What makes a bettable race?

[Robert Goren]

What makes a bettable race? There seems to some opinion that a large field does it by itself. Or large handles does. That is not true for me. First there has to be a horse I like a lot to win it. Second, there has be a horse( preferably 2) I don't like getting betting bet heavily. 3 or 4 horses with a very small chance of winning going off at 15/1 or higher doesn't cut it. Neither do horses going off at even money or less. I generally want at least 2/1 and a horse I don't like going off at 3/1 or less. With todays takeouts, the well bet horse with a small chance of winning is vital. Since I am a very small mostly win better handle does not come into play at all, although I can see how it might if you are betting large amounts especially in the exotic pools. What does it take for you?

[lamboguy]

a race that is full of first time starters and a horse in it that fooled the clockers and wiseguys.

[HUSKER55]

I hunt for races where I think the favorite is in tight. I try to find the horse that can beat it.

[therussmeister]

There also seem to be some who are of the opinion that a small field, by itself, makes the race unbettable. For me, it doesn't. A bettable race is simply one where I find an overlay. I assign probability to every potential bet I consider making and than calculate minimum acceptable payout based on this.

I find overlays in all types and sizes of races, and can't find overlays in all types and sizes of races. Therefore, unfortunately, I can't pin down before handicapping and viewing the tote board, which races are likely to be bettable with a few exceptions that have to do with my handicapping weaknesses.

[Robert Goren]

I would like to add that often the public has the chances of all the horses pretty close to right or least close enough to make finding a profitable bet impossible. The 16+% takeout rates are very hard to overcome.

[Charli125]

Good question.

For me personally, I only look at races with over 5 starters. Through my ROI research, I've found that I'll lose money on short fields. I also look for races with few if any first time starters.

Only at that point do I look to see if there are any overlays.

The only time pool size comes into account for me is in how much I bet. I know I ignore some tracks because the pool sizes are so small that a $50 bet would change the odds.

[Dave Schwartz]

While some race conditions obviously lend themselves to less favorites and more longshots, I feel strongly that it is the mix of horses in the individual race that determines playability.

In other words, there may be a 6-horse field with a 2/5 favorite you perceive as being significantly overbet, thereby creating a wonderful opportunity for you to exploit the race by wagering the rest of the field.

Conversely, there may be a 12-horse field with a favorite so good that he looks like the "dead nuts" (as they say in our vernacular).


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[thaskalos]

The older I get, the more conservative I become...and this carries over to my horseplaying as well...

My confidence in a race peaks when I see mature horses, with full past-performances, and established form over the current track.

When I see sharp-looking shippers, layoffs, and young horses with sketchy past-performances...my interest wanes, and my money stays in my pocket.

[BombsAway Bob]

The older I get, the more conservative I become...and this carries over to my horseplaying as well...

My confidence in a race peaks when I see mature horses, with full past-performances, and established form over the current track.

When I see sharp-looking shippers, layoffs, and young horses with sketchy past-performances...my interest wanes, and my money stays in my pocket.
I love when a Horse that has had 6 or more starts runs a HUGE BEYER that is out of whack with their lifetime average figs. Invariably, the horse is crushed next start, often while MOVING UP in class.
Also, Any race where a horse with lifetime record like: 22starts, 2W - 7P - 3S & constantly bet down to one of the top two betting choices in an N3L race.

[Hanover1]

As an earlier poster replied, a seasoned field, well placed, with 8+ entrants does it for me. Cheaper fields i.e. N3L are the cup of tea for some, but not myself.

[fmolf]

As an earlier poster replied, a seasoned field, well placed, with 8+ entrants does it for me. Cheaper fields i.e. N3L are the cup of tea for some, but not myself.
I am just the opposite of Mr. Thaskalos...i love to find the shipper coming in,or the well bred firster,the horse coming off a layoff with a good work tab and back class and my favorite the horse making strong middle move and stepping up in class.....in my experience these are just some of the betting angles/horses the public seems to overlook.

[curious]

I look for a horse that has odds greater than or equal to 9-1, but has won a lot the last several races.

I find these guys all the time. I bet them X to win, 2X to place, and 4X to show. They might not win but they hit the board all the time.

