What are appropriate Expectations for Handicappers

[RonTiller]

I just finished reading the New Pace thread, in which the battle of Patrick versus Dave (and Patrick versus making a living as a professional handicapper) reared its ugly head once again. I don't mean this to be a continuation of that thread. Having myself spoken to Patrick many times and having attempted to explain how brutally difficult it is to make a steady stream of income handicapping, how brutal the competition is and how he almost certainly had unrealistic expectations, it got me wondering. What are realistic expectations when one uses a tool, like a handicapping program or a set of handicapping reports or a handicapping system?

Background to this question:

When I first got involved in handicapping, shortly after meeting Jim Cramer, Tom Hambleton, John Marone and Ron Ambrose in Las Vegas, I assumed that all the book writers, like Jim Quinn, Mark Cramer and Tom Brohamer ("essayists" as a friend called them) were betting thousands of dollars a race and living like kings on their winnings. So my first win and place bets of $200 seemed like an appropriate baby step. Ha! That was an unrealistic understanding more that an unrealistic expectation.

Since then, I have spoken to people who have all sorts of expectations regarding their handicapping life with a new program, system or report (or even with free picks!!!):

Some expect to supplement their income in retirement
Some expect to make millions
Some expect to turn around decades of losing
Some expect to win tournaments
Some expect to make enough to pay next month's rent
Some expect to make enough, with hard work no doubt, to quit their job
Some expect to hit some good long shots
Some expect to hit a life changing pick 6 or other exotic

Nobody, it seems, expects to have more fun
Nobody, it seems, expects to merely lose LESS than they did before
Nobody, it seems, expects to become absorbed in data analysis
Nobody, it seems, expects handicapping and data analysis to dominate their waking hours
Nobody, it seems, expects to find new ways to make losing bets or new losing horses to bet on
Nobody, it seems, expects to find a rewarding and challenging pastime which will not, in the end, pay for itself with winning bets (neither does golf, league bowling, butterfly collecting or reading spy novels)

And to make this clear, my experience is that although people in general may not expect to have more fun or get absorbed in data analysis (and actually find it a rewarding pastime), many find that is exactly what happens.

So here's the question:

What are reasonable (or appropriate) expectations for handicappers? Do these vary depending on how one handicaps (with a printed set of PPs, a thousand dollar program, a free program, a database, etc.

My question is not intended to bring out the [fill in the blank]-is-better-than-[fill in the blank] crowd or the Only-[fill in the blank]-works crowd. We all know by now where the lines are drawn in the sand on those issues, and who stands where.

If Patrick is being used as an example of unrealistic expectations, what are realistic expectations (not for Patrick - that has been covered ad nauseum - but in general). Is there a sliding scale of reasonable expectations? If I do everything "right" should I expect to make lots of money? have fun? have a satisfying pastime? alienate my spouse? Should different people have different expectations?

And for software vendors, how do you handle expectations and especially, how do you handle what you think are unreasonable expectations?

Ron Tiller
HDW

[Robert Goren]

The only expectation that a bettor should have is to be given a fair shake by the people run racing. That is not always happening now. I knew what it took to making a living betting horses because as college kid I knew some one who did. I knew that life was not for me. It has always been a hobby for me even in retirement. I have made a little money over the years, but it has not been easy and it hasn't been much. I am not sure that making money with these takeout rates even with rebates is possible unless you really pick your spots. There are two spots that come to mind where a really sharp person can make money. I recently had a thread on one of them. There is another thread going on it now.

[Tom]

Dick Schmidt always taught that the first you had to do was define your goals. That made sense. You have to have a goal - be it to break even ( a perfectly acceptable goal!), to supplement your income by $X a month, or to make your living off the races.

He and Tom Hambleton also conducted a "boot camp" in Vegas for those who were serious about winning. I doubt too many would be willing to put in the work that was required.

And that is the key - how much are you willing to put into the game? If you are not willing to make a 100% commitment to the work, every day, you have no business having lofty goals of a good life from the races. If you only play on Saturday and buy your "form" on the way to the track, and you break even, be happy.

If you are willing to do your handicapping for whatever session you are planning, be it the Toga meet, the BC weekend, a contest today, or the whole winter at Tampa Bay, you should expect to make some money most of the time, if you are willing to use some kind of money management and bet enough to cover the take and break. But you have to realize that the randomness of the game might eat you alive at any given session through no fault of your own or your program or method or tea leaves.

You must keep records. Without records, you have no idea what is going on. If your records tell you that your method is a winner, you have to realize that in spite of that, any single event might be a loser and not keep trying to change your game plan chasing a winner. You have to believe the records, and they will tell when you have to make changes.

In sort, you can expect to get out it what you put into it most of the time.
But not always.

[thaskalos]

I just finished reading the New Pace thread, in which the battle of Patrick versus Dave (and Patrick versus making a living as a professional handicapper) reared its ugly head once again. I don't mean this to be a continuation of that thread. Having myself spoken to Patrick many times and having attempted to explain how brutally difficult it is to make a steady stream of income handicapping, how brutal the competition is and how he almost certainly had unrealistic expectations, it got me wondering. What are realistic expectations when one uses a tool, like a handicapping program or a set of handicapping reports or a handicapping system?

Background to this question:

When I first got involved in handicapping, shortly after meeting Jim Cramer, Tom Hambleton, John Marone and Ron Ambrose in Las Vegas, I assumed that all the book writers, like Jim Quinn, Mark Cramer and Tom Brohamer ("essayists" as a friend called them) were betting thousands of dollars a race and living like kings on their winnings. So my first win and place bets of $200 seemed like an appropriate baby step. Ha! That was an unrealistic understanding more that an unrealistic expectation.

