Why can't the "grinder" win in this game?

[thaskalos]

If you believe Andy Beyer and Steven Crist, hardly any horseplayers are beating this game by "grinding".

Beyer has called the existence of the grinder, who beats the game by hunting for overlays in the win pools...A MYTH! "I don't know of a single player who beats the game by methods like...winning 30% of his win bets at 3-1 odds"...he writes.

Steven Crist says the same thing. Both, however, readily admit that they know more than a few players who beat the game by "swinging for the fences"...relying on 3-4 big wins to make their annual profits.

To me...it's an astounding revelation. I always thought that the best way to beat a "favorable" gambling game, was to make sure that you have an edge over the competition...and then to use that edge to safely "grind-out" your profits over time.

In the poker world, virtually ALL the winning players are grinders. They put in many hours playing in the cash games, for what they consider to be an hourly wage. If you tell them that the "poker tournament" road is the way to go...they laugh, and they tell you that the only long-term winners are to be found in the side games...grinding!

About 6 years ago, I was fortunate enough to share a table, in a Las Vegas casino, with the "late" great David "Chip" Reese...whom I met through a mutual friend.

"I am like the casino." He told me, "Many take their shots at me, but, just like the casino...I have an edge, and I know that I will prevail in the end".

Even "Chip" Reese, the world's best poker player, playing in the world's biggest games...was a grinder!

Let's look at the casino...the biggest, best grinder of them all! The casino takes a relatively small edge, and grinds it into an astronomical amount of money, over the long haul.

The winning blackjack counter, the winning sports bettor...ALL grinders...using their edge to grind out sizeable seasonal profits...over time.

But not the winning horseplayer...according to Beyer and Crist.

In our game, it is supposedly too difficult to be right often enough, to make long-term grinding possible. Instead...we are advised to rely on high-risk exotics, where we can make our yearly profits in a hurry...

It is all nonsense, IMO. You either have an edge over your competition...or you don't.

If you have an edge, not only is grinding possible...it is highly recommended by some of the world's best gamblers.

If you don't have an edge over your competition...all the "swinging for the fences" will not help save you in the end...

[46zilzal]

Unless you review about 60 races a day, you won't find enough races to back and the cash outlay to make any profit has to be enormous.

[RaceBookJoe]

Up until the early 80's, you could do well at being a grinder, but today i just dont think its possible or even worth it. The main thing is that everything now is much more expensive. rbj

[JustRalph]

I have tried playing both ways........recently trying to grind my way through.
I have tried it this whole year....... ROI -.16

Last year playing in my old style: +.12

I made much more money hitting nice long shots. And I spent half the time doing it........and had lots more fun...........

Which way do you think I am going back to..........?

[GaryG]

I was a win betting grinder for years, never made any other bets. I switched to the P3 and P4 a few years back due to the depressed odds on my key plays. I will still make a win bet if the odds are 5-1 or more. This game is not getting any easier.....

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

There are still very select win only bettors out there. They wait for the right situation which would include the all-important price factor...then they load up. The difference today, with the simulcast explosion they do not have to wait for days or weeks for the right spot.


I have seen a few in my days and the common thread is PATIENCE. They wait for the public to be wrong, in their opinion, on a race favorite, and/or second choice and they get the best of the percentages with their wager, win or lose. One in particular used to say this is a game of percentages. The only way to beat the take out is to be rewarded when you play.

Can't knock that philosophy, even though I do not have the skill level or patience for that operation.

[cj]

I grind away almost every day. It isn't exciting, and I do have a lot of it automated, but in the end the takeout is lower and I think it is easier. I do dabble in exactas, but that is about it...win and exacta.

[Robert Goren]

I was a win betting grinder for years, never made any other bets. I switched to the P3 and P4 a few years back due to the depressed odds on my key plays. I will still make a win bet if the odds are 5-1 or more. This game is not getting any easier..... Neither is poker.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

I grind away almost every day. It isn't exciting, and I do have a lot of it automated, but in the end the takeout is lower and I think it is easier. I do dabble in exactas, but that is about it...win and exacta.

Interesting point Cj. I had a conversation Sunday with a win bettor who also plays selective exactas with his win wager..but he refuses to use his key horse (win bet) under an exacta. He uses this key horse on top of one or two selections only, and not every race. His reasoning is that he want to vastly improve his win ROI.

[thaskalos]

Neither is poker. Not true...there is alot of "loose" money in poker...especially in the no-limit "live" cash-games.

For years, I played on the internet...but for the last 15 months I have been playing live, and I am shocked at the poor level of playing that I see!

I am seriously thinking of doing it full-time...

[markgoldie]

The problem with grinding is that enough exposure to the vig eats you up in the end. That being said, clealy the most money being made in the sport today is the grinding that whale groups do. They, of course, get max rebates and although they may only have a minor edge, the churn of playing many races keeps them profitable. Since they must play many events to keep their handle up, what they do is clearly "grinding."

Beyer and Christ are talking about the average bettor. As far as poker players and their grinding- try pitting them against the best in the world and let the house cut the pot 17 or 18% on every hand. Then tell me how much profit they're getting from their grinding.

[thaskalos]

The problem with grinding is that enough exposure to the vig eats you up in the end. That being said, clealy the most money being made in the sport today is the grinding that whale groups do. They, of course, get max rebates and although they may only have a minor edge, the churn of playing many races keeps them profitable. Since they must play many events to keep their handle up, what they do is clearly "grinding."

Beyer and Christ are talking about the average bettor. As far as poker players and their grinding- try pitting them against the best in the world and let the house cut the pot 17 or 18% on every hand. Then tell me how much profit they're getting from their grinding. That's not my point Mark...

If the 17%-18% take-out has erased the profits from the grinding...how can we be sure that the profit is still there in the exotics...where the take-out is MUCH higher?

[thaskalos]

Not to mention that there is alot of self-deception in the world of the "high-flying" exotics.

A player connects on a pick-6...and he fools himself into thinking that he is a winning player for a long time...

[Tom]

The only thing that matters is your records of your bets. Everything else is moot.

[GaryG]

A player connects on a pick-6...and he fools himself into thinking that he is a winning player for a long time...You are saying that a P6 win doesn't count?

[thaskalos]

You are saying that a P6 win doesn't count? Of course it counts...but does it mean that we are winning players?

I have heard of players that have hit huge pick-6es with $4 tickets...

When the vast majority of our profits come from 3-4 winning wagers...how sure can we be that our results are because of skill rather than luck?

[mannyberrios]

I grind away almost every day. It isn't exciting, and I do have a lot of it automated, but in the end the takeout is lower and I think it is easier. I do dabble in exactas, but that is about it...win and exacta.:1: Thank you for that comment

[JohnGalt1]

I sometimes get exotic-happy. When I play too many exotics it costs me. I have to be more judicious. Play only when the propose pay offs are high enough to compensate for the lower hit rate.

I never want to waste a $20 wiinner. I will always collect at least the win portion of my wagers.

