Punters, Where is your handicapping effort going?

[Capper Al]

Assuming you just got bit with the racing bug and have already read your first book like Handicapping 101 by Brad Free, on what should fine tune your beginning methods?

[passrace]

Form is where to look at.

[Capper Al]

The answer is, without a doubt, elimination rules followed by or with Form. Form and elimination rules are very close to one another. Class, Speed, and Pace can be bought or found in racing forms. Many software vendors here at PA can give you all the Class, Speed, and Pace info you'll ever need. Without figuring elimination rules and form, you'll never make it. The next thing after Elimination rules and Form is neither Class, Speed, or Pace. It's wagering. The lure of C/S/P is undeniable strong. Just think of C/S/P as the Sirens from Homer's Odyssey. You'll crash on the stones if you don't set priorities right.

[Capper Al]

Form is where to look at.

Agree since this should lead into elimination rules.

[bob60566]

Al

I like trainer intent in the last four running lines

Max:) :) :) :)

[thaskalos]

Being mainly a vertical exotics bettor, elimination rules are of little use to me.

The vast majority of my time is spent estimating the current abilities of the horses in a race...so I can rate them accurately enough to properly structure my wagers.

As far as form, class, speed and pace are concerned...I don't think that the player can afford to discriminate.

All these handicapping factors play a role...and they all need to be considered, if we are to do the job right.

[Overlay]

I don't dispute the usefulness of elimination rules for a beginning player. (I started out that way, too.) But I think that, as a player acquires experience and skill, there is more to be gained from a profitability standpoint by considering the comparative merits of each horse in a race, especially in relation to the horse's odds. The horses that get tossed out in a checklist, elimination approach are the ones that will end up jumping up and winning at long odds, while the survivors of the elimination process will win more frequently, but may not pay enough when they do win to make up for the losses from the times when they don't.

[raybo]

The answer is, without a doubt, elimination rules followed by or with Form. Form and elimination rules are very close to one another. Class, Speed, and Pace can be bought or found in racing forms. Many software vendors here at PA can give you all the Class, Speed, and Pace info you'll ever need. Without figuring elimination rules and form, you'll never make it. The next thing after Elimination rules and Form is neither Class, Speed, or Pace. It's wagering. The lure of C/S/P is undeniable strong. Just think of C/S/P as the Sirens from Homer's Odyssey. You'll crash on the stones if you don't set priorities right.

Wouldn't "form" depend on what type of form analysis you use, ie physicality vs pace/speed/days off etc.?

[raybo]

To further explain what I mean, if you are a "physicality" form handicapper, then you would, necessarily, need to start with form first, followed by elimination, then the other factors.

If you are a "numbers" form handicapper, then you would, necessarily, need to start with the number factors (pace/speed etc., etc.) in order to determine form.

At any rate, the final result, in my opinion, must have form at the top, followed by eliminations, followed by pace/speed etc., to separate the non-eliminations.

[bob60566]

I read this idea from one of Mark Cramers books and stuck in my head.

Why are the past performance running lines not posted as horse best races to worst instead of recent to last.

Mac:confused:

[pondman]

Al

I like trainer intent in the last four running lines

Max:) :) :) :)

This is the key. Understanding the management of a horse helps. You've got to understand if the horse is running into shape, being sent for a win, or needs a rest.

[lamboguy]

i like to watch workouts

[raybo]

I read this idea from one of Mark Cramers books and stuck in my head.

Why are the past performance running lines not posted as horse best races to worst instead of recent to last.

Mac:confused:

Primarily, I would think they are from most recent to less recent to aid in form analysis. A horse's best race may have been 2 years ago.

[jasperson]

Al, I look at speed first. I can't bet a horse that doesn't show that he has enought speed to win the race.

[raybo]

i like to watch workouts

Workouts, IMO, fall under both form and trainer intent.

[Overlay]

This is the key. Understanding the management of a horse helps. You've got to understand if the horse is running into shape, being sent for a win, or needs a rest.
I agree with asking Steve Davidowitz's famous question, "What is he doing in today's race?" with regard to line-by-line analysis of the past performances to determine the purpose for which a horse has been entered, coupled with judgments as to the horse's current capabilities (regardless of the hopes or plans of its connections), and also whether the horse is worth a bet in light of its odds.