Since then, I have spoken to people who have all sorts of expectations regarding their handicapping life with a new program, system or report (or even with free picks!!!):

Some expect to supplement their income in retirement
Some expect to make millions
Some expect to turn around decades of losing
Some expect to win tournaments
Some expect to make enough to pay next month's rent
Some expect to make enough, with hard work no doubt, to quit their job
Some expect to hit some good long shots
Some expect to hit a life changing pick 6 or other exotic

Nobody, it seems, expects to have more fun
Nobody, it seems, expects to merely lose LESS than they did before
Nobody, it seems, expects to become absorbed in data analysis
Nobody, it seems, expects handicapping and data analysis to dominate their waking hours
Nobody, it seems, expects to find new ways to make losing bets or new losing horses to bet on
Nobody, it seems, expects to find a rewarding and challenging pastime which will not, in the end, pay for itself with winning bets (neither does golf, league bowling, butterfly collecting or reading spy novels)

And to make this clear, my experience is that although people in general may not expect to have more fun or get absorbed in data analysis (and actually find it a rewarding pastime), many find that is exactly what happens.

So here's the question:

What are reasonable (or appropriate) expectations for handicappers? Do these vary depending on how one handicaps (with a printed set of PPs, a thousand dollar program, a free program, a database, etc.

My question is not intended to bring out the [fill in the blank]-is-better-than-[fill in the blank] crowd or the Only-[fill in the blank]-works crowd. We all know by now where the lines are drawn in the sand on those issues, and who stands where.

If Patrick is being used as an example of unrealistic expectations, what are realistic expectations (not for Patrick - that has been covered ad nauseum - but in general). Is there a sliding scale of reasonable expectations? If I do everything "right" should I expect to make lots of money? have fun? have a satisfying pastime? alienate my spouse? Should different people have different expectations?

And for software vendors, how do you handle expectations and especially, how do you handle what you think are unreasonable expectations?

Ron Tiller
HDW
In my opinion, the typical horseplayer wants to win...but he severely underestimates the time and effort it takes to accomplish this goal.

After years and years of failure (usually as a result of lack of discipline and self control), he gravitates to the computer handicapping programs (or any other "sophisticated" methods)...which, he hopes, will make a winner out of him by doing the thinking for him.

Ironically...these "sophisticated" handicapping methods ARE NOT best suited for the crowd that is most attracted to them!

They are NOT really for losing players trying to turn their games around; ideally...they are for WINNING players trying to increase their edge in this game.

The losing player, IMO, still has "holes" in his game (and in himself) that he needs to address...BEFORE he purchases these sometimes expensive computer systems...and before he starts blaming the system creators for his failure in this game.

You need to totally immerse yourself in this game, if you want to win...

There are no consistent profits out there for the "hobbyist", regardless of what he might think...and what "sophisticated" methods he might be using.

[Handiman]

The simple answer from the KISS book is I expect the same thing from handicapping as I do from Golf. And that is a great deal of frustration and maddening fun. But I keep at it and have for years because of that one 'Great shot' that rears it's head once in a great while and seduces me into thinking that I can really play the game of Golf.

It's much like that $56 winner I had at Mountaineer last night, but got off of because of course my program couldn't have had that horse figured right, It certainly shouldn't be 2.8-1 as my computer screen said it should be. But the 27-1 horse ran just like a 2.8-1 horse should and the payout seduced me into thinking, Hey I can play this game.

Or is this game playing me?


Handi:)

[detective]

Hi,

I play the races full time for a living. I had a few medical problems this last year so I have had to take time off but I am back in full swing and I will turn my data for my computer back on Nov. 1 This handicapping by hand stuff sucks! Your realistic expectations can only come from record keeping. I hit 30% winners at 4-1 or higher odds on the win end and I do this day in and day out. I only pass a race if the horse or horses I like are below 4-1. This gives me a 50% profit on my win bets. You need a big edge so if you have a few days when you are not that hot your ship will stay afloat. People who say they have a 5% edge on the game and I say go get a job. This is way too much work to accept a low return. You just need records and if your numbers are low see where you can improve. If you are just playing for fun your roi does not matter that much. Look at the game as a hobby. I spent 2,500 snow skiing a few years back and I never made any money skiing. I for years sucked at maiden races so I went out and I figured out how to handicap the babies and now 20 years later I'm writing a book about them! If you use a program like bettor keep track it will show you what areas you are great at and stick with those. So many people learned how to handicapp from a friend or uncle and the problem is their friend or uncle did not really know how to handicap. so bad handicapping was passed on to them and most people are to lazy to learn a new way or take the time that is needed to do it right. Keep records but I know you can get 30% winners at 4-1 or higher because I do it day in and day out.

[Light]

I think you should have zero to negative expectations as a casual player. First it's the most likely outcome and secondly if you come out ahead you will be pleasantly surprised.

If someone decides to be professional I think it takes more than just discipline, keeping records, ability, etc. It takes the ability to manage your emotions and ego. This is the hardest part IMO because if you don't it is guaranteed to destroy your bankroll.

[PhantomOnTour]

My expectations are to win; to show a wagering profit at the end of the year.
I have not been happy for two years...I will be happy at the end of 2011.

Your expectations should be in direct correlation to how much time you spend on the card.
Don't buy the form 30mins before the first race and get upset when you lose.

A realistic expectation for a dedicated player who chooses to become an expert at some aspect(s) of handicapping (trips, from cycle analysis, figs...whatever) is PROFIT.
My only advice is that you stick to one circuit and really get to know the trainers and horses.

[Robert Goren]

There is one thing I can't emphasize enough. Hard work alone will not turn a profit. You have to be smart about what you do as well. You can't get there without hard work, but if you keep making dumb moves you will lose even if you work hard..

[Robert Fischer]

I may be wrong, but if you use a good tool or system it may be appropriate to expect a loss of near or less than takeout.