[DeanT]

When the vast majority of our profits come from 3-4 winning wagers...how sure can we be that our results are because of skill rather than luck?
If you do it long enough (imo) you know.

I grind for the most part. I know several people who grind out 1.02 and live a good life.

[markgoldie]

That's not my point Mark...

If the 17%-18% take-out has erased the profits from the grinding...how can we be sure that the profit is still there in the exotics...where the take-out is MUCH higher?
Everyone has their own approach, of course. For me, the attractiveness of gimmicks is that if you are getting rebates, they are much larger- so there is no takeout disadvantage to playing them. As I have said many times, the lucrative thing about complex verticals (which is what I play far more than anything else) is that the favorite combinations are overbet to a much greater degree than in the win pool, or even the exacta pool for that matter. And the reason, of course, is that you have many players investing relatively short money. And so they are all using the same favorites on their tickets. This is why when average players strike a longshot number in the complex gimmicks, they can make a monumental score. That cannot be done by playing in the win pool. If you are fortunate to cash a win ticket on a 20-1 once in a while, that gives you an additional 20 plays for free so to speak. If the same 20-1 tops a superfecta (especially when other favorites are off the ticket), you can easily get 100-1 or more on your investment.

[melman]

Mark---I hear you very well. I think many people are NOT dealing with reality. The "take" for the huge player on tri's and super's is leveled out with rebates. I know one whale who operates at a Philly Park OTB. He and his little group bet nothing but tri's and supers. Just check out Premier Turf Club or Horseplayersbet and you will see the huge difference in rebates for exotic play. "Moe" bets mostly when he detests the favorite in a race. Sometimes when he hates the second pick on the board. He has taken down the entire super pool quite a few times. I'm NOT knocking win only or win and exacta players that would be as silly as knocking pic6 players who have the bankroll for it. It's just a different skill set. And IMO a more valueable one.

[thaskalos]

For me...the 10-cent super has been a god-send. It allows me to "scale" my superfecta wagers by betting more on the more likely combinations, and less on the combinations that I consider less likely, but still possible. I get alot more coverage than I was able to get when the superfecta was a $1 minimum.

With all the "hedging" that I do, I seldom get more than a 10-1 return on my investment...which makes me a grinder of the superfecta pools.

It works for me though...better than anything else I have tried in 29 years of playing this game.

[melman]

thaskalos----I sure hope your betting your supers with a "correct" provider. You then are NOT having to pay "much higher" takeout rates. To get those rates you do NOT have to be a whale. Far from it.

[thaskalos]

thaskalos----I sure hope your betting your supers with a "correct" provider. You then are NOT having to pay "much higher" takeout rates. To get those rates you do NOT have to be a whale. Far from it. Actually...I am not sure if my provider is the "correct" one or not...

[melman]

I mentioned two "correct" providers in a previous post. If you live in an area that they can accept you the exotic rebates are WELL worth it. The larger the takeout the larger the rebate. I am not in favor of this but it is reality. I would like to see takeout reduction for all.

[Rutgers]

Andy Beyer’s statement of not knowing anyone grinding it out by winning betting speaks more of how difficult it is to overcome at 15-17% takeout when there are only 8-10 possible outcomes as oppose to an exotic player who has to overcome a 20-26% takeout but has hundreds, if not thousands, of possible outcomes.

That does not mean they are not “grinding” it out. They are still making hundreds or thousands of bets for a return of just a few percentage points, they are just not wins bets.

And what I think Steven Crist is saying is what often times happens is that when the winning exotic player looks back at his records at the end of the year, he sees that his profit came from 3-4 wins that paid “big” or much higher then expected. The player isn’t necessarily trying to hit a big exotic, it just sometimes works out that an exotic “overpays’. (which is basically why he uses the A-B-C approach. And if he was just interested in big payouts he wouldn’t play an all A ticket, but he would play an all C ticket)

There are a few problems with just going for the big exotic payoffs.. First off, payoffs that big are very hard to hit, and most player’s bankrolls would not be able to last thru the losing streaks. Secondly, a lot of time when they do hit, that offer less then fair value, either because they were overbet by the crowd (and sometimes that may mean just one other person had it) or the pool wasn’t big enough to offer fair value.

So in essence, grinding it out is the way to win at horse racing, it just easier to do playing the exotics rather the straight betting. (but it still ain’t easy)

[Bettowin]

IMO, to be a "grinder" you have to have the bankroll to make enough money on a small edge to make a living if that is what you are after or enough to stay above minimum wage:)

Chip Reese saying he was a grinder is funny. Yeah he might have played every day but the pots were bigger than most people pay for a house so if he could squeak out a 1% edge (he was much better than that) on say a MILLION a day he was fine.

Who here can bet even $100K per day and keep a 1% edge?

Don't get me wrong I love the horses and play some poker and poker is a helluva lot easier to make money. Horseracing is much harder to learn, more unpredictable and the takeout is way higher but I would rather play the horses:)

For me I love the animals, the atmosphere, the people I meet and there is always the chance of really hitting a BIG one in a two minute span with great handicapping and a whole lot of luck. To do that in poker you would need hours if not days of insane luck and playing right.

[KingChas]

If you believe Andy Beyer and Steven Crist, hardly any horseplayers are beating this game by "grinding"..


If you have an edge, not only is grinding possible...it is highly recommended by some of the world's best gamblers.

If you don't have an edge over your competition...all the "swinging for the fences" will not help save you in the end...

I think every handicapper grinds at times, you have to.
Some days the photos don't go your way,bad rides evolve,chaos,your just not on your game.
You have to back off a little.Mini slumps.
If youv'e been at this game long enough you know when this is happening and you know when its over. ;)
On the other hand if you are grinding 100% of the time you will surely be refinancing your account 99.9% percent of the time.

[Fastracehorse]

If you believe Andy Beyer and Steven Crist, hardly any horseplayers are beating this game by "grinding".

Beyer has called the existence of the grinder, who beats the game by hunting for overlays in the win pools...A MYTH! "I don't know of a single player who beats the game by methods like...winning 30% of his win bets at 3-1 odds"...he writes.

Steven Crist says the same thing. Both, however, readily admit that they know more than a few players who beat the game by "swinging for the fences"...relying on 3-4 big wins to make their annual profits.

To me...it's an astounding revelation. I always thought that the best way to beat a "favorable" gambling game, was to make sure that you have an edge over the competition...and then to use that edge to safely "grind-out" your profits over time.

In the poker world, virtually ALL the winning players are grinders. They put in many hours playing in the cash games, for what they consider to be an hourly wage. If you tell them that the "poker tournament" road is the way to go...they laugh, and they tell you that the only long-term winners are to be found in the side games...grinding!

About 6 years ago, I was fortunate enough to share a table, in a Las Vegas casino, with the "late" great David "Chip" Reese...whom I met through a mutual friend.

"I am like the casino." He told me, "Many take their shots at me, but, just like the casino...I have an edge, and I know that I will prevail in the end".