However, I don't subscribe to the need to go beyond that information by whatever means (tote patterns, "inside information", etc.) to determine whether a horse that otherwise appears fit and ready will be or (purposely) won't be "trying" today, or to uncover whether a horse that appears (based on its record) not to be worth a bet today has been prepared by those "in the know" to pull off a "betting coup".

[thaskalos]

Primarily, I would think they are from most recent to less recent to aid in form analysis. A horse's best race may have been 2 years ago.
I think what Cramer really asked was..."why were races listed with the most recent races on top, rather than the other way around?"

Others have stated the same as well...and they are right.

Looking at the past performances "bottom to top" rather than top to bottom is often an eye-opening experience.

THAT'S how you really study "form", IMO.

[raybo]

I think what Cramer really asked was..."why were races listed with the most recent races on top, rather than the other way around?"

Others have stated the same as well...and they are right.

Looking at the past performances "bottom to top" rather than top to bottom is often an eye-opening experience.

THAT'S how you really study "form", IMO.

Agreed! I start from the most distant race, time-wise, and workup to the most recent, for form pattern recognition purposes.

[Jeff P]

Pace, form, ability from speed figs, class, human connections, breeding, track profile, trips, degree of difficulty inherent in the race itself, tote data, etc...

All of the above are relevant and can be part the overall mix.

Most players can probably rattle off the names of lots of handicapping factors. Many/most are correlated. And if you think about it, every handicapping factor that you can name fits into one of the above categories.

But, in my opinion, this poll ignores the single most important thing:

VALUE.



-jp

.

[Dave Schwartz]

Jeff,

IMHO, "value" - which is always from the perspective of the individual handicapper - cannot be achieved before mastering the handicapping.

IOW, it must be a 2-phase process: handicapping first, then value.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Overlay]

Pace, Form, Ability from Speed Figs, Class, Human Connections, Breeding, Track Profile, Trips, Degree of Difficulty of the Race Itself, Tote Data, etc...

All of the above are relevant and belong in the overall mix.

Most players can probably rattle off the names of lots of handicapping factors. And if you think about it, every handicapping factor that you can name fits into one of the above categories.

But, in my opinion, this poll ignores the single most important thing:

VALUE.



-jp

.
Jeff, I agree with you that value is the "bottom line", but the wording of the poll question concerned where the handicapper should direct his efforts at first. As I interpreted that, you have to first use the other factors that you (and the poll) mentioned to determine a horse's winning chances before you can judge whether or not the horse's odds are offering value in light of those chances.

[Jeff P]

I disagree.

Looking back, I wish assessment of value had been my first and only objective (instead of handicapping.)


-jp

.

[pondman]

However, I don't subscribe to the need to go beyond that information by whatever means (tote patterns, "inside information", etc.) to determine whether a horse that otherwise appears fit

IMO, many horses are not entered to win. There are incentive to having a horse in a race other than winning. I was refering to my style of play-- maidens, shippers, grass. Has the owner/trainer placed the horse in the right race and are they going to send it? This often requires you to examine how much it is going to cost an owner to ship a horse 500 miles and drop it into a soft race. I also consider the competitiveness of an owner. Are they oil shiek with so much money, that they don't care about the purse, they just want to win races?

[Dave Schwartz]

Looking back, I wish assessment of value had been my first and only objective (instead of handicapping.)

How does one assess value without first handicapping?

[Robert Goren]

I agree with asking Steve Davidowitz's famous question, "What is he doing in today's race?" with regard to line-by-line analysis of the past performances to determine the purpose for which a horse has been entered, coupled with judgments as to the horse's current capabilities (regardless of the hopes or plans of its connections), and also whether the horse is worth a bet in light of its odds.

However, I don't subscribe to the need to go beyond that information by whatever means (tote patterns, "inside information", etc.) to determine whether a horse that otherwise appears fit and ready will be or (purposely) won't be "trying" today, or to uncover whether a horse that appears (based on its record) not to be worth a bet today has been prepared by those "in the know" to pull off a "betting coup".Very often the answer will be, I don't have a clue. I got news, for you in lot of cases, neither does the trainer. Most trainers with most horses under their care do not have a grand plan for that horse. They simply enter them in a race where they hope he has a sort of chance and let the horse do the rest. This true for over 90% of the horses enter in claiming races.