[rrpic6]

Look at Pimlico when they run maidens or cheap claimers on the turf. They will have full fields with spotty running lines. Looking a little deeper into the family tree of these horses can find some juicy results.

RR

[fmolf]

Look at Pimlico when they run maidens or cheap claimers on the turf. They will have full fields with spotty running lines. Looking a little deeper into the family tree of these horses can find some juicy results.

RR
I believe this holds true at most tracks,at least the ones that i play.

[iCoder]

While some race conditions obviously lend themselves to less favorites and more longshots, I feel strongly that it is the mix of horses in the individual race that determines playability.

In other words, there may be a 6-horse field with a 2/5 favorite you perceive as being significantly overbet, thereby creating a wonderful opportunity for you to exploit the race by wagering the rest of the field.

Conversely, there may be a 12-horse field with a favorite so good that he looks like the "dead nuts" (as they say in our vernacular).


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

I have to agree with Dave. I like to catch a 2/5(1/9) that's over bet as well. The only difference for me is I like to bet the favorite as a key and go deeper on my bet. Had my biggest super payout that way even when the 1/9 won it. Of course it moved off 1/9 before post time but it held late and kept the odds up. If you can key one and go deep you can make some cash with the high odds field.

I also agree that a mid-sized field (8-12 horses) is better than a small or large field. No money in the small ones and too many angles in the large fields. Definitely better with lots of data (PPs) no matter what you're playing.

I also look for a purse over $20k. If the purse is there you'll have a better quality horse in the race that runs truer to form with greater repeatability.

By far, for deciding what race to bet versus another, I like to use consensus. The more sources I have agreeing with each other, my handicapping buddies, handicapping tools and internet/media sources the better I like it. If it includes the overlays I want, then it's a bet.

[bob60566]

If you would like to view bettable race on March 31 at Golden gate in race # 6 go watch the replay
This is your Dream
Mac:( :( :(

[Stillriledup]

If you would like to view bettable race on March 31 at Golden gate in race # 6 go watch the replay
This is your Dream
Mac:( :( :(

Really? Race 6?

What was it a dream, i don't get it.

[Robert Fischer]

vulnerable favorites

field size

pool size

dynamics

[curious]

My secret to winning big at horse racing, and I am going to share it with everyone.

Okay, get out your pad and pencil.

Ready? Here it comes. Bet more on the winning horses.

[stu]

Y'all

For a bettable race requirement, how about a race where there more than four horses with a legitimiate chance to win.

e.g. http://www.equibase.com/static/entry/PIM040711USA-EQB.html#RACE9

A 12-horse 3+ f/m An2X optional $25k 1mile turf
- shippers from more than one track
- runners with previous black type
- young developping equine talent
- strong human connections


(full disclosure: I work for Pimlico)

[CBedo]

Y'all

For a bettable race requirement, how about a race where there more than four horses with a legitimiate chance to win.

e.g. http://www.equibase.com/static/entry/PIM040711USA-EQB.html#RACE9

A 12-horse 3+ f/m An2X optional $25k 1mile turf
- shippers from more than one track
- runners with previous black type
- young developping equine talent
- strong human connections


(full disclosure: I work for Pimlico)Doesn't do me any good if I can't find the winner, lol. I'd rather have a race where there's only one horse who has a chance to win, but the public hasn't quite figured it out! :)

[Dave Schwartz]

Doesn't do me any good if I can't find the winner, lol. I'd rather have a race where there's only one horse who has a chance to win, but the public hasn't quite figured it out!

Chris,

How often do you find such a race?


Dave

[highnote]

A bettable race to me is any race where the odds I assign to a horse are different enough from the public's odds to make me want to bet the horse in the straight or exotic pools.

Field size or conditions are not a factor. It's all about the odds.

It could be a match race. If the horse I like is even money and I think it should be 2/5 I'll bet it to win.

That said, I do like bigger fields of good stakes races or good maiden special weights.

[Fastracehorse]

..... new barn and a drop.
The new barn gets a freebie drop for the owner and the horse is still sharp.

Or, a horse that makes 2 moves but gets trapped inside - these are usually large.