Even "Chip" Reese, the world's best poker player, playing in the world's biggest games...was a grinder!

Let's look at the casino...the biggest, best grinder of them all! The casino takes a relatively small edge, and grinds it into an astronomical amount of money, over the long haul.

The winning blackjack counter, the winning sports bettor...ALL grinders...using their edge to grind out sizeable seasonal profits...over time.

But not the winning horseplayer...according to Beyer and Crist.

In our game, it is supposedly too difficult to be right often enough, to make long-term grinding possible. Instead...we are advised to rely on high-risk exotics, where we can make our yearly profits in a hurry...

It is all nonsense, IMO. You either have an edge over your competition...or you don't.

If you have an edge, not only is grinding possible...it is highly recommended by some of the world's best gamblers.

If you don't have an edge over your competition...all the "swinging for the fences" will not help save you in the end...

...........but isn't poker and horse racing different games? First off, the skill to be a horse player is probably multi-faceted ( more faceted ).

Secondly, while I agree with U that grinding in the way U describe it, is possible; skill at the game should allow the horse player to venture into exotics.

Even when playing a high number of exotics, I still make substantial win bets, and I call my overall play: grinding; because over time, profiting is still hard work.

fffastt

[Valuist]

Everyone has their own approach, of course. For me, the attractiveness of gimmicks is that if you are getting rebates, they are much larger- so there is no takeout disadvantage to playing them. As I have said many times, the lucrative thing about complex verticals (which is what I play far more than anything else) is that the favorite combinations are overbet to a much greater degree than in the win pool, or even the exacta pool for that matter. And the reason, of course, is that you have many players investing relatively short money. And so they are all using the same favorites on their tickets. This is why when average players strike a longshot number in the complex gimmicks, they can make a monumental score. That cannot be done by playing in the win pool. If you are fortunate to cash a win ticket on a 20-1 once in a while, that gives you an additional 20 plays for free so to speak. If the same 20-1 tops a superfecta (especially when other favorites are off the ticket), you can easily get 100-1 or more on your investment.

This is true in the P6, and to some extent, the P4. But IMO it no longer is the case in the P3 pools. When that bet was introduced in the early 90s, you used to see insane overlays. I remember catching three 3-1 shots and it paid almost $500 on a $2 ticket. But as time went on, bettors developed a much better understanding on how to play the bet, and the pools became more efficient. The addition of the $0.50 P4 will only make that pool more efficient, as players are capable of covering twice as many tickets as before.

[Robert Goren]

Chip Reese saying he was a grinder is funny. Yeah he might have played every day but the pots were bigger than most people pay for a house so if he could squeak out a 1% edge (he was much better than that) on say a MILLION a day he was fine. Chip Reese did not squeak by one a 1% edge. He and some other pro poker players played each other everyday trading chips back forth waiting for the day when a fish came to their table. Then they would pick his bones clean. He was there everyday because he didn't want to miss a fish meal, but most days he didn't leave with very much more than he he came with. He was not a real grinder in most ways except that he played everyday.

[miesque]

This is an interesting thread with different perspectives. I would think personal preference/personality regarding overall risk comes into play here. "Grinding away" with win bets should provide more stable cash flow (at least theoretically) whereas concentrating on the more complicated exotics will yield far more erratic and harder to project cashflows. Within my first visit or two to the track I had latched on to the concept of an exacta (and then trifecta) and quickly became more enamoured by that then Win and hence only use that when there is a significant long shot I am using in my exotics play. For basically a decade a stuck with exactas, trifectas and the occasional super. It has only been the past few years that I have done Pick 4s and only the past two years that I decided to try and take on the final frontier (aka the Pick 6). The funny thing is I pretty much completely leapfrogged the Pick 3 and went to the Pick 4, probably because I seem to like to go about things the hard way. :D I consider Pick 4s and Pick 6s to be exponentially tougher on the psyche in terms of stress and emotions than something like an exacta. The only way I could see living off those two wagers professionally is if you had a nice enough investment portfolio to ensure you lived well through the dry spells because otherwise the stress would get to you sooner rather than later.

[Robert Goren]

Whenever I hear a story about how a pro got started, it usually includes a really big hit and then they were off and running. I don't think I have ever heard of a pro who started out betting $2 then after building his backroll some, he started betting $5, then $10, ect. There are online poker players who have done that, but I have never heard of a horse player doing it.

[thaskalos]

This is true in the P6, and to some extent, the P4. But IMO it no longer is the case in the P3 pools. When that bet was introduced in the early 90s, you used to see insane overlays. I remember catching three 3-1 shots and it paid almost $500 on a $2 ticket. But as time went on, bettors developed a much better understanding on how to play the bet, and the pools became more efficient. The addition of the $0.50 P4 will only make that pool more efficient, as players are capable of covering twice as many tickets as before. That is very true. There was a time when you were assured of a big payoff in the pick-3, anytime the favorite failed to win any of the legs. That is no longer the case. Now the pick-3 often pays less than the corresponding parlay...and it's not just because of the small fields.

I remember a few years ago...I was at a local OTB with a friend, betting Santa Anita. In the pick three, 2 10-1 shots had won the first 2 legs...both full fields. My friend offered to buy me a steak dinner because he had a $1 pick-3 going...with ALL 9 horses in the last race. He was sure that he was guaranteed a big price, and we didn't check the "probables" choosing instead to be surprised.

We were surprised alright...the 5-2 favorite won the last race, and the pick-3 paid 170-1.

IMO...the same thing has happened to the trifecta...most of the time, it pays alot less than it should.

The pick-4s and the superfectas still offer value IMO...but with the reduction in the minimum wagers, who knows how long the value will last...

[Dave Schwartz]

Okay, time for another opinion.

There ARE "grinders" who play at a professional level. However, most of them ultimately expand to at least single-race exotics then they may no longer fit the definition.

I know a couple of people who bet almost entirely to win. Typically, they are high-event players (i.e. lots of $200-$300 bets). They win most weeks and almost every month.

I recently had a conversation with one who told me that he only plays low-rebate tracks because his ROI is much higher at those tracks. (This is a discovery I made a few months ago myself: the competition is much stronger at the high-rebate tracks.)

I have not followed much of this thread. Perhaps SDK would share something, if he hasn't already.

Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Grits]

Win betting and win/place betting are sufficient, particularly noting players who may make no more than maybe three or four bets in an afternoon. Patience being a virtue and all. Somehow, this seems pretty smart. Somehow, its not difficult to pay for one's vacation, one's new washer and dryer, one's Spring/Summer wardrobe, even one's room addition, or whatever one may enjoy doing with their winnings..............

Reasoning (in the form of Dave) checks in. One finds they're OK in their belief that SIMPLE is successful.

(That complicated gimmick ain't as complicated as it is costly and hit far less frequently.)