[iceknight]

I think Dave Scwartz's response to Jeff P is spot on. You need to figure out which horse/jockey style is going to be better on race day first. And you do that by form mainly, looking at the horse has progressed (or cycled through) from the previous low or first race to the last race. Next, the punter can look at class.

On a sloppy track (this is when you usually find best values): look at speed. Test this theory first

[pondman]

They simply enter them in a race where they hope he has a sort of chance and let the horse do the rest. This true for over 90% of the horses enter in claiming races.

Many horse are entered in races with known injuries and problems. I've personally seen many horses standing in buckets of ice before a race. And trainers know the horses don't have any chance of winnning. They've got to enter races because they need the convenient barn space and to bill an owner.

This is in contrast to having a hot young 2 year old that's working well, gotten use to the gate, and is ready to send hard.

[Jeff P]

The point I'm trying to make is this: I see many players (new and experienced alike) making the same common mistake. They spend so much time "handicapping" that value is all but forgotten.

Looking back to when I was a beginner (I started betting horses in 1981) I made the same mistake too.

I could have shortened the learning curve - and drastically - had I made value assessment my top priority (and spent less time handicapping.)


-jp

.

[Robert Fischer]

none of the above

[bob60566]

This is the key. Understanding the management of a horse helps. You've got to understand if the horse is running into shape, being sent for a win, or needs a rest.

Yes
For if you play the minor tracks workouts are about six months apart so you have to spot the obvious and not very obvious in getting these claimers ready.
Major tracks and Minor tracks Handicapping very different.

Mac:)

[Capper Al]

Al, I look at speed first. I can't bet a horse that doesn't show that he has enought speed to win the race.

Jack,

That's one of your elimination rules.

[Capper Al]

Being mainly a vertical exotics bettor, elimination rules are of little use to me.

The vast majority of my time is spent estimating the current abilities of the horses in a race...so I can rate them accurately enough to properly structure my wagers.

As far as form, class, speed and pace are concerned...I don't think that the player can afford to discriminate.

All these handicapping factors play a role...and they all need to be considered, if we are to do the job right.

You're doing it even if you think you are not. You are saying that horse doesn't belong here or how did that horse get in this race.

[Capper Al]

I don't dispute the usefulness of elimination rules for a beginning player. (I started out that way, too.) But I think that, as a player acquires experience and skill, there is more to be gained from a profitability standpoint by considering the comparative merits of each horse in a race, especially in relation to the horse's odds. The horses that get tossed out in a checklist, elimination approach are the ones that will end up jumping up and winning at long odds, while the survivors of the elimination process will win more frequently, but may not pay enough when they do win to make up for the losses from the times when they don't.

No one is arguing where you end up. The start to profitability is picking contenders and one needs to eliminate. The point I'm trying to stress is that too many beginners read a Modern Pace Handicapping and start formulating
E = MC**2.

[Capper Al]

Wouldn't "form" depend on what type of form analysis you use, ie physicality vs pace/speed/days off etc.?

If you know horse flesh then that's one way to eliminate.

[Capper Al]

Al

I like trainer intent in the last four running lines

Max:) :) :) :)

Reading through the PPs might show trainer intent, and that's a good way to eliminate.

[Capper Al]

This is the key. Understanding the management of a horse helps. You've got to understand if the horse is running into shape, being sent for a win, or needs a rest.

Agree. The punter usually won't get it.

[Capper Al]

To further explain what I mean, if you are a "physicality" form handicapper, then you would, necessarily, need to start with form first, followed by elimination, then the other factors.

If you are a "numbers" form handicapper, then you would, necessarily, need to start with the number factors (pace/speed etc., etc.) in order to determine form.

At any rate, the final result, in my opinion, must have form at the top, followed by eliminations, followed by pace/speed etc., to separate the non-eliminations.

Anyway that works for you as long as you eliminate.

[Capper Al]

i like to watch workouts

Good for you. Don't forget to post your good buddies at PA with any good leads.

[Capper Al]

I agree with asking Steve Davidowitz's famous question, "What is he doing in today's race?" with regard to line-by-line analysis of the past performances to determine the purpose for which a horse has been entered, coupled with judgments as to the horse's current capabilities (regardless of the hopes or plans of its connections), and also whether the horse is worth a bet in light of its odds.