But my favorite is when my speed fig is 30 pts higher than the published speed fig.

fffastt

[bigmack]

I'm trying to think how many threads of this very subject have been bandied about over the years. Seems like 814.

And most of the 'good stuff' was in the first 12.

[raybo]

Mid level tracks, 8+ starters, less than 2 firsters, value (odds on my pick is equal to or above 7/2, this would be if I were a win bettor).

For supers the same criteria but odds on winner doesn't matter as long as 2 of the top 4 post time odds horses are not on my ticket.

[turninforhome10]

This is the thing I am having trouble with at my stage in the game(20years handicapping). I just finshed the autobiography of Pittsburgh Phil and have come to the conclusion, it all about having a fantasy stable of horse broken up for each track , with a an idea of what conditions they are eligible for and watching the overnight for entries. This gives me an idea of what races are being used and where soft spots are for my horses. If you have an idea of what kind of trainer you are dealing with ( racehorse trainer vs. daymoney trainer) then you can figure out if they are trying to win or just running for practice. The best example I can give is when looking at maidens especially 2yo's. How many times have you seen a highly regarded 2yo wih 6 months of works get crushed by a trainer owned horse at high odds. Ask yourself how long would I be willing to shell out day money to get my horse to the races?
Bottom line is this, when I was a college student I helped pay my last semesters tution from the winnings of one horse and following that horse for two years and only hitting him when it was right, kind of like asking dad for allowance knowing that not just anytime is a good time to ask. I have just come to the point of this
"Successful handicappers know every detail in regard to the horses upon which they are intending to bet" Pittsburgh Phil , and the only way to do this is by following the horse itself and waiting for the right spot. Trust the horse. I

[Pell Mell]

Since I'm a spot player, any race where I find a play is bettable but I don't bet anything under 3/1.

When it comes to the overlay and underlay business I quit paying attention to it. I have tried to figure them out but would always get caught in the switches.

As an example; This past Sunday I gave my clients 2 horses at OP. The first was 10/1 on the ML. The other was 6/1 on the ML. I informed my people that it didn't look like there would be much value in the race with the 6/1 shot. Both horses won and the 10/1 play was bet done to 3/1 and the exotics didn't pay much. The 6/1 shot got away at 11/1 and the exotics paid way more than I thought they would. Just opposite to what I thought would happen.

If I figure the horse to win I just play it and whatever happens is beyond my control except that I demand 3/1 or more, disregarding whether it's an overlay or underlay.

http://backstretchtalks.blogspot.com/

[raybo]

This is the thing I am having trouble with at my stage in the game(20years handicapping). I just finshed the autobiography of Pittsburgh Phil and have come to the conclusion, it all about having a fantasy stable of horse broken up for each track , with a an idea of what conditions they are eligible for and watching the overnight for entries. This gives me an idea of what races are being used and where soft spots are for my horses. If you have an idea of what kind of trainer you are dealing with ( racehorse trainer vs. daymoney trainer) then you can figure out if they are trying to win or just running for practice. The best example I can give is when looking at maidens especially 2yo's. How many times have you seen a highly regarded 2yo wih 6 months of works get crushed by a trainer owned horse at high odds. Ask yourself how long would I be willing to shell out day money to get my horse to the races?
Bottom line is this, when I was a college student I helped pay my last semesters tution from the winnings of one horse and following that horse for two years and only hitting him when it was right, kind of like asking dad for allowance knowing that not just anytime is a good time to ask. I have just come to the point of this
"Successful handicappers know every detail in regard to the horses upon which they are intending to bet" Pittsburgh Phil , and the only way to do this is by following the horse itself and waiting for the right spot. Trust the horse. I

The only horse racing author, who's book I read from cover to cover, Pittsburgh Phil. I read one of his books right after I started looking at horse racing (1978). Much of what he advised in that book is still valid today, albeit, not particularly useble with horse racing software.

[Robert Goren]

The following of a horse and betting when things were "right" was common when I first started betting almost 50 years ago. Now days a horse races so seldom, it is hard to do.