If one can't pick winners with a degree of consistency, exactly how successful is one going to be bankrolling gimmicks? This is the first thing I was taught about this game. This along with . . . those that have success at it are those who talk the least about it.

[Trotman]

I've been grinding for 40 years and I'm not crying. Do I need every minute rebate, kickback whatever, NO I am not a pro. My kids are through university and making their own way in life,married once and never again, would I change anything probably not. Am I happy and content in my life,absolutely.

[fmolf]

I've been grinding for 40 years and I'm not crying. Do I need every minute rebate, kickback whatever, NO I am not a pro. My kids are through university and making their own way in life,married once and never again, would I change anything probably not. Am I happy and content in my life,absolutely.
Trots....while i am in no way a professional player i have been grinding for 35 myself.I like to play exactas a bit and the occasional double once in awhile.If i weren't doing well this way i would change my approach.I think the key to whatever approach one chooses is to be selective and patient,betting only when one perceives an edge.I will pass many races during a nine race card as i prefer to be at the track when i wager serious monies.My main base wagers are win wagers..... I remember when exactas had a $5 minimum!The good old days!

[Robert Fischer]

This game isn't for everybody. It's not like every man can just give it a good effort and expect to make money. Some people have no business treating this as anything other than entertainment. You pay for entertainment. In order to grind consistent profits, above average virtue and insight is needed.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Trots....while i am in no way a professional player i have been grinding for 35 myself.I like to play exactas a bit and the occasional double once in awhile.If i weren't doing well this way i would change my approach.I think the key to whatever approach one chooses is to be selective and patient,betting only when one perceives an edge.I will pass many races during a nine race card as i prefer to be at the track when i wager serious monies.My main base wagers are win wagers..... I remember when exactas had a $5 minimum!The good old days!

Have to agree with your logic. My friend is strictly a win bettor, with occasional cold doubles or one way exactas using his win selection on top of one or two horses. That's it...he is selective and very astute with gaining value (whatever method he has) in his wagers. He does not bet small amounts.And I do not see his confidence shaken after a few losses as he has been working hard at this for years.

[ronsmac]

Takeout and breakage make it impossible for a grinder.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Takeout and breakage make it impossible for a grinder.

Impossible is a funny word. Perhaps if a highly proficient and disciplined player could take advantage of an over bet race favorite and/or second choice on the board he could receive inflated odds on his key horse..would that not negate the take out of the race?

[Trotman]

fmold exactly, as the old saying goes diferent strokes for different folks. I started a thread with regards to what software added that a pen and form player could not do and other than speed and lots more tracks to bet in all honesty I did not get any logical answer IMO. I've handicapped the same tracks for 40 years and my biggest enjoyment is listening to the experts handicap races with their expert opinions and angles and watch as another of their selections runs up the track. Disipline is huge and playing every track as some say 14 hours a day is not for me.

[levinmpa]

I've always been of the opinion that if you consistently wager to win on contenders that are going off at greater than expected odds, you should be a winner over the long haul. The difficulty is in establishing a fair odds line for contenders. Whatever your preferred method of handicapping, whether it be pace, speed figures, trainer angles, etc, if you're not getting a better than expected price, you're not going to win in the long run. If I could just find that magical fair odds line formula, the game would be so much easier.

[Dave Schwartz]

I started a thread with regards to what software added that a pen and form player could not do and other than speed and lots more tracks to bet in all honesty I did not get any logical answer IMO.

What software does is several things:

1. When I play I spend almost no time handicapping. I spend my time betting and sweating. For me those are the greatest pleasures.

Some players have commented that using the software allows them to add themselves (i.e. their handicapping or wagering expertise) to the equation easily. In other words, they use software to do the major contender work and then concentrate on how to bet or spend a few minutes specializing on body language, trainer, tote action, etc.


2. Software is capable of doing long and complex calculations that you simply cannot do in a timely manner with paper, pencil and calculator.

For example, suppose you have been intelligent enough to create a formula that tells you which horses are overbet relative to how the public usually wagers. Software will give you that answer instantly. The calculator player will not be finished before the horses are in the stretch run.

http://www.horsestreet.com/BBSImages/Overbet.png


3. Software can manage your day - picking out just the kinds of races you are interested in handicapping - and scheduling them for you.

http://www.horsestreet.com/BBSImages/WatchedRaces.png

I actually have a professional level client who only plays 4.5f races. He is only interested in that distance and plays every track that cards such a race.


I am not saying that software is for everyone. I do not expect that you are suddenly going to change your opinion after this post. The point is that for everyone who thinks pencil-and-paper is the way, there are probably 10 that would not dream of ever picking up the pencil again. I am one of those.

To each his own.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[jamey1977]

If you believe Andy Beyer and Steven Crist, hardly any horseplayers are beating this game by "grinding".

Beyer has called the existence of the grinder, who beats the game by hunting for overlays in the win pools...A MYTH! "I don't know of a single player who beats the game by methods like...winning 30% of his win bets at 3-1 odds"...he writes.

Steven Crist says the same thing. Both, however, readily admit that they know more than a few players who beat the game by "swinging for the fences"...relying on 3-4 big wins to make their annual profits.

To me...it's an astounding revelation. I always thought that the best way to beat a "favorable" gambling game, was to make sure that you have an edge over the competition...and then to use that edge to safely "grind-out" your profits over time.

In the poker world, virtually ALL the winning players are grinders. They put in many hours playing in the cash games, for what they consider to be an hourly wage. If you tell them that the "poker tournament" road is the way to go...they laugh, and they tell you that the only long-term winners are to be found in the side games...grinding!

About 6 years ago, I was fortunate enough to share a table, in a Las Vegas casino, with the "late" great David "Chip" Reese...whom I met through a mutual friend.

"I am like the casino." He told me, "Many take their shots at me, but, just like the casino...I have an edge, and I know that I will prevail in the end".

Even "Chip" Reese, the world's best poker player, playing in the world's biggest games...was a grinder!

Let's look at the casino...the biggest, best grinder of them all! The casino takes a relatively small edge, and grinds it into an astronomical amount of money, over the long haul.

The winning blackjack counter, the winning sports bettor...ALL grinders...using their edge to grind out sizeable seasonal profits...over time.

But not the winning horseplayer...according to Beyer and Crist.

In our game, it is supposedly too difficult to be right often enough, to make long-term grinding possible. Instead...we are advised to rely on high-risk exotics, where we can make our yearly profits in a hurry...

It is all nonsense, IMO. You either have an edge over your competition...or you don't.

If you have an edge, not only is grinding possible...it is highly recommended by some of the world's best gamblers.

