Need explanation of some kind.

[Handiman]

Hi Guys. While I have been at this game on and off for 25 years now, I still get extremely crazy when I don't understand things. I am at that point right now. As many of you know I'm running a handicapping contest here on PA.

And before that I have been posting picks live for a few weeks now. Just about 3 or 4 weeks ago a program I have been working on for quite some time was allowing me to pick 5 and 6 winners a night at different tracks. I knew those numbers couldn't continue. But even when winners tapered off I was hitting the board with one horse a lot!

I am playing in the contest too. We played Churchill Downs today and out of 12 races I was lucky to hit just 2 2nds and they were small prices. That was it. I would have done better throwing darts at the form.

Can anyone explain what the hell is going on? How could the roof cave in and the floor fall out from under me so drastically? I really don't understand. If I would have just taken the 8 in every race today I would have made a killing. I know that is ridiculous on face value, but still so frustrating I can barely stand it.

Any input would be appreciated.

Thanks
Handi:)

[Overlay]

How long are we talking about? (You mention just today at CD, which might not represent a more typical day of racing.)

Was it a question of a change in the type of pace profile that started winning the races? Has there been a detectable track bias of any kind?

Do you make a full-field betting line for each race? If so, how have the odds of the unexpected winners compared with your line? Might focusing on betting value (regardless of odds), rather than winning probability alone, be relevant here? If you do make an odds line and quantify/compartmentalize the factors that go into it, what factor(s) appear(s) to be accounting for the recent disparity in performance, compared to your previous experience?

[Handiman]

Over,,,, I bought some of your stuff some time ago. I have not really done a great deal of record keeping to be honest. It's mostly a state of shock I am in right now. I have written so many programs that approach the races in so many different ways.

When I bet live, I'm a value guy. I have several ways to create an odds line. But this contest is more about hitting the board consistently than searching out Value plays where a bet might include more than one horse. I have written a program called Bet magic which is for use with one horse across the board. I have also written a program I call The Dutchman which allows you to dutch up to 4 horses and gives you a bankroll growth expectation or if neg expectation it doesn't let you bet.

I guess I'm just really frustrated with my results today. I've never been clipping along like I have recently and then go down the tubes like this in one day.

Handi:)

[Overlay]

When I bet live, I'm a value guy. I have several ways to create an odds line. But this contest is more about hitting the board consistently than searching out Value plays where a bet might include more than one horse....I guess I'm just really frustrated with my results today. I've never been clipping along like I have recently and then go down the tubes like this in one day.
I could only come back to the small sample size, and the atypical nature of the fields. (How did this compare for you to other Breeders' Cup days, with horses, trainers, and riders coming in from many different tracks/countries, and the variety of races offered?)

Also, (as I said, and as I'm sure you know) besides revealing value, a compartmentalized, ranked, full-field betting line can provide insight into what element(s) in the record of any particular horse in the field did not have the impact on its overall performance that was expected or anticipated, so that it ran more poorly than projected (regardless of considerations of odds or value).

(P.S. I wasn't plugging my stuff, but thanks for the mention of your patronage! :) )

[thaskalos]

Handiman,

No matter what our methodology is, or how "expert" we consider ourselves to be, we are all guaranteed to have some disastrous days...which leave us shaking our heads in disbelief.

And these days are most likely to show up right after a winning streak...when our confidence is high and our guard is lower than it should be.

This happens to all the players...but the better ones don't let it affect their play in the future.

[098poi]

Here are the winning prices yesterday at CD

4.00
6.60
85.20
25.20
17.80
6.60
15.60
15.60
16.20
131.60
31.60
10.60

Hardly a typical day

I didn't bet but my only regret is hearing a replay of At the Races and hearing Steve Crist say his only real focus today was Caleb's Posse. As that race approached I was going to fund my account and throw at least a show wager on but I passed. Oh well.

[raybo]

One bad day, or even a series of bad days, is not something to worry about, as long as your method is sound.

Unless your method is highly flexible and adaptive, regarding tracks, surfaces, class of animals, etc., there will be some cards that your, or anyone else's, handicapping method just won't perform.

[jasperson]

Breeders cup days are the best gambling days,but the worst betting days. I went friday and bet the other tracks and made money. Saturday I stayed home and watched. The best gambling days are Breeders cup and Kentucky derby days. You just ran into the normal bc day.