[turninforhome10]

I would disagree with the last two comments. On the first about handicapping software, I have come to the conclusion that without seeing the horses video past performances no amount of number crunching can remove that last little bit of subjectivity that makes or breaks good handicappers. Lets say for instance that the horse we like in the race is the number 2 and for handicapping purposes lets say it comes into the race with good works and a smashing last out win. Now all of our figures say this a great propostion at 3-1 and the public agrees and make the horse 9-5 while the are in the walking ring. While in the ring you notice the horse wears an outside scoop blinker a big one. Ok now you look back on your pp's and notice that every time this horse breaks from an outside post he runs well, every time inside dismal failure. How are you gonna know when the scoop blinker came into effect without going back to watch replays real close. Where do the numbers lead us from here?
On the second note about it being to hard nowadays. There are more tracks running today than ever. Finding horses have become harder because it has been harder to find angles. The betting public is more numerous today than yesterday, but it has gotten harder to find those rare gems and this is where a sense of horsemanship must come into play. I challenge everybody to got to euibase get a condition book for Keenelands upcoming meet and follow the races by the condion book rather than the entries. See if you can create a fantasy stable by conditions. Find four or five horses that you followed from FG or GP and see if they went North. Also most big horses that are getting cranked up for Churchill might be passing through the entry box at Keneland. If you can find maybe ten races throughout the Keneland meet you might be a ble to net up to 10-15 horses that would be prime contenders for the next race in the books. Now if you are thinking like a trainer, you would think that if the horse runs well and eats up the next day that I will be looking for the next available race for that horse and where and when I enter will give a good idea of trainer intention. If you have a good horse keep it running. It you have a great horse keep em guessing, and if you have a poor horse keep em dropping. It just seems to me that following key horses from key races seems the best approach. Today 4/5/11 at Hawthorne a 3yo ILL filly named Cityrap is set for a big effort of a smashing 8 1/4 lengtht maiden breaking score againist open maiden allowance foes. The replay shows how easily she wins, geared down at the wire. Now heres the part I emplore you to think about, Why would I as a trainer enter this filly against open n1x foes when I can stomp ILL foes and get just as much money ? This is my video pick today and I like Two Bit Bandit to run a good one also. So if these two fillies do well today I can go back and find their maiden races and watch the horses they ran against. After a while of this you can have enough horses to keep you busy.

[illinoisbred]

If Cityrap does win this race today, her winner's share of the purse is increased a little over $6,200 from the $27,000 stated purse. Timing-wise,I'm thinking this works well as a lead-up to the Violet Stakes later this month.

[turninforhome10]

I would say that the Violet is definately on their radar. Thanks for the reply

[thelyingthief]

A bettable race is a race in which you can place a bet. If you cannot place a bet, it is not a bettable race.

thank you for your support.
tlt-

[curious]

turninforhome10,

In the example you gave in that long post about the blinkers and that horse likes running from the outside but not from the inside. Is this a real case? Are there horses that win when running from the outside, but lose when running from the inside?

I don't know much about horses, I know math.

thanks,
curious

[CBedo]

Chris,

How often do you find such a race?


DaveNot often Dave, lol. I guess my point is that, just as many have pointed out in this thread already, tdhe number or horses or the odds of each by themselves don't make a race bettable. What makes a race bettable for me is the perception that at least one of those horse's odds are mispriced (with no exchange betting, mispriced on the high side).

[curious]

Not often Dave, lol. I guess my point is that, just as many have pointed out in this thread already, tdhe number or horses or the odds of each by themselves don't make a race bettable. What makes a race bettable for me is the perception that at least one of those horse's odds are mispriced (with no exchange betting, mispriced on the high side).

I find horses like this all the time. I must have some weird cracked out way of figuring out that the odds being offered are too high.

[CBedo]

I find horses like this all the time. I must have some weird cracked out way of figuring out that the odds being offered are too high.I find horses like that as well. What I don't find often is a race where only in all probability, only one horse can win, and his odds are overlayed.

[curious]

I find horses like that as well. What I don't find often is a race where only in all probability, only one horse can win, and his odds are overlayed.

What you mean (I think) is a race where the horse that should be the odds on favorite is a longshot, and the horses that are the favorite and have odds near the favorite don't have a prayer of winning? So, this longshot is going to blow past them?