If you don't have an edge over your competition...all the "swinging for the fences" will not help save you in the end...
We can get that edge by playing Longshots. Exotics take forever. Plenty of first time starter longshots and second time starter longshots. Huge prices. If we study pedigree and first time starters, we have a huge edge. And why box everything when you can make as much betting to win.? Everyone is so allergic to betting to win. It's like Betting To Win, has kids. Bet To Win, dammit. LOL. The edge is in longshot betting. 17 percent wins at a 20 dollar average is attainable with hard work. The public is stupid, stupid, stupid. I'm not saying letting a horse go off at 5 to 1. They have let them go off at 16 to 1 and even 80 to 1 the other day. And the 80 to 1, won. If one is willing to have a 3 month program and dig in for the long haul. 17 percent wins at a 20 dollar average is attainable. Waiting for a big tri, or a big Pick 3 or a Big Pick 6 is just too risky and it takes too long. 600 dollars and we sign. More than 5000 dollars Uncle Sam keeps 25 percent for a year and a half. Just awful. The only sin is not to Bet To Win. Longshots are our edge. Grinding ? Yes, Grinding the longshots. But we must work hard to find great longshots and D.Q lousy ones. This is attainable.

[Dave Schwartz]

The problem is that you can't bet much on those horses.

You get no handle of significance.

[jamey1977]

The problem is that you can't bet much on those horses.

You get no handle of significance. Is that due to the rebates.? I always said. The goal should be profits. I don't want to bet 5 million to break even. I don't have 5 million dollars. There should be no limit really. 70 plays per month on average - 12 wins - 20 dollars average. Over a 3 month period, profit is counted when 17 percent wins at 20 dollars average is reached. At 60 dollars to win. 3000 dollars per month approx. .One can go to 240 dollars to win and make 9,000 dollars per month when hit rate is achieved. This is on The Big 3 circuits only. Southern Calif.- New York and Kentucky. The others , just don't bother with em. 240 dollars would barely touch the price, maybe 20 cents. And the rebate. 240 times 70. 16 thousand dollars per month and you can go all to all in the trifectas , Longshot with all to all, for 36 to 70 dollars per play. Darn good for rebates. I don't have that kind of money. Give me a million dollar working account and I'll have a go. Also, in California, what rebate outlets can I use.? None are allowed.

[big frank]

I would say a grinder has as good a chance of winning in the long haul as does an exotic player. Pete Rose and Reggie Jackson were both winners and hall of famers.. One guy was a single and doubles hitter[win bettor] and the other lived by the homerun [exotics player]. Whatever works for YOU is the way to go.

[KingChas]

. Pete Rose and Reggie Jackson were both winners and hall of famers.. One guy was a single and doubles hitter[win bettor] and the other lived by the homerun [exotics player]. Whatever works for YOU is the way to go.

Pete didn't make the hall yet, big frank.We know he belongs though.

Actually the way Pete Rose gambled, I would label him a Plunger. :D
Reggie was definately an exotic player.

[sjk]

I play overlaid exacta combinations along with win bets and for me the betting experience has changed considerably over the past couple of years.

With the greater number of short fields there are may more races where I find no overlays to bet or where my bet is one that has a low probability of getting home. As a result my win percentage is reduced (average payoff has gone up so the ROI is OK) and the fun and positive reinforcement of winning is reduced.

The short fields and the significant dollars coming in from sharp players have made for many fewer races where I find a large number of really appealing plays and have increased the boredom factor where nothing much good is happening and I am likely to decide to find something else to do.

[DeanT]

I play overlaid exacta combinations along with win bets and for me the betting experience has changed considerably over the past couple of years.

With the greater number of short fields there are may more races where I find no overlays to bet or where my bet is one that has a low probability of getting home. As a result my win percentage is reduced (average payoff has gone up so the ROI is OK) and the fun and positive reinforcement of winning is reduced.

The short fields and the significant dollars coming in from sharp players have made for many fewer races where I find a large number of really appealing plays and have increased the boredom factor where nothing much good is happening and I am likely to decide to find something else to do.

I agree with this post SJK. The takeout eats you alive in small fields. I find the board is pretty much optimal and there is simply no meat on the bone.

[castaway01]

I don't bet as much as some of you, I'm sure, but I've done much better since switching to just win bets, with the occasional double or exacta. That works better for me, and I'm slightly ahead for the past five or six years. Not getting rich, but slightly ahead. So whatever works for you, works for you.

[TEJAS KIDD]

I consider myself a grinder, but I also believe, my year comes down to 3 or 4 scores.
I try to get 1.10 on the dollar. With the exception of about a 1.5 years worth of high voulume rebate wagering, I've achieved that. For me now, rebates are a bonus. I do not play because I have the rebate. They turned me into a negative roi horseplayer.
I operate my game like a hedge fund. I am not afraid to box 4 horses in a 6 horse race. I will take 2/5 on a horse that I believe should be 1/9. I stay within the race. Very seldom do I play multirace wagers (only as coverage and never my main focus). I use win betting as a cover. My main focus is exactas and trifectas. Superfectas are the bonus for being totally right. Many times my win bet will lose, but I'll crush the exacta and trifecta.
IMO win betting has a higher takeout than exotics.
12 horse race with 18% win takeout---1.5% of takeout for each runner
12 horse race with 24% exacta takeout--.18% of takeout for each exacta combination. Doesnt make sense, but if you look at it the way I do, maybe it will.
You cant really make 5 win bets in a 12 horse race and expect to be profitable. Yet you've tossed out 7 non contenders.
You can, however, box 5 horses in an exacta/trifecta/superfecta and somehow make a profit by tossing out the same 7 non contenders.

[wisconsin]

My play is all over the board, to a fault. But, when I am on a roll, I am generally betting much more of my money to win, and believe me, it can really steamroll. I was up awhile back at the OTB, and "sent it in" on 3 horses at three tracks, all contenders that I liked, and they each paid $10 or so. Within the 20 minutes time frame involved, I cashed for about $1,500, with NO gimmicks wagers.

I will never forget the day back at the OTB in the late '90's, when I had three horses at Detroit Race Course on a Tuesday that won in sucession, and I had no money to win on any of them! Every exotic and gimmick I played was split or snapped. I think about that day often, and still have not fully learned my lesson.

[JohnGalt1]

Winning grinders don't make the headlines.

Winning grinders don't yell and scream while waving their winning ticket in the air, "I hit the win bet, I hit the win bet!"

[Dave Schwartz]

Winning grinders don't yell and scream while waving their winning ticket in the air, "I hit the win bet, I hit the win bet!"

I've been known to. :rolleyes:

[Johnny V]

I am almost exclusively a win bettor but I do also use exacta wagering frequently. I do bet doubles but seldom. I rarely if ever bet any other exotic wagers. On average I might bet 3-4 races a day. I have also limited my play to one or two tracks daily.
The key for me was was keeping records and knowing my strengths and my weak areas. Back when I started making larger bets patience seemed to come natural to me and that is important to this style of betting. It works for me and suites my approach to gambling.

[Robert Fischer]

right. you keep records, and do the math and play within your bankroll (if you are choosing to "grind" rather than gamble).

[bisket]

i only play exotics.... but only when the "force" is with me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LTsvOHq3xc&feature=related

[skate]

why does it have to be one or the other?


For me, a little bump and a little grind works best.