[Casino]

Here are the winning prices yesterday at CD

4.00
6.60
85.20
25.20
17.80
6.60
15.60
15.60
16.20
131.60
31.60
10.60

Hardly a typical day

I didn't bet but my only regret is hearing a replay of At the Races and hearing Steve Crist say his only real focus today was Caleb's Posse. As that race approached I was going to fund my account and throw at least a show wager on but I passed. Oh well.

BTW in his blog he killed the early pick 4 several times it paid over 7,000

[speed]

If one is a longshot player several days or longer without cashing is not uncommon. You already know this. I wonder if anything else has been on your mind or nerves to get this reaction out of you. I doubt you are betting with scared money,so likely that is not it. Relax, possibly take some time away from gambling. Getting this upset will not help you're bottom line with gambling.

Regards,
Speed

[Robert Fischer]

Hi Guys. While I have been at this game on and off for 25 years now, I still get extremely crazy when I don't understand things. I am at that point right now. As many of you know I'm running a handicapping contest here on PA.

And before that I have been posting picks live for a few weeks now. Just about 3 or 4 weeks ago a program I have been working on for quite some time was allowing me to pick 5 and 6 winners a night at different tracks. I knew those numbers couldn't continue. But even when winners tapered off I was hitting the board with one horse a lot!

I am playing in the contest too. We played Churchill Downs today and out of 12 races I was lucky to hit just 2 2nds and they were small prices. That was it. I would have done better throwing darts at the form.

Can anyone explain what the hell is going on? How could the roof cave in and the floor fall out from under me so drastically? I really don't understand. If I would have just taken the 8 in every race today I would have made a killing. I know that is ridiculous on face value, but still so frustrating I can barely stand it.

Any input would be appreciated.

Thanks
Handi:)

personally, made money Friday and lost half of Friday's winnings back on Saturday.

From reading your post, and thinking of contest plays, I can imagine you are puzzled at some of the high percentage plays that didn't materialize.

IMO there were 3 or 4 really good conservative long-term-profit plays on Saturday, that for whatever reason didn't come out. The Turf was the one race that I noticed that was very true to form, with 4 of the Euros figuring to take down a high percentage of the top two placings. Mama did say that there'd be days like this...

Debatable that there were some "gambling" plays that I chose not to invest in that payed well.

[dkithore]

Handi, You are not alone. Trust me. Imo It is the random phenomena at it's best. No explanation will be sufficient for what happened. Yes, some will argue about track bias, quality of race horses this year etc.

It would be a mistake to doubt the tools that works well for you most of the time. For me it is a losing streak. It hurts my ego but then I think of randomness of our sport and wait for the tide to turn.

It is refreshing to see someone so honest as you sharing his stuff. Thanks Handi for being here.

Dk

[Handiman]

Thanks guys. I spoke to a Dr. friend of mine today. I have a very bad heart which is literally driven by an ICD machine in my chest. Last physical it was found that my heart is getting worse and not even responding to the beat directions of the machine all of the time. I go back again in Dec for further evaluation.

I only bring this up, because my buddy told me to just settle down and realize that anytime your heart is physically affected, your emotions and even thought processes are directly affected. So my reaction, while honest and raw, was and is to be expected I guess. They don't know why the physical heart is so connected to the emotional heart, but apparently it is although that may sound counter intuitive.

On top of that, add in my type A personality, which causes me a great deal of consternation when I don't do well at something and I can come unglued a bit easily I guess.

The next week will tell a tale. I just hope to be back in normal mode and not huddled in the corner hugging my teddy bear and sobbing like a little girl. :lol: Well it's not that bad, but in my head damn near.

Thanks for listening guys. I really appreciate it.

Handi:)

[Jeff P]

I wouldn't sweat it Handi... In my opinion, BC day is a unique animal - something vastly different than what all of us encounter on a typical Saturday.

Historically for the Breeders Cup - contention runs deep in most of the races. Large fields of closely matched horses are the order of the day. (Frankly, I wish every day were BC day.)

The public pours tons of (uninformed) money into the pools - creating a special situation that doesn't exist on normal days. In my opinion (I have the data to back this up) the odds have historically failed to reflect just how closely matched the horses actually are.

If you are going to evaluate your performance over this past weekend's BC day cards - do so against BC days from prior years.