However, I don't subscribe to the need to go beyond that information by whatever means (tote patterns, "inside information", etc.) to determine whether a horse that otherwise appears fit and ready will be or (purposely) won't be "trying" today, or to uncover whether a horse that appears (based on its record) not to be worth a bet today has been prepared by those "in the know" to pull off a "betting coup".

Anyway you do it. You just have to do it.

[thaskalos]

You're doing it even if you think you are not. You are saying that horse doesn't belong here or how did that horse get in this race.
When you are betting the deep vertical exotics, "eliminating" horses is more complicated than you make it seem.

It's not done by "elimination rules".

[Capper Al]

Pace, form, ability from speed figs, class, human connections, breeding, track profile, trips, degree of difficulty inherent in the race itself, tote data, etc...

All of the above are relevant and can be part the overall mix.

Most players can probably rattle off the names of lots of handicapping factors. Many/most are correlated. And if you think about it, every handicapping factor that you can name fits into one of the above categories.

But, in my opinion, this poll ignores the single most important thing:

VALUE.



-jp

.

No it didn't. I said first elimination rules that are tied in with form and then after that wagering before C/S/P. And why I said not C/S/P is not because they are not important but because the commerical vendors and racing forms do a good job providing C/S/P data.

[Capper Al]

Jeff,

IMHO, "value" - which is always from the perspective of the individual handicapper - cannot be achieved before mastering the handicapping.

IOW, it must be a 2-phase process: handicapping first, then value.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

Agree.

[Capper Al]

Very often the answer will be, I don't have a clue. I got news, for you in lot of cases, neither does the trainer. Most trainers with most horses under their care do not have a grand plan for that horse. They simply enter them in a race where they hope he has a sort of chance and let the horse do the rest. This true for over 90% of the horses enter in claiming races.

That's where looking at the PPs and weighing it against the connection's win percent comes in. If the horse has good connections and a good pattern then it's good. If the horse has a bad pattern with losing connections then it's likely to be a loser. Anything in-between you don't know.

[Capper Al]

The point I'm trying to make is this: I see many players (new and experienced alike) making the same common mistake. They spend so much time "handicapping" that value is all but forgotten.

Looking back to when I was a beginner (I started betting horses in 1981) I made the same mistake too.

I could have shortened the learning curve - and drastically - had I made value assessment my top priority (and spent less time handicapping.)


-jp

.

That's what this thread is about. Elimination rules using form, followed by wagering technique (a.k.a. value), and finally if you want to play with C/S/P go for it.

[bob60566]

]That's where looking at the PPs[/u] and weighing it against the connection's win percent comes in. If the horse has good connections and a good pattern then it's good. If the horse has a bad pattern with losing connections then it's likely to be a loser. Anything in-between you don't know.

Al I agree on the above.

My point earlier was why are horses not listed as last ten PPs best races to worst in that order as i think they do in Europe.
Intresting thread

Mac:)

[Jeff P]

No it didn't. I said first elimination rules that are tied in with form and then after that wagering before C/S/P. And why I said not C/S/P is not because they are not important but because the commerical vendors and racing forms do a good job providing C/S/P data.

I said the poll missed the mark because I didn't see a category for value.

It is possible (even among us lowly software vendors) to create factors that have absolutely nothing to do with C/S/P... or form - but are based entirely on R&D into how the public bets (and sometimes mis-bets) the races.

Because factors like that are such a departure from what everyone else is doing, I've found them to be ahem... useful (at least in my approach.)


-jp

.

[Capper Al]

When you are betting the deep vertical exotics, "eliminating" horses is more complicated than you make it seem.

It's not done by "elimination rules".

Somehow, by intuition or numeric rule, you do it. I even sent you once a PM thanking you for sharing. You didn't post it as an elimination rule, but what you said was on the mark.

As far as being simple, I never said they were. One has to study ER and keep track of how well they work and under what circumstances. There are a lot of books to get the punter started. They should be reading these first and even purchase a paper and pencil system to get an idea of how to put it all together.

[Capper Al]

I disagree.

Looking back, I wish assessment of value had been my first and only objective (instead of handicapping.)


-jp

.