[thaskalos]

Hi,

I play the races full time for a living. I had a few medical problems this last year so I have had to take time off but I am back in full swing and I will turn my data for my computer back on Nov. 1 This handicapping by hand stuff sucks! Your realistic expectations can only come from record keeping. I hit 30% winners at 4-1 or higher odds on the win end and I do this day in and day out. I only pass a race if the horse or horses I like are below 4-1. This gives me a 50% profit on my win bets. You need a big edge so if you have a few days when you are not that hot your ship will stay afloat. People who say they have a 5% edge on the game and I say go get a job. This is way too much work to accept a low return. You just need records and if your numbers are low see where you can improve. If you are just playing for fun your roi does not matter that much. Look at the game as a hobby. I spent 2,500 snow skiing a few years back and I never made any money skiing. I for years sucked at maiden races so I went out and I figured out how to handicap the babies and now 20 years later I'm writing a book about them! If you use a program like bettor keep track it will show you what areas you are great at and stick with those. So many people learned how to handicapp from a friend or uncle and the problem is their friend or uncle did not really know how to handicap. so bad handicapping was passed on to them and most people are to lazy to learn a new way or take the time that is needed to do it right. Keep records but I know you can get 30% winners at 4-1 or higher because I do it day in and day out.
In my long horseplaying career...I have met 5 or 6 players who have claimed to hold a 50% edge on this game.

Upon further questioning...they have all confessed that they bet between $12 and $18 per race...

I hope you are the exception...:)

[pondman]

Hi,

I hit 30% winners at 4-1 or higher odds on the win end and I do this day in and day out. I only pass a race if the horse or horses I like are below 4-1. This gives me a 50% profit on my win bets. You need a big edge so if you have a few days when you are not that hot your ship will stay afloat. People who say they have a 5% edge on the game and I say go get a job.

Glad to see someone else is saying this-- couldn't have said it better. I pass many more races than I play.

To answer the OP:

I haven't read the other thread. But I don't think there is a substitute for experience. Being there, betting, and recording it. You have to have a feel for it, before you quit your day job. I don't think you get much in a book. I think you need to have your own niche, your own data. If your expert system is on the front end to data, I think you will do okay. I have my doubt about generic software. I have my doubt about the math people. I don't thing the business works anything like people assume it does.

Furthermore, two pros will have different opinions on the same race. I don't think there is a one size fits all betting methodology. You stay with what works for you over time.

Can you make a fortune at the track? Yes. Can you have profitable expectations? Yes. For example, Golden Gate opens on Thursday. My expectation are to net at least 11k by the end of the year at the Gate. How can I do this? I've studied the place for years. However, if you saw me sitting in my office at SA, you'd think I got off on the wrong bus, because I probably wouldn't be paying attention to the races at all, unless they were running on turf at SA, or there was a really good placement of a horse-- maybe Patterson or Sutherland coming back on a recent maiden winner at 15-1.

[Casino]

Hard work doesnt guarantee anything,but without it you have no shot.

[Track Collector]

Hi,

I play the races full time for a living. I had a few medical problems this last year so I have had to take time off but I am back in full swing and I will turn my data for my computer back on Nov. 1 This handicapping by hand stuff sucks! Your realistic expectations can only come from record keeping. I hit 30% winners at 4-1 or higher odds on the win end and I do this day in and day out. I only pass a race if the horse or horses I like are below 4-1. This gives me a 50% profit on my win bets. You need a big edge so if you have a few days when you are not that hot your ship will stay afloat. People who say they have a 5% edge on the game and I say go get a job. This is way too much work to accept a low return. You just need records and if your numbers are low see where you can improve. If you are just playing for fun your roi does not matter that much. Look at the game as a hobby. I spent 2,500 snow skiing a few years back and I never made any money skiing. I for years sucked at maiden races so I went out and I figured out how to handicap the babies and now 20 years later I'm writing a book about them! If you use a program like bettor keep track it will show you what areas you are great at and stick with those. So many people learned how to handicapp from a friend or uncle and the problem is their friend or uncle did not really know how to handicap. so bad handicapping was passed on to them and most people are to lazy to learn a new way or take the time that is needed to do it right. Keep records but I know you can get 30% winners at 4-1 or higher because I do it day in and day out.

Hello Detective,

A few questions here........if you do not mind sharing:

(a) How many DIFFERENT tracks do you play? (No need to mention the specific ones.).
(b) On a yearly basis, about how many plays do you end up making?
(c) Do you look for plays just about every day of the year, or are the days you play limited to the specific season(s) for the tracks that you play?
(d) How do you insure that you are getting 4-1 win odds higher? Do you base it on historical info (from a database), or are you wagering right at/near post time like 1 MTP, Post Time, PT minus 30 seconds, PT minus 60 seconds, etc.?

[detective]

(a) How many DIFFERENT tracks do you play? (No need to mention the specific ones.). I play three States, NY, CA, KY I do throw in Gulf Stream in the Winter.
(b) On a yearly basis, about how many plays do you end up making?
Every day I make about 10 bets. It depends on if I get the odds. Sometimes I only get 8 plays. It works out to 2,400 plays a year on average. Sometimes higher or lower.
(c) Do you look for plays just about every day of the year, or are the days you play limited to the specific season(s) for the tracks that you play?

I play every day except Monday and Tuesday but I do play Monday when Saratoga runs or if it's a dead Presidents day.
(d) How do you insure that you are getting 4-1 win odds higher? Do you base it on historical info (from a database), or are you wagering right at/near post time like 1 MTP, Post Time, PT minus 30 seconds, PT minus 60 seconds, etc.?

I bet with 2 min to post and if odds drop to 3-1 oh well. Most of the time that does not happen. If I can cxl the ticket I do that and I put in conditional wagers as well but that has failed in the past. I bet on horses with much higer odds of course but I did my home work over the years and for me it's 4-1 or higher. I wish I could bet on horses like Frankel or Cigar but I give those plays to my Mom. She just likes to cash not make money at it. If I handicap a race and the chalk looks great at 4/5 I just sit it out but I will buy a exacta if I think I can get a price behind the favorite but most of the time I pass. I do bet at times two horses to win if they both have good odds. I never bet a 8/5 with a 4/1 but if one horse is 11/1 and the other 4/1 I bet. Take a look at Precision by wong or Bob Pitlaks new book PC tools For The Thoroughbred Handicapper both books lay out on the math that you need to do to help you win. The hours and hours it takes to make money at the game is worth it to me but remember you won't have much of a life. If I could be a Dr. I would be better off or some other field it just ended up I do this. I am no Allen Woods when it comes to bank roll but I do pay the bills and have some left over. But I am nuts as well...