[Dave Schwartz]

What makes a race bettable for me is the perception that at least one of those horse's odds are mispriced (with no exchange betting, mispriced on the high side).

Exactly!

However, from my point of view, I differentiate between a betable horse and a betable race.

I think you can find at least one betable horse in almost every race. Perhaps not a horse with a high probability of winning AND solid profit together, mind you.

To me, a betable race is a race where you could bet multiple horses and probably make long-term profit from any of them because there is a significant percentage of pool money wagered on very one or more over-rated horse(s).

An example of this would be if there was (say) a 2/1 horse that I thought only had a 15% chance of winning. That horse provides "extra money" in the pool that makes many horses profitable. All this, of course, depends upon how accurate my assessment of such horses usually are.


Dave

[raybo]

turninforhome10,

In the example you gave in that long post about the blinkers and that horse likes running from the outside but not from the inside. Is this a real case? Are there horses that win when running from the outside, but lose when running from the inside?

I don't know much about horses, I know math.

thanks,
curious

Yes, horses that, when running from the inside, don't have the early speed to get to the front and end up being dead last in the first turn, due to all the horses outside of him coming to the rail and forcing him to the back of the pack. The pace has to be exactly right for this horse to make up all that ground and then he still has to fight through all the traffic in front of him, which usually means he's gotta go to the outside. So, he lost ground early and now he's going to lose more ground going outside.

[JustRalph]

nowadays........

Favorite that is declining in form or vulnerable for some reason

Race shape that favors another horse at 6-1 or higher

That's all I bet anymore...........that's it.........

[sjk]

On the first about handicapping software, I have come to the conclusion that without seeing the horses video past performances no amount of number crunching can remove that last little bit of subjectivity that makes or breaks good handicappers.


You underestimate the capabilities of modern software. I bet without knowing the names of the horses or whether they are maidens or stakes winners. There is no subjectivity involved whatsoever. I just export the list of bets that the software provides.

Pittsburgh Phil found it important to know who the horses were but that is no longer necessary if you have the right software tool.

[turninforhome10]

So your software can calculate how a horse responds to blinkers, or how 2yo number compare when running againist older horses. The other day at SA a 2-5 favorite walks through the ring washy, pissed off and wearing Gate Dancer earmuffs, his Bris numbers were off the chart and his Prime Power was 10% higher than anyone else's. Did your software calculate that the horse was pissed off because it was first time ear muff and did not like it all. Let me ask you even what ear muffs are for and tell me if this is a good bet. I bet the 5-1 2nd choice who was relaxed and dappled and won like a thief while our numbers horse struggled to finish 4th. While the numbers did give 2nd choice , how would your software do with the muffs. This is the difference between being stuck to numbers or being able to use the numbers as a check off sheet before looking at the horses. How can you bet a horse without examining their paddock behavior and the way the warm up.

[sjk]

I would ask how you can ever bet a significant number or races (several thousand per year) if you are caught up in these sorts of details.

There are two elements to making a substantial profit at the end of the year. You need to make bets with a positive expectation and I am sure there are many paths to that element. You also need to bet a significant amount of money and it is helpful to be able to bet a large number of races and to do so in a minute or two per race.

[turninforhome10]

I am sorry for hogging up this whole thread firstly. Second here is my criteria.
1) Purse over 20k, jocks ride better when the stakes are higher
2) Second start in same condition at same distance with repeat pilot
3) J/T combo that hits around 15-20%
4) Underlay for favorite if I am not betting it
5) Video replay of last races shows trouble, easy win or good effort
6) A happy paddock horse
7) 7-5 to 5-1 for win, all others play exotics.
8) High % jock shipping to ride (NY to PRX,)
9) If i don't get what I like for the horse, I will pass and wait for them to run again, while looking at the condition book for a race and see if that is where they go.
I have tried Multi Caps, Jrc capper, and numerous others. Now I watch the overnights, have a vast fantasy stable broken down by track and conditions, watch a lot of replays and handicap using Twinspires express and get the whole lifetime pp and look for patterns, then make my speed numbers and odds(my secret) and when the horses hit the track I am scanning for any irregularities with any of the horses. I also like to see the trainer on hand. This whole time I am watching the tote board for any action realizing that owners do bet and I love owners who have more money than horse in the race. This is when I like to bet.