One of my favorite authors once said he would need to live three times. The first for his experience. The second to test his hypotheses. The third time he'd be more on the mark with what works. How can one know judge value if they have no idea of handicapping?

[Jeff P]

That's what this thread is about. Elimination rules using form, followed by wagering technique (a.k.a. value), and finally if you want to play with C/S/P go for it.

And I'm saying that's backwards!

In my opinion, the beginner can shorten the learning curve (by several years) by simply making the primary objective one of assessing value. Instead of "handicapping" study what the public bets and why. Learn to recognize ahead of time which races are likely to be mis-bet (and why.) Then spot those situations (and jump in) during live play.

-jp

.

[Capper Al]

How does one assess value without first handicapping?

I posted the same thing.

[Capper Al]

And I'm saying that's backwards!

In my opinion, the beginner can shorten the learning curve (by several years) by simply making the primary objective one of assessing value. Instead of "handicapping" study what the public bets and why. Learn to recognize ahead of time which races are likely to be mis-bet (and why.) Then spot those situations (and jump in) during live play.

-jp

.

Okay, we are on the same page now. This is where I'm going. Don't do the E = MC**2 like most of us do. Learn to pick contenders and then value them.

[Jeff P]

One of my favorite authors once said he would need to live three times. The first for his experience. The second to test his hypotheses. The third time he'd be more on the mark with what works...

Now THERE's something I can agree with!


-jp

.

[Jeff P]

Okay, we are on the same page now. This is where I'm going. Don't do the E = MC**2 like most of us do. Learn to pick contenders and then value them.

No. I think we are on two different planets. I'm saying avoid picking contenders at all costs. Study your opponent instead. You'll get more mileage because almost no one is doing it.


-jp

.

[Capper Al]

I said the poll missed the mark because I didn't see a category for value.

It is possible (even among us lowly software vendors) to create factors that have absolutely nothing to do with C/S/P... or form - but are based entirely on R&D into how the public bets (and sometimes mis-bets) the races.

Because factors like that are such a departure from what everyone else is doing, I've found them to be ahem... useful (at least in my approach.)


-jp

.

Agree. What you are talking about is beyond this thread. Beginners are not going to understand of these concepts. If I read you correctly-- tote action, maybe past action, correlating to factors not being bet on by the public in today's race. I was impressed by your product in the exacta contest. I too am a lowly programmer. I just don't sell my stuff.

[bob60566]

Agree. What you are talking about is beyond this thread. Beginners are not going to understand of these concepts. If I read you correctly-- tote action, maybe past action, correlating to factors not being bet on by the public in today's race. I was impressed by your product in the exacta contest. I too am a lowly programmer. I just don't sell my stuff.

New thread is needed to continue this intresting debate


Mac:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[Capper Al]

New thread is needed to continue this intresting debate


Mac:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

That's got to be JP's doing. I might not be on the same page with him.

[bob60566]

That's got to be JP's doing. I might not be on the same page with him.
What comes first the horse or the cart???

Mac:)

[Capper Al]

What comes first the horse or the cart???

Mac:)

I don't know horses. I believe the jockey is the one on top. The cart that's harness racing. I don't do that anymore.

JP, if you spin off a thread as Bob requested, please post a note here point to your new thread.

Thanks

[Johnny V]

I went with form for a beginning player because that is a good place to start looking after reading that first handicapping book. Value is something that would come after learning more comprehensive handicapping using most if not all of the listed factors. How is someone going to learn that the 4-1 has value without judging the horse on several important factors in relation to the other horses?

It is very common to hear folks say that their handicapping is good but they have a problem with the betting. IMO it is the handicapping that they need the work on. That comes first. Judging value is the vital factor when deciding whether to pull the trigger. JMO.

[JohnGalt1]

As a beginner, my first book was "Eliminate the Losers" by Bob KcKnight. It was written in the '60s.

An example for sprints was take the three fastest horse's last race and the three fastest races at todays distance in all races in the pp's. The horse in both columns is the bet, unless the last and fastest is the same or the horse is off a layoff, don't play the horse or race.

You can see the limitations, but it was my first stab at "real" handicapping.