IMHO, evaluating BC performance vs. expectations for a typical Saturday would be a mistake.


-jp

.

[vegasone]

If you had the ability to study about 10 years of data, you would see that any one system varies wildly from year to year and month to month and week to week sometimes.

This is what makes it such a hard game. You can get nothing but winners for a short streak and then not able to hit more than a few for another streak.

Getting nothing but winners over a couple weeks is just the way it works sometimes.. Track conditions, race conditions whatever. To know that a system works needs a huge amount of testing, which means thousands of races.

[Handiman]

Sorry for being such a drama queen. We are playing Aqueduct as the contest track today. In the 6th I hit a $23 horse and just now in the 8th I hit a $15.80 horse. So maybe back to normal.

Handi:)

[castaway01]

Thanks guys. I spoke to a Dr. friend of mine today. I have a very bad heart which is literally driven by an ICD machine in my chest. Last physical it was found that my heart is getting worse and not even responding to the beat directions of the machine all of the time. I go back again in Dec for further evaluation.

I only bring this up, because my buddy told me to just settle down and realize that anytime your heart is physically affected, your emotions and even thought processes are directly affected. So my reaction, while honest and raw, was and is to be expected I guess. They don't know why the physical heart is so connected to the emotional heart, but apparently it is although that may sound counter intuitive.

On top of that, add in my type A personality, which causes me a great deal of consternation when I don't do well at something and I can come unglued a bit easily I guess.

The next week will tell a tale. I just hope to be back in normal mode and not huddled in the corner hugging my teddy bear and sobbing like a little girl. :lol: Well it's not that bad, but in my head damn near.

Thanks for listening guys. I really appreciate it.

Handi:)

I was impressed by "Pegasus"...you were really on a roll there for a while. Maybe this is just regression to the mean, because you couldn't keep winning like you were? No offense, but some record keeping would probably tell you if overall you've been losing badly, or the recent downturn means you're just breaking even now.

Best of luck with your heart problems. In all seriousness, if racing is causing the stress, then to hell with it---much better to be alive in life than dead in the double. :)

[BIG49010]

CD and KEE can be very different tracks to play, you have so called "Good O'le boys" who train all year at either location and on big days there horses run out the TV set.

[Handiman]

I was impressed by "Pegasus"...you were really on a roll there for a while. Maybe this is just regression to the mean, because you couldn't keep winning like you were? No offense, but some record keeping would probably tell you if overall you've been losing badly, or the recent downturn means you're just breaking even now.

Best of luck with your heart problems. In all seriousness, if racing is causing the stress, then to hell with it---much better to be alive in life than dead in the double. :)

I have a wife and two 30 something daughters and a bad heart. Believe me when I say that stress from Horseracing is a walk in the park compared to what those three crazies can cause me. :lol: It's just a matter of my competitiveness and pride in what I'm doing that seems to drive me really crazy. Yesterday I finished last among the contest players, and then today at Aqueduct, I finished at the top of the pack.

And no offense taken. One of my weakness' is record keeping. That is for sure. Thanks for the advice though.

Handi:)

[ranchwest]

Some things to consider:

1) Typical race days are carded by the Racing Secretary. Breeders Cup races are carded based on BC rules. That's different, plus the RS carded days can differ drastically. So...

2) Systems should be evaluated in blocks of thousands of races in the pool of races from which you select playable races. A single day is a highly variable "animal".

3) Many horses run in races as a prep. BC is not a prep, it is what the horses prepped to run in. So, the effort in BC can be different. Study the track condition book and evaluate the class level to spot the prep races. Then, evaluate form cycle.

4) Systems often don't differentiate adequately among class levels. Your picks in a 5k claimer shouldn't have the same criteria as a G1 race.

5) The short-term is frequently filled with luck -- good and bad.

I suppose we could go on with this endlessly, but these are a few of the thoughts that come to mind.

[2low]

I'm a poker player and have been at least casually following horse racing for several years. One parallel I've noticed is that the vast, vast, vast majority of people who play do not understand how very torturously long the "long term" truly is, and how both losing and winning at a rate much higher than expectation can occupy unbelievably long, grueling sample sizes.

I don't even watch races most of the time. Each race, card, day, week, is meaningless, and results rely so, so much on luck. Your favorite in a race is what, 3/1? 25%? I've personally never ever placed a bet expecting anything other than a loss. A series of bets in a day is hardly different. The goal is to manage that luck over the extremely long grind to make a profit at long-term expectation.