[guckers]

This is one of the main reasons I've decided to build my own db and custom app. I want to be fully accountable for my own results and I want to know the data and the program intimately. I think some people think that a handicapping apps is a quick way to cut corners and find more winners... and I don't necessarily blame them. Let's face it, people are suckers for get-rich-quick ideas, and anything that promises something better than what they are right at the moment.

Just a quick gander at some of the handicapping software vendors includes copy such as

"Neurax Pro v4.0" Features: (http://www.brisnet.com/php/fw/softwareDisplay/)




Picks more winners than ever before.
HorseStreet (http://horsestreet.com/index.html)
DAVE SCHWARTZ'S "TAKE NO PRISONERS" APPROACH TO RACING MAY AGGRAVATE SOME BUT APPLYING IT MAKES YOU A WINNER.

Jcapper (http://www.jcapper.com/)

JCapper will improve your game and make you a better player. Can you put a price on that?

I'm not trying to throw these vendors under the bus, full disclosure - I've never used their software and don't have anything negative to say. But it's a sales pitch, just like anything else in the world, and sometimes there is a sucker (like pk) that believes the snuggie is acceptable to wear anywhere because the commercial says so.

I think handicapping and gambling attract suckers, and the suckers usually want to cut corners and will complain the loudest when something isn't delivered as promise.


edit: grammar

[guckers]

Just want to clarify that I don't think that all people who use handicapping apps are cutting corners or suckers. Not trying to piss vendors/users off...

But I think we can all agree that they would be the first stop for someone looking to get rich quick or that it could be the holy grail = unrealistic expectation.

And from the initial post, the first expectation I would share with someone looking at taking a db handicapping approach to this, is to (1) get ready to spend a lot of time immersed in data, (2) there are little quirks with the data that will drive you nuts and you'll likely go insane for short periods of time, (3) you'll spend days working on your db/app with little to no progress.

[pondman]

Just you'll spend days working on your db/app with little to no progress.

Prior to building an app you need to spend a few years observing, mock playing on paper, and then playing with money. Once you've got that down you build an app. And the results is something structured on your own thinking, rather than generic, often erroneous information. However, that's often difficult to pass on to another person, becomes sometimes it's off in left field. But you've got to go with it if it wins.

[lansdale]

There is one thing I can't emphasize enough. Hard work alone will not turn a profit. You have to be smart about what you do as well. You can't get there without hard work, but if you keep making dumb moves you will lose even if you work hard..

Hi Robert,

I think this is a truth that many overlook. Handicapping, like investing of any kind, is a form of gambling. And like any of these stochastic activities, it does not yield returns proportional to the time and energy invested. In this respect, it contradicts most of the significant activities of life. I have known a number of people who have put a great deal of time and effort into the game over the years and have long-term negative ROI. The professional gamblers I know not only have the requisite dedication and discipline, but also an average IQ on the order of 140, and an excellent knowledge of the mathematics of probability and statistics.

I recently read some research on online poker in which the authors found over-confidence among a high percentage of players - no doubt soon to be ex-players. In all, 80% claimed that their play to be 'above average'. To some degree, their ignorance is due to the enormous complexity of the game, which is similar to handicapping in that respect. And I think the same overconfidence applies to this game. Devotion and hard work are just not enough.

Cheers,

lansdale

[therussmeister]

Hi Robert,


I recently read some research on online poker in which the authors found over-confidence among a high percentage of players - no doubt soon to be ex-players. In all, 80% claimed that their play to be 'above average'. To some degree, their ignorance is due to the enormous complexity of the game, which is similar to handicapping in that respect. And I think the same overconfidence applies to this game. Devotion and hard work are just not enough.

Cheers,

lansdale
This is true of everything, as far as I know. 80% of all people consider themselves to be above average drivers, above average intelligence, above average in looks, an above average employee, yadda, yadda, yadda...

I've read some research that says people so resolutely overestimate their abilities, that even people with low self-esteem are overconfident, just not as much as other people.

[pondman]

but also an average IQ on the order of 140, and an excellent knowledge of the mathematics of probability and statistics.

Research doesn't support this opinion-- at least not in horse racing. It's an organizational structure which is needed. And the experience to know the green lights (including value) and red lights of racing.

You comment are true for successful sport betting.

[lansdale]

Research doesn't support this opinion-- at least not in horse racing. It's an organizational structure which is needed. And the experience to know the green lights (including value) and red lights of racing.

You comment are true for successful sport betting.

Hi pondman,

Generally agreed with your posts here. And not disagreeing with your comments here. First, nearly all the professional players I know play either poker or blackjack, or are sports bettors. Re the question of the necessity of math knowledge for handicapping, I agree it's not as crucial as with those games, but without an ability to assess value, which many players lack, one is not going to make money. And the experience and ability to organize data that you describe also require a measure of intelligence that is likely above average.

Another point re not needing math: it seems to me that many of the questions the game poses are more about classification, taxonomy, or pattern recognition, than being about the numbers. This sounds like what your own approach to the game is about.

Cheers.

lansdale

[Jeff P]

The following (in no particular order of importance) are now mentioned in this thread: Patrick, JCapper, and suckers.

I want to address this in a clear manner lest anyone get the wrong idea about how I operate or what it is I offer.

Patrick did approach me about JCapper. Rather than take his money (which would have been the easy thing to do) I told him he wasn't ready for JCapper, explained why, and then gave him a list of specific things to work on.