If I answered the poll question based on my first book, I would've answered speed, but I did not answer the poll question since I use a combination of methods that include class "Total Victory at the Track", speed/pace Hambleton pace figs from Sartin's "Pace Makes the Race", Pace line selection " Handicapping Magic", and Ed Bain's trainer intent.

[TrifectaMike]

I said the poll missed the mark because I didn't see a category for value.

It is possible (even among us lowly software vendors) to create factors that have absolutely nothing to do with C/S/P... or form - but are based entirely on R&D into how the public bets (and sometimes mis-bets) the races.

Because factors like that are such a departure from what everyone else is doing, I've found them to be ahem... useful (at least in my approach.)


-jp

.

Great Post! Great Advice!

Mike (Dr Beav)

[thaskalos]

And I'm saying that's backwards!

In my opinion, the beginner can shorten the learning curve (by several years) by simply making the primary objective one of assessing value. Instead of "handicapping" study what the public bets and why. Learn to recognize ahead of time which races are likely to be mis-bet (and why.) Then spot those situations (and jump in) during live play.

-jp

.
I consider this post to be the most interesting in this whole conversation...because it implies that the flow of money that is bet on particular races follows betting "patterns" which can be identified, and exploited, ahead of time.

My only concern is...is this theory true?

Is it really possible "to recognise ahead of time which races are likely to be mis-bet...and why"?

If it is...then I am intrigued.

We have tried handicapping the horses, and the trainers...

Maybe it's time to handicap...the handicappers.

[PhantomOnTour]

I consider this post to be the most interesting in this whole conversation...because it implies that the flow of money that is bet on particular races follows betting "patterns" which can be identified, and exploited, ahead of time.

My only concern is...is this theory true?

Is it really possible "to recognise ahead of time which races are likely to be mis-bet...and why"?
If it is...then I am intrigued.

We have tried handicapping the horses, and the trainers...

Maybe it's time to handicap...the handicappers.

It was very easy to figure out that this year's BC Classic would be misbet because of an overhyped horse in Uncle Mo.

Isn't what the tote players have been doing for years considered handicapping the handicappers?

[bob60566]

I consider this post to be the most interesting in this whole conversation...because it implies that the flow of money that is bet on particular races follows betting "patterns" which can be identified, and exploited, ahead of time.

My only concern is...is this theory true?

Is it really possible "to recognise ahead of time which races are likely to be mis-bet...and why"?

If it is...then I am intrigued.

We have tried handicapping the horses, and the trainers...

Maybe it's time to handicap...the handicappers.
Last nights first race at Hollywood park 27-0 MDN with 8% trainer goes to post as Fav. think this is what Jeff means as value race

[thaskalos]

Isn't what the tote players have been doing for years considered handicapping the handicappers?
No...because what the tote board watchers have been doing for years is trying to "piggyback" on the "smart money"...which turn overlays into underlays.

What Jeff seems to be suggesting is that there is a way to exploit this phenomenon to our advantage.

[Overlay]

Learn to recognize ahead of time which races are likely to be mis-bet (and why.) Then spot those situations (and jump in) during live play.
It seems to me that this would be complicated by each race being its own unique mix of entrants and factors. I think that it's possible to make certain generalizations about race types, such as the public being more accurate on races with smaller fields or higher-class horses. But I don't think that the public will ever reach the point of sending every horse in every race off at odds corresponding to its true chance of winning. To me, having a practical means of assessing that chance of winning for each horse in any race puts you in just as good a position as keying exclusively on specific race types.

A question occurs to me: What relevance would previous research/writings done on "chaos races" have to this dicusssion?

[Capper Al]

Last nights first race at Hollywood park 27-0 MDN with 8% trainer goes to post as Fav. think this is what Jeff means as value race

It looks like he won at a $1.30 to 1.

[Capper Al]

"Originally Posted by Jeff P

Learn to recognize ahead of time which races are likely to be mis-bet (and why.) Then spot those situations (and jump in) during live play."

Time for a wake up call here. All the so-called celebrity posters, including myself, fell behind this post like horses being slowed up by a horse on the lead. Think about it -- What is value play? It is betting on mis-bet horses. Yes, it would be nice to say ahead it looks like horse #3 will be under bet in race 5. Still race 5 will come and you can see for yourself if horse #3 is under bet. And, if so, you have a value play.