Variety, why not?

Poker is Completely different, bluff is involved.

[castaway01]

Winning grinders don't make the headlines.

Winning grinders don't yell and scream while waving their winning ticket in the air, "I hit the win bet, I hit the win bet!"

Depends how much that win bet is.... :) But sadly I'm more likely to moan when I lose than cheer when I win. I have to work on that.

[Dave Schwartz]

For me, a little bump and a little grind works best.

Variety, why not?

Skate,

That is true in more ways than one.
:ThmbUp:

Dave

[Actor]

poker is a helluva lot easier to make money.What poker table is going to let me bring a laptop to the table? :D

[Robert Goren]

What poker table is going to let me bring a laptop to the table? :DTry taking one to a blackjack table sometime.:lol:

[Overlay]

Try taking one to a blackjack table sometime.:lol:

Tom Cruise did that, didn't he (a "computer", although not a laptop)? :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtmVMrAUcR8

[thaskalos]

Try taking one to a blackjack table sometime.:lol: At the blackjack table...you can't even have your cell phone on the table next to you when you play.

That's how paranoid they are...

[Cratos]

If you believe Andy Beyer and Steven Crist, hardly any horseplayers are beating this game by "grinding".

Beyer has called the existence of the grinder, who beats the game by hunting for overlays in the win pools...A MYTH! "I don't know of a single player who beats the game by methods like...winning 30% of his win bets at 3-1 odds"...he writes.

Steven Crist says the same thing. Both, however, readily admit that they know more than a few players who beat the game by "swinging for the fences"...relying on 3-4 big wins to make their annual profits.

To me...it's an astounding revelation. I always thought that the best way to beat a "favorable" gambling game, was to make sure that you have an edge over the competition...and then to use that edge to safely "grind-out" your profits over time.

In the poker world, virtually ALL the winning players are grinders. They put in many hours playing in the cash games, for what they consider to be an hourly wage. If you tell them that the "poker tournament" road is the way to go...they laugh, and they tell you that the only long-term winners are to be found in the side games...grinding!

About 6 years ago, I was fortunate enough to share a table, in a Las Vegas casino, with the "late" great David "Chip" Reese...whom I met through a mutual friend.

"I am like the casino." He told me, "Many take their shots at me, but, just like the casino...I have an edge, and I know that I will prevail in the end".

Even "Chip" Reese, the world's best poker player, playing in the world's biggest games...was a grinder!

Let's look at the casino...the biggest, best grinder of them all! The casino takes a relatively small edge, and grinds it into an astronomical amount of money, over the long haul.

The winning blackjack counter, the winning sports bettor...ALL grinders...using their edge to grind out sizeable seasonal profits...over time.

But not the winning horseplayer...according to Beyer and Crist.

In our game, it is supposedly too difficult to be right often enough, to make long-term grinding possible. Instead...we are advised to rely on high-risk exotics, where we can make our yearly profits in a hurry...

It is all nonsense, IMO. You either have an edge over your competition...or you don't.

If you have an edge, not only is grinding possible...it is highly recommended by some of the world's best gamblers.

If you don't have an edge over your competition...all the "swinging for the fences" will not help save you in the end...

I don’t know where Crist and Beyer got their statistics from (and I really don’t care), but if you are patience (grinding) and willing to wager a few hundred to a few thousand dollars per wager on win only bets and your handicapping is very good you will laugh yourself to the bank tax-free.

[jonnielu]

If you believe Andy Beyer and Steven Crist, hardly any horseplayers are beating this game by "grinding".

Beyer has called the existence of the grinder, who beats the game by hunting for overlays in the win pools...A MYTH! "I don't know of a single player who beats the game by methods like...winning 30% of his win bets at 3-1 odds"...he writes.

Steven Crist says the same thing. Both, however, readily admit that they know more than a few players who beat the game by "swinging for the fences"...relying on 3-4 big wins to make their annual profits.

To me...it's an astounding revelation. I always thought that the best way to beat a "favorable" gambling game, was to make sure that you have an edge over the competition...and then to use that edge to safely "grind-out" your profits over time.

In the poker world, virtually ALL the winning players are grinders. They put in many hours playing in the cash games, for what they consider to be an hourly wage. If you tell them that the "poker tournament" road is the way to go...they laugh, and they tell you that the only long-term winners are to be found in the side games...grinding!

About 6 years ago, I was fortunate enough to share a table, in a Las Vegas casino, with the "late" great David "Chip" Reese...whom I met through a mutual friend.

"I am like the casino." He told me, "Many take their shots at me, but, just like the casino...I have an edge, and I know that I will prevail in the end".

Even "Chip" Reese, the world's best poker player, playing in the world's biggest games...was a grinder!

Let's look at the casino...the biggest, best grinder of them all! The casino takes a relatively small edge, and grinds it into an astronomical amount of money, over the long haul.

The winning blackjack counter, the winning sports bettor...ALL grinders...using their edge to grind out sizeable seasonal profits...over time.

But not the winning horseplayer...according to Beyer and Crist.

In our game, it is supposedly too difficult to be right often enough, to make long-term grinding possible. Instead...we are advised to rely on high-risk exotics, where we can make our yearly profits in a hurry...

It is all nonsense, IMO. You either have an edge over your competition...or you don't.

If you have an edge, not only is grinding possible...it is highly recommended by some of the world's best gamblers.

If you don't have an edge over your competition...all the "swinging for the fences" will not help save you in the end...

Beyer and Crist are caught in the BS. If there are a great many people grinding out a living on horse racing, then certainly they would have told you how in 30 years of publishing. They say what they say now because the only alternative is to come out and tell you that you are what is being ground up.

jdl

[PaceAdvantage]

Beyer and Crist are caught in the BS. If there are a great many people grinding out a living on horse racing, then certainly they would have told you how in 30 years of publishing. They say what they say now because the only alternative is to come out and tell you that you are what is being ground up.

jdlHow are you doing, if I might ask? And of course I mean in your personal wagering...I only ask because you constantly present yourself as one who has all the answers.

And BTW, how come you don't tell us all right here, right now, how to win, like you expect Beyer and Crist to do....(how many books have they written???)

When is your book coming out?

[lamboguy]

this game is as rough as it gets to win. i bet 14 hours a day 7 days a week, 365 days a year, and have been doing it for a long time. just to review what happened yesterday, i know a little about 2 races in monmouth part, the 7th and the 9th. in the 7th, i know that the scott volk entry, taylors tough, is a very fast horse. but i also know ahead of time that he might be short. the other horse i know that is training lights out is john forbes horse, artic air. so i played a pick 3 using both horses and takeing a guess at the 8th race using 4 horses. one of the 4 happened to win and paid $14.00. now i head into the 9th race which i singled the 6 horse, doug o'neil's horse bella roja, which turned out to be a vet scratch. i played o'neil's horse because i knew that horse was training lights out in philly. in that race there was another horse that was training well at monmouth, mike mitchel's horse manhattan breeze. that horse broke down.

the story that i am trying to present here is that even with all my good information that i have and others don't,it doesn't get me to the cashier's window all the time. most of the people here are using some type of computer program or pace numbers that do not take into account the physical ability of a horse, or if the horse is training better or worse than the last time the horse ran. you might as well go throw the dice in a casino, or pull the lever on a slot machine. you have just as much a chance. a few people that know me will tell you i am pretty good at this game, and if i can't win, its got to be pretty tough for others that don't sit in my chair. i have kept track in the last few years as to how much i do lose and its about 3% of what i bet before rebate. i win something like once every 15 weeks.

