The $3000 Question

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

I have a good friend that happens to be one of the best handicappers i know...he selects a consistency of winners, some at good prices. The other side of the equation is that he is a terrible money manager. This fault has kept him in the loser file for too long. We have discussed the important money management topic at length for about twenty years. No help.

I had asked my friend what would you do with a $3000 betting bank that would be used entirely for the purpose of wagering on horses.

I now ask all of the fine players on this site for any comments on how best to use this fund for the purpose of making money. Once again my buddy is a proficient handicapper. I do not know his win percentage as he does not keep records....but he can select "live" horses his problem in the betting end of the equation.

Thank you in advance for your comments as I am not an expert to give him any advice on this topic.

[acorn54]

percentage of bankroll is the smartest move-sensible progression, you bet more when you are winning and bet less when you are losing.

[jamey1977]

percentage of bankroll is the smartest move-sensible progression, you bet more when you are winning and bet less when you are losing. If he can pick winners. Just tell him to conserve his plays and only bet when he gets 4 to 1 and up. All of his plays should be 4 to 1 and up only. He should easily get 20 percent - Winners at a 16 dollar average. The problem with him is like I use to have, chasing losses and side bets. Just official method plays only. Discipline, without it, we will never profit one penny at this game. I don't care about winning. I know I will win. All I care about is putting down my official plays according to my official method of operations. If he could incorporate this thinking, like I do. He could succeed easily.

[appistappis]

bet 5% of the bankroll to win......when you reach $5000 go to 8%.

[thaskalos]

I have a good friend that happens to be one of the best handicappers i know...he selects a consistency of winners, some at good prices. The other side of the equation is that he is a terrible money manager. This fault has kept him in the loser file for too long. We have discussed the important money management topic at length for about twenty years. No help.

I had asked my friend what would you do with a $3000 betting bank that would be used entirely for the purpose of wagering on horses.

I now ask all of the fine players on this site for any comments on how best to use this fund for the purpose of making money. Once again my buddy is a proficient handicapper. I do not know his win percentage as he does not keep records....but he can select "live" horses his problem in the betting end of the equation.

Thank you in advance for your comments as I am not an expert to give him any advice on this topic. If your friend keeps no records, there is no way of telling if his losses are due to poor money management or bad handicapping...or both. I know you said that he is a proficient handicapper...but that doesn't mean that he is good enough to win.

Proper money management only matters if you are a winning player. If you are a losing player, good money management will allow you to last longer in the game...but you will eventually lose your bankroll - no matter how large it is.

Tell your friend to keep a record of his bets, and to make sure he is a winning handicapper, before he commits serious money to this game.

[acorn54]

bet 5% of the bankroll to win......when you reach $5000 go to 8%.
well it is not quite so simple as that. the percentage of bankroll one can wager without risk of ruin is correlated to one's return on investment.
bill quirin in the back of his book "winning at the races", has a chart that relates win percentage to percentage of bankroll one can safely wager with a 90 percent chance of avoiding risk of ruin. i would suggest referring to that table for guidance.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

I have mentioned a number of betting strategies over the years including % of bankroll, flat bets (at least you are not betting more on losers), and the session concept.

The frustrating part of his play is that is that he wins money for long periods of time (months), despite his poor money management performance. Yes, he has to have a number of winners to off set.

When I attend the track with him it is typical to have a 40-50% winners in playing 5 or 6 races for the day.

[completebill]

THASKALOS is correct. The ONLY way for your friend is to develop a proper record-keeping system. Then he can see where his strengths and weaknesses are, and figure out how to bet accordingly. Does he do better win betting or in some kind of "exotic" bet. Is he better at certain distances, surfaces, class levels, or......? Others here give excellent advice, but before you can examine proper betting strategy ( % of bankroll, Kelly betting, etc.) you need to have records!!!

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

THASKALOS is correct. The ONLY way for your friend is to develop a proper record-keeping system. Then he can see where his strengths and weaknesses are, and figure out how to bet accordingly. Does he do better win betting or in some kind of "exotic" bet. Is he better at certain distances, surfaces, class levels, or......? Others here give excellent advice, but before you can examine proper betting strategy ( % of bankroll, Kelly betting, etc.) you need to have records!!!

his strength is most definately turf racing and the cheaper races. this is where he is most proficient at simply picking winners long or short. He is a value player who likes to read between the lines and go aagainst the chalk, or pass the race.

[comet52]

Set win goals along with stop points for losing days. Learn to stick to them and get the "greedy mind" out of the driver's seat. Otherwise your bet size is irrelevant as your lack of discipline will kick in and blow the roll, a little or a lot at a time doesn't really matter.

