINK outside the norm. The math and work are the simple part......you just can't teach discipline or critical thinking....people either "get it" or they don't. Most gamblers are on the compulsive side (understatement).....they can't "pass" the "action". A WINNING gambler only bets when he thinks he has everyone else over the barrel. In horse racing that means finding horses that run well at the RIGHT ODDS, when most (others) are WRONG about that race. You can work as hard as you want and be a math or computer genius...you either catch on to this or you lose all the time. I don't care if you are betting two cockaroaches racing across the room, you don't pull out a dime until you think you know which one is faster or you know the guy you are betting against is a fool or wrong more times than hes right. Theres a human element to it that you must be able to understand...its an art. Even understanding all this, i make mistakes constantly and lose..you gotta learn how to lose to.......to win...theres no such thing as a formula.......Mamma called it gambling for a reason.

[cosmo96]

When all is said and done, I do very well with my computer and software program. The game is always changing. I do well at adapting. I don't see how anyone can be successful without a computer.

[Cratos]

BING and O.........This is true in ALL gambling. I'm a decent black jack player and a novice poker player. I can win at poker with a bunch of "average joes" in a house game but i have a couple friends that can kick my ass. Both made the World series in different years off of a 125$ online game. Discipline and managment is the key to ANY game of chance. I know horse racing so i practice this on horse racing. The guys i know that are GOOD at poker (and horses) can sit there and fold for hands until they have something or think others have crap. I PASS WAY more races than i play. They crunch the numbers and know how many blinds they can "give up" before they are in trouble. But they are constantly trying to figure out how others (at that table) play the game. You have to have discipline, some math skills and a little bit of bettors intuition (thinking out of the box). The power of observation.

Its a mistake i see people make on here. They think you can win by being good with numbers or a computer (hard work). One guy even made fun of me because i talked about drinking beer and having a good time at the track. Its not an "art" he said, well it damn sure ain't a science because theres about a billion ways a race can go and a million ways you can handicap it. I already know which races i'm betting and how much i may lose before hand. I keep records of every bet. This person didn't understand that anyone thats any good at any gambling.......is good at math. The gambler that makes money has DISCIPLINE, knows when to pull the trigger or to sit it out and they learn to THINK outside the norm. The math and work are the simple part......you just can't teach discipline or critical thinking....people either "get it" or they don't. Most gamblers are on the compulsive side (understatement).....they can't "pass" the "action". A WINNING gambler only bets when he thinks he has everyone else over the barrel. In horse racing that means finding horses that run well at the RIGHT ODDS, when most (others) are WRONG about that race. You can work as hard as you want and be a math or computer genius...you either catch on to this or you lose all the time. I don't care if you are betting two cockaroaches racing across the room, you don't pull out a dime until you think you know which one is faster or you know the guy you are betting against is a fool or wrong more times than hes right. Theres a human element to it that you must be able to understand...its an art. Even understanding all this, i make mistakes constantly and lose..you gotta learn how to lose to.......to win...theres no such thing as a formula.......Mamma called it gambling for a reason.

An excellent post

[lamboguy]

all forms of skillful gambling revert back to odds. when one bets sports its not enough to say that Pittsburgh is a much better team than Oakland. for numbers sake, you have to assign how much better they are either with money odds or points. if you think that the Steelers are 7 points better and line of the game is 8, maybe you can get lucky and give the 8 and get away with it, but eventually you will get cleaned out. in order to win with that bet you probably need to be giving 6 or less.

the same thing happens in horses, if you aren't getting more than your horse is worth you will be a loser no matter how good a picker you are.

[pondman]

the same thing happens in horses, if you aren't getting more than your horse is worth you will be a loser no matter how good a picker you are.

Horse racing has huge overlays. But if a player wants to stick with what every other player is doing, and bet low priced favorites, they'll never have a chance at much except entertaining themselves. It's not until a player can spot a substantial margin that this game become rewarding.

[sammy the sage]

still need your jock in ANY PARTICULAR race to give 100%...many times they don't...

[lamboguy]

Horse racing has huge overlays. But if a player wants to stick with what every other player is doing, and bet low priced favorites, they'll never have a chance at much except entertaining themselves. It's not until a player can spot a substantial margin that this game become rewarding.sometimes you can find value in very short priced horses. a few weeks ago there was an Alabama bred stake race at The Fair Grounds. i had the eventual winner at .10 to the dollar. the Scot Gelner trained entry wound up going off at 1/2. that is pretty decent value if you ask me. the horse paid 5 times more than he should have paid in my mind. when you look at it, its a much better play than betting a horse going off at 10-1 that should have been 8-1. but i do agree, finding value in favorites are few and far between.

there are 2 very important parts to the example i just made though. first you have to have a spot on odds model and second you have to be able to anticipate what the odds will look like after the horses leave the gate.