I see all the time people claiming to not be a grinder, that they just have a method, or experience, or whatever, that allows them to profit over relatively few wagers. Nice to live on that side of the big wheel while it lasts.

Not saying I don't believe you get it, Handi - I'm sure you do. Just my thoughts in general. The game drives me crazy too:lol:

[raybo]

I'm a poker player and have been at least casually following horse racing for several years. One parallel I've noticed is that the vast, vast, vast majority of people who play do not understand how very torturously long the "long term" truly is, and how both losing and winning at a rate much higher than expectation can occupy unbelievably long, grueling sample sizes.

I don't even watch races most of the time. Each race, card, day, week, is meaningless, and results rely so, so much on luck. Your favorite in a race is what, 3/1? 25%? I've personally never ever placed a bet expecting anything other than a loss. A series of bets in a day is hardly different. The goal is to manage that luck over the extremely long grind to make a profit at long-term expectation.

I see all the time people claiming to not be a grinder, that they just have a method, or experience, or whatever, that allows them to profit over relatively few wagers. Nice to live on that side of the big wheel while it lasts.

Not saying I don't believe you get it, Handi - I'm sure you do. Just my thoughts in general. The game drives me crazy too:lol:

I agree with most of what you said. Most of the results, in the short term are cyclical. The long term, and for me that's a yearly evaluation, is determined by what kind of wagers you make, and how much "room" they provide you for substantial individual event profit. If you don't have much of that "room" in a majority of your wagers, then you are, in my meaning of the word, a "grinder".

On the other hand, when the majority of your wagers afford substantial "room" for big individual profits, you are no longer a grinder. My meaning of a "grinder" may be different than yours, so take it for what it's worth.

[Overlay]

I've personally never ever placed a bet expecting anything other than a loss.
There's nothing wrong with that frame of mind (since losing wagers generally outnumber winning ones), but you should at least assure that the horses that you do bet have a greater chance of winning than the public (and the odds that the public establishes) gives those horses credit for. (That same value judgment would apply to poker also, wouldn't it, as regards comparing potential return against the probability of getting a particular hand?)

[2low]

That's the correct frame of mind to have, but you should at least assure that the horses that you do bet have a greater chance of winning than the public (and the odds that the public establishes) gives those horses credit for. (That same value judgment would apply to poker also, wouldn't it, as regards comparing potential return against the probability of getting a particular hand?)

Yes, value works the same in poker as in horse racing.

[thaskalos]

Yes, value works the same in poker as in horse racing.

No...IMO it does not.

In other gambling games (poker included) value is fairly easy to determine.

In poker, when the expert player calculates that he has a 33% chance of making his hand and winning the pot, and that pot offers a 4-1 return on his money...he makes the call instantly -- and knows in his heart that he has made the right call...win or lose.

If the expert sports bettor has identified the Chicago Bears as 3 point underdogs in tonight's game, he proceeds to make his wager with confidence...knowing that he has "the best of it"...no matter what the outcome of tonight's game will be.

The expert horseplayer, however, has to deal with something which changes the rules...as far as determining value is concerned.

And this "something" is the inside information which is available to "some"...but not to all.

When our projected 9-5 obvious top choice is "ice on the board" at 6-1 odds, while a nondescript recent claim, who should rightly be 7-1, is bet down to 5-2 favoritism...do we run to the window to place our bets on our obvious "overlay"...or do we get stumped by paranoia and indecision?

Are we confident that we have the "best of it" in this wager...or do we think that we are made to look like fools, by those "in the know"?

In our game, there is a very fine line between "overlay", and "ice on the board"...and our determination of the perceived "value" in a race better take this into consideration.

[2low]

No...IMO it does not.

In other gambling games (poker included) value is fairly easy to determine.

In poker, when the expert player calculates that he has a 33% chance of making his hand and winning the pot, and that pot offers a 4-1 return on his money...he makes the call instantly -- and knows in his heart that he has made the right call...win or lose.

If the expert sports bettor has identified the Chicago Bears as 3 point underdogs in tonight's game, he proceeds to make his wager with confidence...knowing that he has "the best of it"...no matter what the outcome of tonight's game will be.