[turninforhome10]

Why do I need to bet thousands of races. Your stategy seems a bit shotgun, if I place enough bets one will have to come through. If I pay attention all I should need to do is 3-4 good races everyday and parlay. What your saying is that if you scan all the races through your software then it should find races that are bettable for you. What I am saying is that bet the horse not the race when it is right. Analog vs digital, both are quality it just depends on what your ear.

[sjk]

Sound like what you are doing is working out very well for you.

Best wishes for continued success.

[turninforhome10]

Thanks SJk, I think that is key and the hardest thing to get to while handicapping is finding your own way and don't knock what works for some. I have found that having of arsenal of different methods to use at different tracks is a good thing. We are all different and half crazy for betting the ponies in the first place, but try to get 9-5 on anything in the stock market now.

[Dave Schwartz]

So your software can calculate how a horse responds to blinkers, or how 2yo number compare when running againist older horses. The other day at SA a 2-5 favorite walks through the ring washy, pissed off and wearing Gate Dancer earmuffs, his Bris numbers were off the chart and his Prime Power was 10% higher than anyone else's. Did your software calculate that the horse was pissed off because it was first time ear muff and did not like it all. Let me ask you even what ear muffs are for and tell me if this is a good bet. I bet the 5-1 2nd choice who was relaxed and dappled and won like a thief while our numbers horse struggled to finish 4th. While the numbers did give 2nd choice , how would your software do with the muffs. This is the difference between being stuck to numbers or being able to use the numbers as a check off sheet before looking at the horses. How can you bet a horse without examining their paddock behavior and the way the warm up.


Since you knock software so hard, let me ask you this...

"You can do all of the above and turn it into a workable probability for each horse in each race?"

Of course you can't. In YOUR approach, you are quite happy to do it YOUR way and it seems to be working for you.

I assure you that SJK is doing just fine with the software he uses despite the fact that he chooses to do it differently than you; despite leaving out the factors you mentioned above.


The point is that people do things differently. Even paper-and-pencil guys. One guy would not dream of looking at horses in the paddock and another guy would never consider playing a race without that step.

Most computer guys are happy (and many are successful) without considering any of the things you mentioned. To think that you have to do all the things YOU DO in order to succeed is just off the mark.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[pondman]

I single out horses not races.

My own logic dictates:

1. There must be a key horse in the race. I prefer shippers, layoffs, troubled trips, maidens, and maidens on S. California Grass. These are the horses the speed freaks can't handicap.

2. The morning line needs to be focused away from my horse.

3. The crowd doesn't give respect to my horse.

4. Prefer to see a competent lightly bet jockey and prefer not to see the super jock--Just to get a little extra value.

5. If the above is not met...I'll wait...sometimes all week.

[turninforhome10]

I agree Dave on the fact that doing what I do is maybe a bit overboard, and I am not knocking software. I have used many in the past, but my point is that just looking at your figures and assuming that everything is a go for what your doing, being able to look over a horse in the paddock gives me an idea of what equipment has changed ie tongue tie, ring bit, shadow roll etc. What I am looking for is my angle something the general public might not notice. The bottom line is I have to have an angle. Last week at SA a 2-5 shot runs a bad fourth, the secret to hitting the 5-1 in the race is that the 2-5 shot added ear muffs and was acting like a damn fool in the paddock. Show me anywhere that ear muffs are on any equipment change lists. And then explain to me where the any software would have found this. A little bit of horsemanship can go along way.

[Dave Schwartz]

I agree Dave on the fact that doing what I do is maybe a bit overboard, and I am not knocking software. I have used many in the past, but my point is that just looking at your figures and assuming that everything is a go for what your doing, being able to look over a horse in the paddock gives me an idea of what equipment has changed ie tongue tie, ring bit, shadow roll etc. What I am looking for is my angle something the general public might not notice. The bottom line is I have to have an angle. Last week at SA a 2-5 shot runs a bad fourth, the secret to hitting the 5-1 in the race is that the 2-5 shot added ear muffs and was acting like a damn fool in the paddock. Show me anywhere that ear muffs are on any equipment change lists. And then explain to me where the any software would have found this. A little bit of horsemanship can go along way.