[acorn54]

well the op question "why is this game so hard to beat", speaks volumes for the reason younger blood doesn't gravitate to gambling on horseraces. the other forms of gambling are much less demanding, to obtain a positive expectancy in a much shorter time.
i don't know how many people responding to this thread have participated in the stock market, or poker, but i have, and its been my experience that it requires alot shorter learning curve to get into positive expectancy.

[dasch]

When you have a winning effort horse but due to the trip ends up running 5th combined with pace that can also take a winning effort off the board, you end up with under certain circumstances taking a horse from running 1st to last.

That type of volatility is what makes this game so great. It also unfortunately makes it too complex for the average person.(I am not trying to say us horseplayers are so great but it definitely says we all love a challenge)

[Stillriledup]

well the op question "why is this game so hard to beat", speaks volumes for the reason younger blood doesn't gravitate to gambling on horseraces. the other forms of gambling are much less demanding, to obtain a positive expectancy in a much shorter time.
i don't know how many people responding to this thread have participated in the stock market, or poker, but i have, and its been my experience that it requires alot shorter learning curve to get into positive expectancy.

I've talked about this before but i think it bears repeating. Why do people all of a sudden need to be full fledged experts to make horse wagers? People toss millions into lotteries every day, they have no problem parting with their money on a wing and a prayer, why not put some of that "discretionary income" into the races? People are allowed to bet random numbers at the track, i know none of us here on this board would stop them!

[thaskalos]

I've talked about this before but i think it bears repeating. Why do people all of a sudden need to be full fledged experts to make horse wagers? People toss millions into lotteries every day, they have no problem parting with their money on a wing and a prayer, why not put some of that "discretionary income" into the races? People are allowed to bet random numbers at the track, i know none of us here on this board would stop them!

People throw money at the lottery because the payoff is potentially life-changing. The racetrack does not usually promise such riches.

And people play numbers at the roulette because the takeout is only about 5%.

Roulette on horseback with a 20%+ takeout just doesn't have a good ring to it...

[Pensacola Pete]

I've talked about this before but i think it bears repeating. Why do people all of a sudden need to be full fledged experts to make horse wagers? People toss millions into lotteries every day, they have no problem parting with their money on a wing and a prayer, why not put some of that "discretionary income" into the races? People are allowed to bet random numbers at the track, i know none of us here on this board would stop them!

That's what they used to do, before the lotteries became legal. When lotteries were legalized, it didn't take long for people to realize that after paying for gas, $2 for parking, $3 to get in, $2 (then) for the Form, and 50c for a program, they could have walked down to the local liquor store and bought seven $1 lottery tickets.

[pondman]

And people play numbers at the roulette because the takeout is only about 5%.


That's the guaranteed disadvantage-- 5% loss on every consistent bet. You can't win money.

Horse racing can have positive advantage. I say it can be much greater than 10%.

[thaskalos]

That's the guaranteed disadvantage-- 5% loss on every consistent bet. You can't win money.

Horse racing can have positive advantage. I say it can be much greater than 10%.

Yes...horse racing can have a positive advantage.

But about 98-99% of the horseplayers are not sure whether this is true or not...even though they have played this game for many years.

In fact...the vast majority of the horseplayers lose much more than 5% when they play their game of choice.

So, the argument could be made that they would be much better off if they headed for the roulette table instead.

Heck...they might even get a free buffet coupon there...

[acorn54]

That's the guaranteed disadvantage-- 5% loss on every consistent bet. You can't win money.

Horse racing can have positive advantage. I say it can be much greater than 10%.

people can beat an efficient market if they have information not available to the masses. isn't that what all this hoopla is about as far as watching the trips of horses and track bias', and the selling of "exclusive info" only available to a select few.
the problem is the effort required to attain a positve expectancy in horse wagering, versus other venues such as giving money to a financial investor such as warren buffet via his berkshire hathaway stock, or in the vanguard standard and poor 500 index fund.

[traynor]

I think the perception that this "game" is "hard to beat" is just that--a perception, rather than an accurate description of reality. That perception may have originated in (and be maintained by) the notion that individual races are totally unique and must be "deciphered" like some kind of puzzle.

The reality is that most races are boringly similar, and contain consistent, repeating sets of variables that can be known and--once known--utilized. It is only when looking at an individual race, or a small sample of races, that the illusion of uniqueness is created. Looking at large samples, and viewing those large samples as one would view samples representative of any other kind of business activity makes the "game" look pretty much like any other activity that uses data analysis to develop insights.

I think anyone willing to invest the time and effort needed to take a couple of semesters of statistics and data analysis before they run off to the track with the mortgage payment can probably do well. It is WAY easier than making a living playing blackjack. Not as much fun, but much easier.

[acorn54]

I think the perception that this "game" is "hard to beat" is just that--a perception, rather than an accurate description of reality. That perception may have originated in (and be maintained by) the notion that individual races are totally unique and must be "deciphered" like some kind of puzzle.

The reality is that most races are boringly similar, and contain consistent, repeating sets of variables that can be known and--once known--utilized. It is only when looking at an individual race, or a small sample of races, that the illusion of uniqueness is created. Looking at large samples, and viewing those large samples as one would view samples representative of any other kind of business activity makes the "game" look pretty much like any other activity that uses data analysis to develop insights.