He and I have exchanged PMs since... Patrick, if you are reading, I want you to know that I read your posts - and am quietly rooting for you. I am also genuinely happy that you are doing well with Ted's software and that you are enjoying the game once again.

As for the wording on the JCapper site that says: "JCapper will improve your game and make you a better player." - I stand behind that statement. Simply put, it's the truth.

All of us are human beings equipped with brains. Therefore all of us have the ability to learn from past experience (or numbers presented on a computer screen.) Something happens to most players who make a genuine effort to analyze results from a database. After a while, that effort starts to pay off. More often than not it results in the player learning new things not just about areas being researched within racing as a game - but where strengths and weaknesses exist within their own games as well.

I have never told a customer I'll make them a winner. That's not what I sell. I offer database software and data of the highest quality. I offer support that I hope exceeds expectations. That combination does make winning possible. However, when asked, I tell prospective customers that winning consistently at the windows is an extremely difficult thing to do. I also tell them that final responsibility for achieving expectations rests squarely on the shoulders of the individual.



-jp

.

[PaceAdvantage]

Jeff,

Anyone who witnessed your team's performance in the Pace Advantage Inter-Board Handicapping League knows your software is top notch. If that's not enough, they can ask your biggest fan on here...JustRalph.

Don't let one malformed opinion cause you any sweat...

[windoor]

I have not been posting much lately, but this thread did catch by eye and I thought I might be able to contribute.

Realistic Expectations for most of us is simply to improve our bottom line.
I personally, would like to automate the process as much as I can for the business end of it, and then get back to going to track for the pleasure of being there, watching the horses and hanging out with like minded people.

To that end:

I am very deep into the rabbet hole called database handicapping and have convinced myself this is the only way for me to improve my game in a reasonably short period of time. Once you have it set up properly there is no faster way to get the answers you need to make pass or play decisions based on historic results.

A plug for J/Capper:

I am mostly a spot/angle type of player, with my own key factor list. It has proven to be profitable over the last three years at my home track, but finding other tracks to play has been a crap shoot.

J/Capper is the only software I could find that would let be break out the plays by the “Seven” (which of course includes the track) I also use a custom Excel application to get some modified files into the J/Capper database. Thank-you Harry (Hcap) for that.

At my (and others) request to add a feature to the software that would expand on this ability, Jeff graciously offered an upgrade free of charge to any who had a need for it and spent about 45 minutes on the phone with me to make sure I understood how to set it up properly for what I wanted it to do. Customer support like this is unheard of these days.

What I have been working on is a “black box” that can handicap hundreds of races per day without mistakes. My first attempt playing all tracks and all spot/angle plays for the month of September shows a 5 unit loss for the month. That works out to 997 plays, 218 wins at an average odd of 3.55. Not to shappy for a first attempt and would still be a money maker with rebates.

If (There is always an if) you play the top 12 Tracks the total plays comes down to 389 with 111 wins, an average odd of 4.08, for a profit of 75 units for the month. I am two weeks into October and am quite pleased with the results so far.

This is only possible for me when I have enough data to analyze for each play at each track. I am a data window junkie an am enjoying the game once again.

Regards,

Windoor.

[Robert Goren]

Research doesn't support this opinion-- at least not in horse racing. It's an organizational structure which is needed. And the experience to know the green lights (including value) and red lights of racing.

You comment are true for successful sport betting.
I would like to see that research on horse race bettors. Extremely Profitable handicapper are rarer than hen's teeth. I have known 2 in my life. One died many years ago. The other has a drinking problem and probably doesn't bet the races more than a dozen times a year. The one that died many years ago lived the life as a profesional gamber and traveled with the horses from track to track. He knew horses as animals inside out. The drinker just picks up a DRF and reads it and picks the a winner. I am sure he has never done any research on horse racing ever. The one thing that these guys have in common is that they both never went to college and they both are/were extremely naturally smart, not book smart.

[Ian Meyers]

The ONLY way to win consistently is through hard work, period. And even that's not nearly enough. IMHO it's nearly impossible to win today without computer assistance. Twenty years ago, sure, ten years ago maybe. Today, not a chance. Pool liquidity is at a ten year low and getting worse. Pool efficiency is at an all-time high as the square money evaporates. I thought I was a pretty fair handicapper three years ago but when I sat down to look at all my records I was just +/- breakeven. After playing for 30+ years I was on the downside of ROI because the sucker money had left and the tools I was using (like high-end speed figures) were now ubiquitous. I spent the past 36 months learning (or re-learning) fundamentals I had been overlooking (like class which is still important in the TB game and nearly paramount in harness) and mining my database. I hooked up with handicappers, that had skills in areas I didn't. I began play harness as well as quarterhorses in addition to T'breds looking for edges. As a result I have been fortunate enough to boost my ROI to consistently positive levels but it took thousands of hours of work to do it over and above the 30 years I put in up to now.

There isn't anything wrong with playing this game for enjoyment. I rarely win on BC day but I invest in the pools every year because I enjoy it. Picking up a copy of the form and going out to the track to spend a few hours with friends is a great way to pass the time. But if you think you'll win that way you are deluding yourself. The 21% blended rake will crush your bankroll over time.

[mabred]

Boy time to get out of the game I guess!!!

After reading Ian's post I now know I have no shot

Figured that myself just checking my BR many times.

I do enjoy going to Saratoga and it may be my only

Place I'll bet.I do bet small and in the last few years

even smaller.Next year I'm following Joe Prunes and his selections

at the Pa get together..

see u at the Spa
mabred

[Ian Meyers]

Boy time to get out of the game I guess!!!

After reading Ian's post I now know I have no shot



Sorry, wasn't looking to step on your dream, just being brutally honest.

The reason that the powers that be don't get that the rake is too high is because 99% of them don't gamble. I they did they'd understand how hard it is to win at this game. Read some other bulletin boards some time for sh**s and grins where a horse player complains about the takeout and some idiot responds with 'if you just picked more winners the takeout wouldn't matter.'