I get what you are saying, but you see, the other side to this coin is that some guys, like me, will counter with "I couldn't care less about tongue ties, or paddocks." It isn't that I think they have no value to someone, it is that they have no value to me.

The fact that this is your approach and it works for you makes me say, "Congratulations! You are a winning player and that puts you in the upper 2-3% of all players!" It is where most everyone on this forum would like to be.

It does not, however, cause me to say, "Boy, I really need to make sure I get a look at the horses in the paddock before I make a bet."


Some years ago, I was at Saratoga with the gang from PA. I had a killer 10-day run, as good as any I have ever had in my life. At one point, after cashing a $104 horse and $600+ exacta, one of the guys says, "How could you bet this horse?" He went on to criticize me (not insultingly at all) for not being smart enough to know that the horse's workout pattern was bad, the jockey was not the usual connection for this trainer, blah-blah-blah, ad nauseum.

When he was finished, I asked if I had to give the money back and we all had a good laugh.

My point is this - He had his way, and I had mine. Personally, I like my way better, and I would just not enjoy doing it his way even if I could.

And referencing your quote above, "...just looking at your figures and assuming that everything is a go for what your doing..." is precisely what I do. It works fine for me as well as a lot of other players. I ask myself why anyone has the need to do all that work when they don't have to.

Different strokes...


Dave

[raybo]

I agree with Dave on this one. If I did what other people have told me I must do, over all these years, I would never have become successful.

Dave is the kind of guy who has immersed himself in tools development/authoring for horse racing. I have done that also, albeit with Excel rather than programming languages. But, the processes we have both gone through, doing all this development work/teaching, makes what is important, on a daily basis, to becoming and staying profitable, fairly obvious.

Designing a tool, from scratch, teaches you so much about how to approach the game.

Sure, I would like to be able to view horses before the race, and know if horses are ready for a good race or not, but I would never use it, simply because I'm never at the track wagering. If I go to the track at all, it's for entertainment/diversion only, and I don't wager at the track at all. There are far too many distractions for me to be able to do my "due diligence".

[turninforhome10]

I guess for me it is all about knowing the horse since I used to claim. And when claiming it is all about the details. This is now the way I think for good or for bad. I try to approach the horse as if I would buy it since placing a wager also makes me invest in the animal. This is why I have a fantasy stable, it allows me to stay sharp after following a horse for a while I get a good idea of the competition the horse has faced and keep tabs of the horses eligible for that condition. I also like the personal nature when a horse I have been following does well. For instance take a look at Soldat's PPs. If you followed the horses that he ran against at Saratoga on the grass last fall the were many key horse to come from those races. Now waiting for those horses to run back I made alot of money from betting horses from those key races even when my Ultimate PPS suggested other. As a claiming trainer\owner I have yet to claim a horse that has not won for me at the same class or higher. All I am saying is that use what works for you, just that little bit of edge in knowing horses can be either a big edge or a complete fail if you are unsure what to look for.
My best story for watching horses before the race goes as follows.
Big name trainer has first time starter, horse bred to run all day long. During the post parade he lets this horse almost work 3/8 not run off but planned. Realizing that horses only use 30% of the red cell volume at rest, the trainer wanted this route cranked up for his 5-1/2 debut. While everybody accused the horse of running off, I knew the trainer and thought there was no way this was accident. The horse wins by 10 and pays 146.00 to win. Made my whole summer.

[turninforhome10]

POWHATAN COUNTY (Fusaichi Pegasus), who concluded his juvenile season with a runner-up to Soldat in the With Anticipation S. (G3) in early September, figures to attract plenty of support following a smart victory in his 2011 bow, a March 3 allowance/optional claiming event at Gulfstream Park. The George Weaver pupil came back from the six-month layoff with a head score over subsequent Spiral S. (G3) hero Animal Kingdom (Leroidesanimaux [Brz]), and Powhatan County's connections were considering next Saturday's Blue Grass S. (G1) on Polytrack. The bay colt will be a much shorter price in the Transylvania.