The expert horseplayer, however, has to deal with something which changes the rules...as far as determining value is concerned.

And this "something" is the inside information which is available to "some"...but not to all.

When our projected 9-5 obvious top choice is "ice on the board" at 6-1 odds, while a nondescript recent claim, who should rightly be 7-1, is bet down to 5-2 favoritism...do we run to the window to place our bets on our obvious "overlay"...or do we get stumped by paranoia and indecision?

Are we confident that we have the "best of it" in this wager...or do we think that we are made to look like fools, by those "in the know"?

In our game, there is a very fine line between "overlay", and "ice on the board"...and our determination of the perceived "value" in a race better take this into consideration.

I respectfully disagree. The unknown is the unknown, no matter what game you're playing. It needs to be included in the math. You rarely have perfect information in poker, and probably never in sports betting. The unknown simply becomes a variable in the calculation (though determining the value of the variable may not be simple).

[thaskalos]

I respectfully disagree. The unknown is the unknown, no matter what game you're playing. It needs to be included in the math. You rarely have perfect information in poker, and probably never in sports betting. The unknown simply becomes a variable in the calculation (though determining the value of the variable may not be simple).
Yes...there are "unknowns" in every game.

And we don't have "perfect information"; after all...that's what makes these gambling games so tough to beat.

As a poker player...would you mind telling me what information - which is unknown to you - is known to other players...and can be used against you?

[2low]

Yes...there are "unknowns" in every game.

And we don't have "perfect information"; after all...that's what makes these gambling games so tough to beat.

As a poker player...would you mind telling me what information - which is unknown to you - is known to other players...and can be used against you?

In any one hand, it could be anything - physical tell, maybe they picked up on my tendencies, familiarity with each other that I don't have, on and on. But this isn't really my point. What I'm saying is that it doesn't matter what I don't know, only that I accept that there are possibly unknowns, and that I adjust for them properly over time - not necessarily today in this current race.

AND - by the way, I'm not trying to claim I've figured horse racing out or that I'm the best poker player of all time:lol:. I just have my theories based off of what I've learned from playing, and they make sense to me. I reserve the right to be proven wrong.

[Robert Fischer]

interesting debate going on here fellows :ThmbUp:

[thaskalos]

In any one hand, it could be anything - physical tell, maybe they picked up on my tendencies, familiarity with each other that I don't have, on and on. But this isn't really my point. What I'm saying is that it doesn't matter what I don't know, only that I accept that there are possibly unknowns, and that I adjust for them properly over time - not necessarily today in this current race.

AND - by the way, I'm not trying to claim I've figured horse racing out or that I'm the best poker player of all time:lol:. I just have my theories based off of what I've learned from playing, and they make sense to me. I reserve the right to be proven wrong.
No one has really figured this game out...although some have made claims to that effect. :)

All I am trying to say is that, in this game, the most obvious examples of "value" are really nothing of the sort...

Whereas the vast majority of us just look at past performance lines which represent events of weeks (or months) ago...some players are privy to vital information about the horses that we are completely in the dark about.

And it's very difficult - if not impossible - to make adjustments for these occurrences...for today's race or over time.

IMO...horse racing cannot be compared with other gambling games of incomplete information; it deserves a category all its own. :)

[Overlay]

No one has really figured this game out...although some have made claims to that effect. :)

All I am trying to say is that, in this game, the most obvious examples of "value" are really nothing of the sort...

Whereas the vast majority of us just look at past performance lines which represent events of weeks (or months) ago...some players are privy to vital information about the horses that we are completely in the dark about.

And it's very difficult - if not impossible - to make adjustments for these occurrences...for today's race or over time.

IMO...horse racing cannot be compared with other gambling games of incomplete information; it deserves a category all its own. :)

I don't disagree with you about the existence of information in every race that any individual player will not and cannot know. Predicting a horse's probability of winning will never be on the same order as knowing the chances that a particular number will appear when rolling a pair of dice. However, at the same time, I believe that it is possible to develop an estimation of winning probability (based on performance patterns and other available, known information) that is accurate enough to produce consistent long-term profitability in bet selection and sizing.

If I thought that the outcomes of races were predictable and explainable only in terms of information that the player could never know, I'd give up the pursuit of handicapping today. But the consistency and repetitiveness of historical performance data says otherwise to me.