And it wouldn't matter if you paid a 20% commission on all your stock trades if you only bought stocks that went up... ;)

[2low]

Research doesn't support this opinion-- at least not in horse racing. It's an organizational structure which is needed. And the experience to know the green lights (including value) and red lights of racing.

You comment are true for successful sport betting.

My guess is that relatively high IQ and PROPER organizational structure go hand-in-hand.

[Ian Meyers]

My guess is that relatively high IQ and PROPER organizational structure go hand-in-hand.


The old saying goes "guys that consistently make money betting horses could have made much more money doing something else."

Most of the guys I know that are successful either were traders at one time (like Cary Fotias) or have the IQ and decision-making skills to have been if they wanted to (like Ernie Dahlman).

[Robert Goren]

Unless you have an innate ability to pick winning horses, it is going to take a lot of hard work. I think the thing that gets overlooked by people who want to use a computer to pick horses is the horse itself. If you know what you are looking at when you look at a horse, you will save yourself a lot of money. Horses are not a deck of cards or a pair of dice. Most bettors (including me) would be a lot better off learning about judging show horses rather buying another computer program . I think there is so much money bet on what computers spit out today that the edge they use give their users is pretty much gone. Since almost nobody bets horses on how they look any more, that is where the real edge is.

[funnsss1]

The people these days making money at the track have inside information.With the blatent fixing by jockeys and betting companies its imposible to play a decent number of races per day in north america and show a decent profit.I have been handicapping since the 70s and was playing up to 100 races a day and making money but since 2005 have cut back to an average of 10 races a day and show a lose of about 2000 per year.Ive had days where ive had 7 winners from 10 bets and profitted about 2 percent because of the takeout and betting company skimming.At the alarming rate of handle decline I can see most tracks closing in 10 years.

[WPL]

A good friend of mine for many years has made a lot of 'effing' money playing blackjack. That's all he does. I wanted to learn how to do what he did and he was extremely generous with his time, both in study and practice and at the tables teaching me what he did. You can read about some of the methods in books, but the trial is by always by fire.
He can work for long hours at the tables. I found that I could not.
He bets with the balls of a bank robber when the conditions are right.
I don't have that knack at the tables. I found what my limit was.
It was a great education for me learning the level of talent, discipline and dedication required to make such a quantum jump from hobbyist to professional level play in blackjack.
I don't think playing the horses measurably profitable and consistent is all that different. There are some very important dissimilarities which I won't weigh in on.
Most people really do expect something for nothing in 'gambling' more often than not. Everybody has expectations - so what is 'appropriate' is different from one to the next. Just like how much bet size you are willing to make without choking is an individual thing.

B

[rubicon55]

Unless you have an innate ability to pick winning horses, it is going to take a lot of hard work. I think the thing that gets overlooked by people who want to use a computer to pick horses is the horse itself. If you know what you are looking at when you look at a horse, you will save yourself a lot of money. Horses are not a deck of cards or a pair of dice. Most bettors (including me) would be a lot better off learning about judging show horses rather buying another computer program . I think there is so much money bet on what computers spit out today that the edge they use give their users is pretty much gone. Since almost nobody bets horses on how they look any more, that is where the real edge is.

Agreed, Joe Takach is probably someone who looks at handicapping in similar way. IMO I like to look all the variables and rank them and weigh them in order of importance and not just the numbers. Number crunching and robots have their place and limits only as tools. I use tools like that which is a very crucial component to weeding out the non-contenders - saving us all tons of time. Physical appearance and attitude of a horse can speak volumes about what the horse is doing today and sometimes nothing at all. However, it is much better confirmation in my opinion than soley relying n what looks good on paper - especially when contenders appear equal on paper. I use my eyes to confirm what I already knew before the tote board lights up. I have saved lots of money on horses by not betting on ones who are acting up or not physically up for a game effort. Lastyl its too bad some tracks do not have a better video feed system for the paddock and post parades to help with this effort. The industry could do better with helping off track bettors in this way. Thanks Robert for the different take.

[raybo]

There are great posts in this thread! These are the kinds of threads that can really make the difference in whether a player gets satisfaction from his participation in the game, or not.

Many here know my story. I "joined" the game in 1978, after a co-worker introduced me to it. He offered some "experience gained" knowledge to me at the very beginning and that "pre" knowledge made all the difference for me.

First, he told me that this game will "chew you up and spit you out", if you let it.

Second, he told me that the game was, indeed, beatable.

Third, he told me that, if your goal is to beat the game, prepare yourself, and your skills, before you start. I took this to heart, playing only 1 or 2 race cards, with real money, for the first 20+ years.

I decided, early on, that I didn't want to waste my effort (which I already knew would have to be huge to succeed), without "knowing" that, at some point in the future, I could guarantee success.

Well, it took me 20+ years of study and hard work, to reach that point. Thank God for computers and data files and Excel!! I never would have made it without all 3 of them.

My short answer for the OP? One's realistic expectations, should correspond with the player's patience level, displine level, and consistency. There is a direct relationship, also, between success as a player and "inherent" intelligence. I'm not talking about racing knowledge, or formal education,etc..

Relate it to "street smarts", if you don't know how to "gamble", you can probably forget about ever being successful in this game. You have to know the proper wagering vehicle, for you, when, where, and how much to wager, and when to pass. And, when you pass, you must have the mental toughness to not regret it, ever, regardless of the outcome of that particular race. When you wager, and lose, you must be able to forget it and move on like it never happened, it was just another loss, among a high percentage of losses.

As Pittsburgh Phil once said, a smart bet is a smart bet, regardless of the outcome (or something to that affect).

I started with the goal of playing full time, making my living as a professional handicapper. Well, that pursuit lasted almost a year. I found out that, although I made a good profit during that time, it wasn't worth the stress I encountered, knowing I "had to win" to live. It takes a very special person to play, with playing as your only income source, for an extended period of time.