Obviously you need to set a reasonable bet size and there are varying opinions on what's optimal, but people confuse that with the real issue which in gambling is always self-discipline.

[Jay Trotter]

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.....after 20 years he isn't going to change! Left to his own devices he will continue the madness.

Assuming you "believe" in his skills and you know what it takes to capitilize on those abilities I would suggest that you toss in $3,000 of your own (or $1,500 each) and you manage the money and the plays.

This pool of funds could only be accessed by you, so you make and track the plays! After a few months you can show him the results of record keeping, discipline and value.

Even if he goes ahead and makes side bets (which he likely will) you will have the hard data to show him exactly where he went off the track (which is making all those action plays).

2 cents worth,

Trotter:ThmbUp:

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Thank you for all the well thought out resonses. It is frustrating for myself, as he is a good friend with a skill to select winning horses as evidenced by the 30 years we have been friends and attend the tracks in New york about two dozen times a year including Saratoga.


Their are times when he has a strong opinion on a horse in a later races and I tell him to wager on this selection as an advance wager (i know the horse will be a value selection). He goes broke before then.

I am not trying to save the world, so to speak. My intention is to help bring a few changes that might help my friend become a better money manager at the race track.

A number of people have stated that the percent of bankroll method is best. My problem with this is that you are betting more money on losers then winners. I know progressive betting unless it is a very controlled one are ruinous.

Once again thanks for the suggestions..it is greatly appreciated.

[ronsmac]

3000 is much too small of a starting bankroll.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

3000 is much too small of a starting bankroll.

I do not agree with that statement. If you are specializing in primarily over lay win wagers the $3,000 figure is more then adequate for successful play.

[thaskalos]

3000 is much too small of a starting bankroll. If anything...$3,000 may be too BIG of a bankroll to start with.

Unless the horseplayer is depending on race track winnings to survive...he is better off starting with a small bankroll and small bets...and build over time. The bets should increase only if the bankroll increases proportionally.

If he proves to be a winning player...he will be betting serious amounts soon enough. And the confidence that he will gain in the process will be invaluable to him, when the inevitable losing streaks come.

If, on the other hand, he discovers that he is a losing player...then he will be delighted to have bet only small amounts...

[shouldacoulda]

We have discussed the important money management topic at length for about twenty years. No help.

I had asked my friend what would you do with a $3000 betting bank that would be used entirely for the purpose of wagering on horses.



After 20 years with no help from what I take as your urging him to address it, I have to ask; what does he feel is holding him back?

My other question is, what was his response when asked what he would do a 3K bankroll?

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

After 20 years with no help from what I take as your urging him to address it, I have to ask; what does he feel is holding him back?

My other question is, what was his response when asked what he would do a 3K bankroll?

In my opinion i feel he plays, and bets accordingly to play the game, and not for the purpose of winning money. Yes, their is nothing wrong in playing this game for the fun and action if a person can afford to do so. However, when a person has the ability to apply his knowledge and hard work and make a supplemental income from a hobby he simply enjoys...now that's the ultimate.

[comet52]

You wanna fix an action junkie? Send him to a therapist or GA meeting. You're taking on a thankless and essentially hopeless task.

In my opinion i feel he plays, and bets accordingly to play the game, and not for the purpose of winning money. Yes, their is nothing wrong in playing this game for the fun and action if a person can afford to do so. However, when a person has the ability to apply his knowledge and hard work and make a supplemental income from a hobby he simply enjoys...now that's the ultimate.

[shouldacoulda]

You wanna fix an action junkie? Send him to a therapist or GA meeting. You're taking on a thankless and essentially hopeless task.

My 2 closest friends growing up were poker nuts, but my 1 friend got addicted. The other friend and I were talking one day that we created a monster in him with playing poker. He said the most interesting thing in response. He said that many times when someone has a gambling "addiction", it's because they don't assume enough risk in their day to day activities and it comes out in other ways. Like gambling too much.

If you friend is a $2.00 bettor and is not hurting himself financially and likes to play the races for enjoyment much like solving a crossword puzzle then great. If he is hurting himself financially and agonizes over losses and put's himself down when he loses then yes, I think he should seek help. It's self destructive behavior at that point.

[fmolf]

your friend may be selecting winners but he may in reality be betting on underlays.or betting too much on underlays and not enough on his overlays.Just because a horse is 4/1 or higher does not make him an overlay,an overlay is a horse whose odds are higher than his actual chance to win the race.He is probably making too many plays at too small odds...if he can not make an accurate odds line/betting line and measure that against the actual tote odds to determine if an overlay exists he will never enter the ledger on the winning side in the long run.