[Marlin]

I wouldn't sweat it Handi... In my opinion, BC day is a unique animal - something vastly different than what all of us encounter on a typical Saturday.

Historically for the Breeders Cup - contention runs deep in most of the races. Large fields of closely matched horses are the order of the day. (Frankly, I wish every day were BC day.)

The public pours tons of (uninformed) money into the pools - creating a special situation that doesn't exist on normal days. In my opinion (I have the data to back this up) the odds have historically failed to reflect just how closely matched the horses actually are.

If you are going to evaluate your performance over this past weekend's BC day cards - do so against BC days from prior years.

IMHO, evaluating BC performance vs. expectations for a typical Saturday would be a mistake.


-jp

.I couldn't agree more. Take Court Vision for example. Is he your average Saturday 64-1? I don't think so. Your average Saturday 64-1 is usually seriously overmatched on paper. Court Vision was an outsider but a combined improvement of him or opponents regression equaling 4 lengths or so puts him right there. Your typical Saturday 64-1 probably has to overcome 15 lengths. Not impossible any Saturday but much more likely on BC day.

[thaskalos]

I don't disagree with you about the existence of information in every race that any individual player will not and cannot know. Predicting a horse's probability of winning will never be on the same order as knowing the chances that a particular number will appear when rolling a pair of dice. However, at the same time, I believe that it is possible to develop an estimation of winning probability (based on performance patterns and other available, known information) that is accurate enough to produce consistent long-term profitability in bet selection and sizing.

If I thought that the outcomes of races were predictable and explainable only in terms of information that the player could never know, I'd give up the pursuit of handicapping today. But the consistency and repetitiveness of historical performance data says otherwise to me.
I agree with your entire post here, and I never said that long-term profits were not possible in this game...inside info notwithstanding.

I was just pointing out that, IMO, the assessment of "value" in this game is a more complicated process, and it demands more experience than is required in other gambling games...like poker and sports betting.

This, again in my opinion, is the main reason why there are many more professional poker players and professional sports bettors in this country, than there are professional horse players.

[Valuist]

Hi Guys. While I have been at this game on and off for 25 years now, I still get extremely crazy when I don't understand things. I am at that point right now. As many of you know I'm running a handicapping contest here on PA.

And before that I have been posting picks live for a few weeks now. Just about 3 or 4 weeks ago a program I have been working on for quite some time was allowing me to pick 5 and 6 winners a night at different tracks. I knew those numbers couldn't continue. But even when winners tapered off I was hitting the board with one horse a lot!

I am playing in the contest too. We played Churchill Downs today and out of 12 races I was lucky to hit just 2 2nds and they were small prices. That was it. I would have done better throwing darts at the form.

Can anyone explain what the hell is going on? How could the roof cave in and the floor fall out from under me so drastically? I really don't understand. If I would have just taken the 8 in every race today I would have made a killing. I know that is ridiculous on face value, but still so frustrating I can barely stand it.

Any input would be appreciated.

Thanks
Handi:)

The fall meet at CD has become very tricky when Keeneland, Arlington and Turfway switched to synthetic surfaces. You will see plenty of races where horses only have had prior races on Poly, or their last 6 or 7 races are on synthetic, making it more difficult to gauge their true dirt form.

[pondman]

I am playing in the contest too. We played Churchill Downs today and out of 12 races I was lucky to hit just 2 2nds and they were small prices. :)

Betting every race?

IMO there are 2 or 3 good bets a day, the ones which prove themselves overtime. These are profitable, but not without losses. The rest of the races are pushes and losers.

[pondman]

I believe that it is possible to develop an estimation of winning probability (based on performance patterns and other available, known information) that is accurate enough to produce consistent long-term profitability in bet selection and sizing.

IMO...it's important for the serious player to understand and quantify the more common occurences. For example how does the average player quantify layoffs, works, turf runners, maidens runners, and shippers? All of these make the average player hesitate. But what does the data say about the positives or negatives of these? How many players can answer this? Not very many. Very few players understand the business side of things and whether a horse is well managed or not. If you have the data on these occurences and the experience to play these, while the average player hesitates you'll be able to hit a home run. But IMO the highest confidence level you'll find is in the area of 45%. Therefore, you'll have losses-- at times more losses than wins. However horse racing, because of mutual odds, could be an easier lifestyle than playing poker or sports.