I think anyone willing to invest the time and effort needed to take a couple of semesters of statistics and data analysis before they run off to the track with the mortgage payment can probably do well. It is WAY easier than making a living playing blackjack. Not as much fun, but much easier.

you make it seem so easy and effortless. first of all a "couple of semesters", of statistics is six months of classes . also when you have that knowledge under your belt you have to on a regular basis analyze data.
people can simply let a financial manager or an stock fund indexed to the russell 2000 run on auto pilot and average a 14% annual return, doesn't get any easier than that.

[thaskalos]

I think the perception that this "game" is "hard to beat" is just that--a perception, rather than an accurate description of reality. That perception may have originated in (and be maintained by) the notion that individual races are totally unique and must be "deciphered" like some kind of puzzle.

The reality is that most races are boringly similar, and contain consistent, repeating sets of variables that can be known and--once known--utilized. It is only when looking at an individual race, or a small sample of races, that the illusion of uniqueness is created. Looking at large samples, and viewing those large samples as one would view samples representative of any other kind of business activity makes the "game" look pretty much like any other activity that uses data analysis to develop insights.

I think anyone willing to invest the time and effort needed to take a couple of semesters of statistics and data analysis before they run off to the track with the mortgage payment can probably do well. It is WAY easier than making a living playing blackjack. Not as much fun, but much easier.

I don't know about that.

As I said at the start of this thread, Al Francesco happens to be a gambling LEGEND...and he discovered a way to make a lot of money in blackjack...but he has not yet unraveled the mystery surrounding horse racing.

[thaskalos]

you make it seem so easy and effortless. first of all a "couple of semesters", of statistics is six months of classes . also when you have that knowledge under your belt you have to on a regular basis analyze data.
people can simply let a financial manager or an stock fund indexed to the russell 2000 run on auto pilot and average a 14% annual return, doesn't get any easier than that.

Yes...making a lot of money in this game is as easy and effortless as Traynor makes it seem.

That's why we see so many millionaire horseplayers roaming around... :)

[traynor]

you make it seem so easy and effortless. first of all a "couple of semesters", of statistics is six months of classes . also when you have that knowledge under your belt you have to on a regular basis analyze data.
people can simply let a financial manager or an stock fund indexed to the russell 2000 run on auto pilot and average a 14% annual return, doesn't get any easier than that.

Actually, a couple of semesters would be nine months or so. A small enough investment considering the time spent by the average handicapper over the years reading the DRF or staring at a computer screen trying to make sense of what they are seeing. Or re-reading 20-30 year old books for the seventh time.

The alternative, of course, is to hook up with a betting syndicate, and let someone else do all the heavy lifting. I would rather make my own decisions, so I guess that means I will have to do it the hard way.

[traynor]

I don't know about that.

As I said at the start of this thread, Al Francesco happens to be a gambling LEGEND...and he discovered a way to make a lot of money in blackjack...but he has not yet unraveled the mystery surrounding horse racing.

I have no idea who Al Francesco is, and I am not especially interested in what he did or did not do, or claims to have done or not done. Maybe he has a cognitive blind spot when it comes to horse races?

[thaskalos]

I have no idea who Al Francesco is, and I am not especially interested in what he did or did not do, or claims to have done or not done. Maybe he has a cognitive blind spot when it comes to horse races?

It seems that 98-99% of the horse bettors suffer from the same affliction...

Isn't that strange...in a game that's supposedly so easy to beat?

[thaskalos]

I have no idea who Al Francesco is, and I am not especially interested in what he did or did not do, or claims to have done or not done. Maybe he has a cognitive blind spot when it comes to horse races?

Sorry...

I was under the impression that ALL expert blackjack players knew who Al Fransesco was...

[traynor]

Yes...making a lot of money in this game is as easy and effortless as Traynor makes it seem.

That's why we see so many millionaire horseplayers roaming around... :)

I think it is a bit of a leap to go from "making a profit" to "making a lot of money." I don't see many millionaire blackjack players around lately. Lots of millionaire baccarat players, but not many play blackjack.

There may be quite a few millionaire bettors around who make a nice profit betting on horse races, but I doubt many would be interested in posting their strategies on a forum. In fact, I think that is probably the very last place one would find them. More likely next to last--the very last would be those offering their strategies for sale.

The "easy and effortless" part is highly subjective. A suggestion that studying stats and data analysis might be useful is to bypass the hot air and puffery that goes with almost anything in horse race "analysis." Flailing about in a data silo with junior high math skills and the endless software apps that seem more concerned with bells and whistles than useful analysis is likely to make anything seem difficult.

[traynor]

Sorry...

I was under the impression that ALL expert blackjack players knew who Al Fransesco was...

Nope. Wrong again.

[thaskalos]

Nope. Wrong again.

Well...at least I am consistent...