[Robert Goren]

The biggest thing that keeps the "good" handicapper from winning is the lack of information on track condition and which horses will run on what type of track. When people hear a trainer say that a track was cuppy and such and such a horse didn't like it, they think the trainer is just making up excuses. Well chances are that he is not. You can be betting on a horse that looks to very good by what ever methods you use and it has no chance because it not going like the track today. A lot of times when you see a horse wake up for no reason, it because is because he finally gets a track he likes.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

From the many years associated with very sharp players I have come to the conclusion that there is no single way of winning at this 'tough' game. Years ago sheet players made some massive scores and made large profits over a few years wagering on their edge which, at the time consisted of playing many races on a typical nine race card...mostly exotic wagering combinations.


I have also seen a few disciplined patient players who would wait and win, for the most part...being selective was their edge. They were mostly win bettors who wagered sizeable amounts.

Most importantly their is no way of knowing if these players were winners in the long term, however, their approaches worked. I believe the key to surviving the game for profit, in the long term is how you handle the inevitable losing streak...this is the key as you have two options (a) chase and get destroyed with careless or reckless wagering or (b) accept the fact that these streaks are an inevitable part of the game and adjust your betting accordingly and reduce stakes to survive.

[kingfin66]

Everyone is so allergic to betting to win. It's like Betting To Win, has kids.

Now that is funny!

[thaskalos]

I agree with Lambo. It is getting very tough out there, for those of us who rely exclusively on the printed information in the past performances.That information is not as believable as it once was, IMO.

The horses used to race alot more frequently than they do now.

The handicapper considers the horse's last race to be the best indicator of form...but in today's game...that race is likely to have been run 21+ days ago. Gone are the days when cheaper horses ran every 7-14 days.

What the horse did a month ago, is not a very good indication of recent form, IMO...and its more recent "workout" clockings are seldom accurate enough to be taken seriously.

[classhandicapper]

If you believe Andy Beyer and Steven Crist, hardly any horseplayers are beating this game by "grinding".

Beyer has called the existence of the grinder, who beats the game by hunting for overlays in the win pools...A MYTH! "I don't know of a single player who beats the game by methods like...winning 30% of his win bets at 3-1 odds"...he writes.

Steven Crist says the same thing. Both, however, readily admit that they know more than a few players who beat the game by "swinging for the fences"...relying on 3-4 big wins to make their annual profits.

To me...it's an astounding revelation. I always thought that the best way to beat a "favorable" gambling game, was to make sure that you have an edge over the competition...and then to use that edge to safely "grind-out" your profits over time.

In the poker world, virtually ALL the winning players are grinders. They put in many hours playing in the cash games, for what they consider to be an hourly wage. If you tell them that the "poker tournament" road is the way to go...they laugh, and they tell you that the only long-term winners are to be found in the side games...grinding!

About 6 years ago, I was fortunate enough to share a table, in a Las Vegas casino, with the "late" great David "Chip" Reese...whom I met through a mutual friend.

"I am like the casino." He told me, "Many take their shots at me, but, just like the casino...I have an edge, and I know that I will prevail in the end".

Even "Chip" Reese, the world's best poker player, playing in the world's biggest games...was a grinder!

Let's look at the casino...the biggest, best grinder of them all! The casino takes a relatively small edge, and grinds it into an astronomical amount of money, over the long haul.

The winning blackjack counter, the winning sports bettor...ALL grinders...using their edge to grind out sizeable seasonal profits...over time.

But not the winning horseplayer...according to Beyer and Crist.

In our game, it is supposedly too difficult to be right often enough, to make long-term grinding possible. Instead...we are advised to rely on high-risk exotics, where we can make our yearly profits in a hurry...

It is all nonsense, IMO. You either have an edge over your competition...or you don't.

If you have an edge, not only is grinding possible...it is highly recommended by some of the world's best gamblers.

If you don't have an edge over your competition...all the "swinging for the fences" will not help save you in the end...


I am 100% grinder and win virtually every single year.

I never play the pick 4, pick 6, or superfecta, and only rarely plays pick 3s or triples. Most of my bets are win or place and I only play exactas or doubles if I have two strong opinions within the same or consecutive races.

I think that's the easiest way to beat the game.

IMO It rarely makes sense to play exotics UNLESS you have multiple value oriented opinions within the same or consecutive races because of the higher take. The thing is, the pools are so darn efficient, IMO it's pretty rare to have 2 huge errors inside the same race or consecutive races.

Most people swing for the fences because grinding is boring and they want to make a major score that can change their year. But many are probably costing themselves money over the long haul without realizing it. Sure you can have a big year or make a mega score here or there, but all that counts is ROI.

I'll take 80% winners to place at 2.70 and other high probability profitable scenarios all day long over losing for months in order to make a major score to break into the black. It's all about ROI and getting money through the windows. It's not about the size of your scores.

[thespaah]

You are saying that a P6 win doesn't count?
I think his point is if one hits a P6 for say $20k and then goes over his stats over a period of time, that person may find they are still in the hole.

[thespaah]

What software does is several things:

1. When I play I spend almost no time handicapping. I spend my time betting and sweating. For me those are the greatest pleasures.

Some players have commented that using the software allows them to add themselves (i.e. their handicapping or wagering expertise) to the equation easily. In other words, they use software to do the major contender work and then concentrate on how to bet or spend a few minutes specializing on body language, trainer, tote action, etc.


2. Software is capable of doing long and complex calculations that you simply cannot do in a timely manner with paper, pencil and calculator.

For example, suppose you have been intelligent enough to create a formula that tells you which horses are overbet relative to how the public usually wagers. Software will give you that answer instantly. The calculator player will not be finished before the horses are in the stretch run.

http://www.horsestreet.com/BBSImages/Overbet.png


3. Software can manage your day - picking out just the kinds of races you are interested in handicapping - and scheduling them for you.

http://www.horsestreet.com/BBSImages/WatchedRaces.png

I actually have a professional level client who only plays 4.5f races. He is only interested in that distance and plays every track that cards such a race.


I am not saying that software is for everyone. I do not expect that you are suddenly going to change your opinion after this post. The point is that for everyone who thinks pencil-and-paper is the way, there are probably 10 that would not dream of ever picking up the pencil again. I am one of those.

To each his own.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz
When I look at that screen you posted, I have no clue what the heck that is.
:D

[Dave Schwartz]

Which part do you not understand?