That year taught me some valuable lessons. The most important one is that the stress of "having to" will affect the way you "gamble", negatively, and will make you question what you already know is true. Second guessing, in this game, will kill you.

In short, if you're in it for the money, it almost has to be treated as a business, in every sense of the word. If you can't do that, then you probably should lower your expectations, for the sake of your mental and emotional health, among other things.

Those players who really enjoy this game are to be envied, regardless of their level of success or lack thereof! I, personally, enjoy the data manipulation involved, more than the playing. I could walk away from the playing and wagering, tomorrow, with no regrets, but the data manipulation is another story, I'm hooked for life!

[raybo]

The people these days making money at the track have inside information.With the blatent fixing by jockeys and betting companies its imposible to play a decent number of races per day in north america and show a decent profit.I have been handicapping since the 70s and was playing up to 100 races a day and making money but since 2005 have cut back to an average of 10 races a day and show a lose of about 2000 per year.Ive had days where ive had 7 winners from 10 bets and profitted about 2 percent because of the takeout and betting company skimming.At the alarming rate of handle decline I can see most tracks closing in 10 years.

If your method is directly tied to the tote odds, profiting is indeed extremely difficult, for the best of players.

Using a wagering platform that is tied to odds rankings and odds spread, rather than actual odds, makes the game much more beatable, regardless of the takeout.

[Black Ruby]

I'm enjoying this thread and the general tone of civility, which doesn't always appear on the board.

I'm a part time player, who'd like to be able to play more. As to my expectations, they are that increased play will help me to be better at recognizing when I'm at my best in reading and analyzing the data to determine how the race should unfold, and to improve my money management and discipline so that I more consistently save my prime bets for the times when I'm at my best.

[pondman]

Since almost nobody bets horses on how they look any more, that is where the real edge is.

On any given day at a competitive track a large number of horses are running injured or are not 100% fit. Learning to spot these injuries and avoiding those bets will save you money. It's also important to understand a number of concepts, such as when a trainer ships into a grass race, he or she is doing it because the race is easier on the horse than on the dirt. So you'll find awful looking horses winning turf races at a different venue. You either have to say, "I'll bet all of these during a season," or pass on this type of race completely. Because they'll burn you if you play some of the time.

Part of the mindset must focus on the intent of the owner and trainer. This is difficult for a brainmaker style decision. This is where you'll cash the big tickets-- when a trainer is sending the horse. A computer will never recognize this. Only through observations will you learn to spot this.

[superfecta]

If your method is directly tied to the tote odds, profiting is indeed extremely difficult, for the best of players.

Using a wagering platform that is tied to odds rankings and odds spread, rather than actual odds, makes the game much more beatable, regardless of the takeout.

Best answer ,but the takeouters don't get it.

[pondman]

Most of the guys I know that are successful either were traders at one time (like Cary Fotias) or have the IQ and decision-making skills to have been if they wanted to (like Ernie Dahlman).

And if they are honest they'll tell you they make or lose money on 2 or 3 big moves (depending on their position), which happen every 5 years. These are always the result of unpredictable events, such as a jet flying into the World Trade Center. They make their money tauting a product, not predicting a jet flying into a building.

They margins are so large on horse racing compared to other forms of gambling, that it's easy to find a dozen big play per season. This doesn't require a big brain or years at a University. In fact I'd say a University education may be a hamper and narrow critical thinking, creativity, and observational skills. It not hard to see a big play coming in horse racing if you look outside conventions.

[pandy]

As mentioned by several people on this thread, there's a lot of work involved. I know two professional harness bettors and both of them put in long hours watching video and keeping track of things like track bias, wind direction, etc. Neither one of them has a job and if they did they wouldn't have the time to do all of the work.

Both of them bet exotics mostly and they rarely bet favorites. They watch the board and bet overlays and longshots in exotics.

[lansdale]

And if they are honest they'll tell you they make or lose money on 2 or 3 big moves (depending on their position), which happen every 5 years. These are always the result of unpredictable events, such as a jet flying into the World Trade Center. They make their money tauting a product, not predicting a jet flying into a building.

They margins are so large on horse racing compared to other forms of gambling, that it's easy to find a dozen big play per season. This doesn't require a big brain or years at a University. In fact I'd say a University education may be a hamper and narrow critical thinking, creativity, and observational skills. It not hard to see a big play coming in horse racing if you look outside conventions.

Hi pondman,

This absolutely true both of the 'Street' and handicapping - most of your profits are going to come from a few big moves every year. You seem to have a grudge against math guys, but you probably have heard of Dick Mitchell, - he taught math at L.A. City College - whose research confirmed this notion. Most of one's handicapping profit comes from a few big races. This contradicts the very common idea that one can 'grind out' a profit. More importantly, it points up the big difference between working for a living, in which money is made gradually, and investing or handicapping, where profit is much more volatile.

You seem hung up on the idea that handicapping is a unique skill, almost an idiot savant ability, that isn't correlated with general intelligence. You talk about experience, but handicappers with decades of unprofitable 'experience' are the norm in this game. Anyone who can turn their experience into profitable play is the exception. What do you think explains the difference?

Cheers,

lansdale

[Dave Schwartz]

This contradicts the very common idea that one can 'grind out' a profit.

I suggest to you that this is precisely possible. In fact, it is my own personal approach to the game.

I find that every 400-500 races my "profit catches up with me."

I have never been an advocate of Kelly. Before. Now that I find I am able to make a really strong line on a race I can bet according to my advantage and probability of hitting. This has completely changed my play.

However, I must admit that inevitably, it boils down to the larger bets driving the profit. The higher the bet, the higher the expected return. The smaller wagers produce less profit as should be the case.

I guess one could say that I agree with you in the sense that it IS the large hits - but large is a relative term. Not "large" as in 8 wins per year are all it takes. More like a handful of good hits each day.


I recall a good friend of mine from many years ago, Ron Cox. One time we were having dinner together (me, Ron, Greg Lawlor and someone else, whose name escapes me at the moment).