[Dave Schwartz]

Turnforhome,

All good ideas for you, but totally foreign to some of us. Doesn't mean we can't be successful any more than me saying that you can't win unless you make a good assessment of value the way I do.

Back in Los Angeles many years ago - literally almost 30 years ago - a guy was giving me lessons on handicapping horseflesh. I really thought I was getting it.

Went to HOL one day, with the intention of betting one standout - Star Gem, ridden by Frank Olivares in like the 7th race. I was prepared to make a $20 win bet, which, for me back then was a huge bet. I watched the horses come onto the track and I swear this horse was limping. Seriously, it looked like he was dragging his right-read leg. I mean, I thought he was leaving a drag mark in the sand. I remember thinking, they can't possibly let this horse start. He should be renamed Igor!

So, in case you aren't getting the idea here, the horse could barely walk, let alone run. I decided to pass.

The horse was 20/1. He popped out of that gate so fast and was long gone, winning for fun.

Nope. Judging horse flesh just was not for me.


Dave

[turninforhome10]

All I am saying is that use what works for you, just that little bit of edge in knowing horses can be either a big edge or a complete fail if you are unsure what to look for.

Take this idea for instance- Knowing that most trainers that accopmlish alot with medium sized stables do so because of the help. I say this because the best outfitts pay their help well so we will take that out of the equation. I ran shedrow of forty horses in IA at PrM back in the late nineties. My best horses had my best grooms. My very best horse had a the hardest working most experienced groom that money could buy. When my grooms went to the paddock with their best boots and cowboy hats on and the horse fit the race the game was on. Mostly when my boss wore his "Allen Jerkens" hat we all knew. We were something like 85 ITM when the hat was on.
It just the little things that we can gain from just being perceptive and really paying attention to the races in which we bet and doing so closely from 15-4 mins to post. Watched a race last night where the 5/2 favorite first time starter was scratched 4 mins to post. Well the ordinary gambler would be pissed that they are forced to change any tickets that might have. Thats fine the big picture either says A the horse was lame and scratched or B the trainer got caught trying to steal one to get eligible for starters. Either way the horse goes in the stable mail and we will see how it pans out

[thaskalos]

Turnforhome,

All good ideas for you, but totally foreign to some of us. Doesn't mean we can't be successful any more than me saying that you can't win unless you make a good assessment of value the way I do.

Back in Los Angeles many years ago - literally almost 30 years ago - a guy was giving me lessons on handicapping horseflesh. I really thought I was getting it.

Went to HOL one day, with the intention of betting one standout - Star Gem, ridden by Frank Olivares in like the 7th race. I was prepared to make a $20 win bet, which, for me back then was a huge bet. I watched the horses come onto the track and I swear this horse was limping. Seriously, it looked like he was dragging his right-read leg. I mean, I thought he was leaving a drag mark in the sand. I remember thinking, they can't possibly let this horse start. He should be renamed Igor!

So, in case you aren't getting the idea here, the horse could barely walk, let alone run. I decided to pass.

The horse was 20/1. He popped out of that gate so fast and was long gone, winning for fun.

Nope. Judging horse flesh just was not for me.


Dave This story brings back bad memories...

More than 20 years ago I found myself at The Gambler's Book Shop in Las Vegas...where I purchased Joe Takach's horse body language video. I can still remember the eagerness with which I anticipated my return home...so I could watch the video, and acquire this vital component of the handicapping process.

When I got back home and watched the video several times, I literally RAN to Arlington Park...so I could put my newly found skills to the test.

At the paddock, and all through the post parade, I discovered - to my horror - that my best bet of the day was the epitome of what Takach had regarded as the horse least likely to run his best race today. Whereas the other horses pranced about, and held their heads up proudly...my horse - a gelding named Blanket Finish - was seemingly so exhausted, that he could barely keep his nose off the ground as he walked. It was pathetic.

I congratulated myself for my purchase of the video...and silently thanked Mr. Takach for the money he was saving me by advising against wagering on "nags" such as this.

I did at least...until I watched the horse win the race by 3 lengths, paying $13.00 to win...while sticking his tongue out at me the whole way...