Odds?
Pct?
$Net
Opt%
Grade?

[jonnielu]

How are you doing, if I might ask? And of course I mean in your personal wagering...I only ask because you constantly present yourself as one who has all the answers.

And BTW, how come you don't tell us all right here, right now, how to win, like you expect Beyer and Crist to do....(how many books have they written???)

When is your book coming out?

Your concern is touching... I'm doing just fine, in particular with my personal wagering. I am truly amazed at what can be done with just a little decent inspiration. Of course having the goods in the first place is always a vital part of the successful equation.

I'd like to thank Julie at Keeneland in particular for insisting that Ability-X Ratings needed to be simpler, and a respected member of the handicapping community, who will go un-named because I also have great respect for him, for calling my composite rating gibberish. This kind of inspiration is hard to come by.

Of course, it might be said that I could never have done it without the priceless ridicule I've had from various members of this board. It always helps to have a crowd urging you on. I appreciate it.

As for why I don't tell you how to win right here right now, I already did that. Why would you be interested now if it didn't hold your consideration for 2 minutes three years ago? At any rate, instead of me being redundant, you have the search function at your disposal if you are now interested.

I don't know how many books Beyer and Crist have written, I only know that if they told you how to win, there would be little publishing left to do.

As for my book, it came out in 1982, maybe you missed it. I have had the idea of expanding on it 28 years later, just to show how many answers it did contain. And, of course, how many more have been found over the years by pursuing those simple concepts. The title of the original is "Racing Facts".

I've been thinking of a new title for the continuation, what do you think of -
"Searching for Exceller... Finding Racing Fact", does it grab you at all?

jdl

[PaceAdvantage]

I Googled your book name along with your name and the only thing that came up was your website.

Who published your book? Can I get it on Amazon?

[thespaah]

Odds..Easy...
Pct...Of what?
What's a "watched race"?
PCT,Net and OPT.....No idea.....
I guess I could figure these out but it would be embarrassing to come to an incorrect conclusion.
In those instances I defer to the following..When in doubt ,let the pros handle it.
I have never been exposed to handicapping software. Permit my ignorance , What does it do? Analyze stats and spit out probable outcomes?
Oh, it "looks" like it costs a lot of money. For serious big bucks bettors only expensive.
One other question. Does handicapping software offer a conclusion as in "this horse is mostlikely to win this race", or does it give the user several different possibilities, leaving that user to decipher for himself how to read what the computer is telling?

[Dave Schwartz]

Pct...Of what?
Probability of winning this race.

What's a "watched race"?
It is a race you are interested in handicapping based upon whatever criteria you have set. In other words, it manages your day and your post times, picking up changes from the tote board.

PCT,Net and OPT.....No idea.....
PCT see above.
Opt is "optimum bet percentage of your bankroll." Perhaps you have heard of "The Kelly Criterion?"


I guess I could figure these out but it would be embarrassing to come to an incorrect conclusion.
In those instances I defer to the following..When in doubt ,let the pros handle it.
A very good idea, or at least the serious computer handicapper.


I have never been exposed to handicapping software. Permit my ignorance , What does it do? Analyze stats and spit out probable outcomes?
That would be a simple but somewhat accurate description.


Oh, it "looks" like it costs a lot of money. For serious big bucks bettors only expensive.
That would depend upon your outlook on the game. If you are going hunting for big game you do not take a slingshot. Neither do you take a .22.


One other question. Does handicapping software offer a conclusion as in "this horse is mostlikely to win this race", or does it give the user several different possibilities, leaving that user to decipher for himself how to read what the computer is telling?
That would depend upon the software and the user. In THIS software, most users accept the output of the program or even allow the program to size the bets for them. It totally depends upon the user.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[jonnielu]

I Googled your book name along with your name and the only thing that came up was your website.

Who published your book? Can I get it on Amazon?

Well that's weird... no IRS press release? I published it, and it is not on Amazon.

jdl

[thespaah]

Probability of winning this race.


It is a race you are interested in handicapping based upon whatever criteria you have set. In other words, it manages your day and your post times, picking up changes from the tote board.


PCT see above.
Opt is "optimum bet percentage of your bankroll." Perhaps you have heard of "The Kelly Criterion?"



A very good idea, or at least the serious computer handicapper.



That would be a simple but somewhat accurate description.



That would depend upon your outlook on the game. If you are going hunting for big game you do not take a slingshot. Neither do you take a .22.



That would depend upon the software and the user. In THIS software, most users accept the output of the program or even allow the program to size the bets for them. It totally depends upon the user.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz
Thanks...I guess if was to become a serious everyday player it would be wise to invest in one of these p[rograms. I'd still have to figure out how to use it though. That is where I'd need help.
My first question would be "Ok now that I understand what these figures mean, what is this teling me?".....
That would probably be my largest concern. Support from knowledgable sources willing to answer questions.

[Dave Schwartz]

Spaah,

Software is no different from handicapping with paper-and-pencil (and calculator). You get out of it what you are looking for.

Imagine I give you a printout every race that shows my opinion of each horses chances of winning (pct), $Net (which is the average return for $2.00; thus $2.00 is break-even), etc. In addition, I say, "Bet $10 on this horse."

What do you do?

The answer is that you do what you do now. You figure out how to bet the race - once you have calibrated yourself to the output.

In other words, maybe you learn to just bet what the program says. Maybe you learn to bet the horses with $Nets over a certain amount, maybe you...

The point is that you figure out how to take advantage of your program's output.

(Understand that the output you are looking at is the opinion using the handicapping approach and settings I have chosen. Change the factors, settings, etc. get different output.)

Dave

[46zilzal]

ANY program, not matter how good, is only HALF the answer to this game......MOST do nothing to help you on the more difficult choice of profiting, CONSISTENTLY, on the prioritization of entrants that program points out.

[thespaah]

Spaah,

Software is no different from handicapping with paper-and-pencil (and calculator). You get out of it what you are looking for.

Imagine I give you a printout every race that shows my opinion of each horses chances of winning (pct), $Net (which is the average return for $2.00; thus $2.00 is break-even), etc. In addition, I say, "Bet $10 on this horse."

What do you do?

The answer is that you do what you do now. You figure out how to bet the race - once you have calibrated yourself to the output.

In other words, maybe you learn to just bet what the program says. Maybe you learn to bet the horses with $Nets over a certain amount, maybe you...

The point is that you figure out how to take advantage of your program's output.

(Understand that the output you are looking at is the opinion using the handicapping approach and settings I have chosen. Change the factors, settings, etc. get different output.)

DaveI understand now. Thanks!....Typically what is the monthly cost( assuming it's some sort of monthly service) on h'capping software?.From whom does one buy it?..Just curious

[Dave Schwartz]

Spaah,

Our software comes with a start up cost of $600 and a monthly data cost of $129. Many are less expensive but none are superior. Of course, everyone has their favorite.


Dave