Ron had just completed 5 consecutive winning years where he had declared $200k or more on his income tax from gambling. (Greg had advised him years before to do this; to make himself "legitimate." It allowed him to purchase a house with a conventional mortgage.)

Anyway, Ron said that at the end of every year he could trace the profit back to 8 big days. I said this would make me crazy. It would be like making your living selling Christmas trees but not knowing what month Christmas was in this year.

To each his own approach. I assure you that there are grind it out players who are successful at the races in a big way. I know several personally.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[pandy]

I never met a successful "grinder", although I read about people who claim to do it on this board. Every player I've ever met or known that has a long term profit gets it from a several scores a year.

[Dave Schwartz]

Whales certainly grind.

<G>

[pandy]

I guess with the rebates that's true. Before rebates it was rare.

[Dave Schwartz]

And yet, it should not be any more difficult to win without rebates. Whales figure the rebates into their return/line. Thus, it is simply a matter of making "profitable" wagers (including whatever rebate you do or don't get).

Of course, when I say, "Not more difficult" I am referring to the individual race. In other words, a player receiving a large rebate should find more playable races, and slightly greater profitability in those races, but the concept should work the same: Only play the "positive expectation" races.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[raybo]

I would think that "grinding" out a small profit daily, weekly, or even monthly would be extremely difficult, whales excepted.

I imagine, those who are not whales and say they "grind" out a profit, probably are doing what Dave said, waiting for the profit to catch up to them every few months, so most of the time, they aren't making a profit consistently on a short term basis.

I know from my point of view, I stay in the game with small hits, but almost all my profit comes from several large hits during the year. But, then, that's the way my method is designed to work.

[Dave Schwartz]

I imagine, those who are not whales and say they "grind" out a profit, probably are doing what Dave said, waiting for the profit to catch up to them every few months

Change that to every thousand bets and you can see that consistency becomes a matter of volume.

At 100 bets per day, that's about 2 weeks. At 100 RACES per day, with 2-3 horses per race and it is about 500 races.

I mean, really... if your system does not show a profit in most groups of 1,000 bets, then PROBABLY you system is either not really profitable or dependent upon a great many longshots.

[thaskalos]

It all depends on the types of wagers a player makes...and how immersed he is in the game.

If the player is a win bettor, then grinding can't be avoided.

I would say that the majority of the winning players are NOT "home run" hitters.

Unless a player is a specialist in the carryover pools...I don't see how he can say that his profits come from only a few big hits a year. Unless he plays the game on an infrequent basis...

And I doubt that any consistent winners are only occasional players.

As far as winning every month is concerned, it depends on the volume of a player's bets.

I consider myself a superfecta grinder.

I wager on 150 races a week...and I seldom have a losing month.

But my wagers are highly leveraged...and my ROI is much lower than some I have seen advertised on this board.

[raybo]

Change that to every thousand bets and you can see that consistency becomes a matter of volume.

At 100 bets per day, that's about 2 weeks. At 100 RACES per day, with 2-3 horses per race and it is about 500 races.

I mean, really... if your system does not show a profit in most groups of 1,000 bets, then PROBABLY you system is either not really profitable or dependent upon a great many longshots.

Are you talking in generalities, or does "your system" refer to mine? I don't play 1000 races per year, much less in 2 or 3 weeks. As a matter of fact, if I had to do that I wouldn't bother. I'd just go ahead and blow my head off and get it over.

[Dave Schwartz]

Raybo,

By "system" I meant your approach to the game.

When in full swing, 1,000 races is about 2.5 weeks for me. Those 1,000 races will produce almost 3,000 individual win bets. I should be profitable over that many bets if my "system" has a positive expectancy.

If you "don't play 1000 races per year, much less in 2 or 3 weeks..." then you have made my point. I believe Dick Mitchell once said that it takes about 30,000 wagers to truly prove whether your system works. If that is accurate then it is safe to say that you could logically never know if your system works because racing will change before you get enough races to prove it.

Of course, that doesn't mean you have to give the money back. :)

[raybo]

Raybo,

By "system" I meant your approach to the game.

When in full swing, 1,000 races is about 2.5 weeks for me. Those 1,000 races will produce almost 3,000 individual win bets. I should be profitable over that many bets if my "system" has a positive expectancy.

If you "don't play 1000 races per year, much less in 2 or 3 weeks..." then you have made my point. I believe Dick Mitchell once said that it takes about 30,000 wagers to truly prove whether your system works. If that is accurate then it is safe to say that you could logically never know if your system works because racing will change before you get enough races to prove it.

Of course, that doesn't mean you have to give the money back. :)

I agree, that most players might show profitability for short periods of time but, as you said, they really don't know if their "system" is long term viable or not.

Personally, if I make a profit every year I play, that's enough proof for me. I'm not trying to make a living from playing the races, so the amount of net profit is not a great concern to me. I just don't want to be a long term loser. To me, that's like throwing your money away, unless you are treating racing as a form of entertainment, only. It's not entertainment for me, it's a part time job, a small sideline business/investment vehicle.

I love horses but do not like wagering. However, I do like the challenge it presents and I absolutely love "messing" with the data.

[pondman]

Raybo,

When in full swing, 1,000 races is about 2.5 weeks for me. Those 1,000 races will produce almost 3,000 individual win bets. I should be profitable over that many bets if my "system" has a positive expectancy. :)

If the thread was entitled "Can you expect to make money at the track":

I've cash 42 tickets this year for at least $3,000 (all win bets.) The highest was for 16k. But I know horse racing and know when to throw out a couple hundred.

If the thread was entitled "How to bet every race run in America:

You might have a point.

[Dave Schwartz]

Such is my style, although it is not "every race." Pretty close, though.

There is almost always a way to find at least one profitable wager in each race.

[thaskalos]

Some players have a very solid grip on this game, and can make their desired profit by betting fewer races.

The rest of us have to work much harder than that...