Punters, back to the basics. What counts is understanding form and trainer intent then figuring out some way to select your contenders. Then use commercial C/S/P figures. Don't stress about these. Most commercial C/S/P products are about as good as one another, and your efforts to reproduce your brand should be left until after you understand the game. You can't put a number on form. You can't buy form information. You have to learn it to play the game. You can buy C/S/P almost anywhere.

[Jeff P]

Punters, back to the basics....

You can't put a number on form...


I have to politely disagree.

Not only has it been done - but it's been done by a few of us lowly software developers and with a fair degree of success.


-jp

.

[Jeff P]

I consider this post to be the most interesting in this whole conversation...because it implies that the flow of money that is bet on particular races follows betting "patterns" which can be identified, and exploited, ahead of time.

My only concern is...is this theory true?

Is it really possible "to recognise ahead of time which races are likely to be mis-bet...and why"?

If it is...then I am intrigued.

We have tried handicapping the horses, and the trainers...

Maybe it's time to handicap...the handicappers.

I started a new thread here:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1192090#post1192090


-jp

.

[Capper Al]

I have to politely disagree.

Not only has it been done - but it's been done by a few of us lowly software developers and with a fair degree of success.


-jp

.

I have to politely disagree too.

If I understand you properly, one of two things is going on. The first is that you are predicting races were a contending horse might be overlooked before the tote-board turns on. And/or secondly, you are finding competitive races where the longshot is as good a bet as the favorite and then betting on the shot. This is not new and I'll be surprised if your algorithm doesn't use a method to either eliminate or just letting the contenders bubble up to the top of your list. Why mislead the poor punters?

[salty]

I don't have the time to read through this entire thread before posting so sorry if I am bringing up something that might have been brought up already.

I think that above everything else you first have to fine tune your money management ability. In almost every form of gambling money management is essential. Anybody that wants to tackle the races first has to put together their playing the horses bankroll, we all know that. But, before there is any thought to handicapping ideas a person would be better off understanding how to structure wagers. Finding the right horse to put the money on is hard enough, but without the proper wager then all the ideas of handicapping are wasted.

But since that is not an option in this poll for whatever reason,

For a person just getting into racing I think Class would be the best place to start. In my opinion it is the most clear cut part of handicapping. There are not a million rules to understand to each theory. At the start a newbie should learn what the difference is between all the different classes of racing as well as the differences between the quality of the different tracks. Think about how dumb other people would think you are if you said something like,
"I'm not betting this race, for some reason all these horses have only raced once or not at all, how am i supposed to figure this out" :faint:

[Capper Al]

I don't have the time to read through this entire thread before posting so sorry if I am bringing up something that might have been brought up already.

I think that above everything else you first have to fine tune your money management ability. In almost every form of gambling money management is essential. Anybody that wants to tackle the races first has to put together their playing the horses bankroll, we all know that. But, before there is any thought to handicapping ideas a person would be better off understanding how to structure wagers. Finding the right horse to put the money on is hard enough, but without the proper wager then all the ideas of handicapping are wasted.

But since that is not an option in this poll for whatever reason,

For a person just getting into racing I think Class would be the best place to start. In my opinion it is the most clear cut part of handicapping. There are not a million rules to understand to each theory. At the start a newbie should learn what the difference is between all the different classes of racing as well as the differences between the quality of the different tracks. Think about how dumb other people would think you are if you said something like,
"I'm not betting this race, for some reason all these horses have only raced once or not at all, how am i supposed to figure this out" :faint:

I generally agree with you have stated just our approach might differ. Your point on starting with class is well taken. I was picking it from after a punter has read his first handicapping book and was ready to start the journey from there.

Although I agree that wagering is important and must be learned early, one needs to understand the risk involved first. This would be like boiling down a die as having only six sides. Once this is understood (which isn't as easy with racing), the math follows. I doubt anyone actually heeds the old timers' wisdom that they should practice on paper first before using real money. That would be ideal way to go.

[thaskalos]

I generally agree with you have stated just our approach might differ. Your point on starting with class is well taken. I was picking it from after a punter has read his first handicapping book and was ready to start the journey from there.

Although I agree that wagering is important and must be learned early, one needs to understand the risk involved first. This would be like boiling down a die as having only six sides. Once this is understood (which isn't as easy with racing), the math follows. I doubt anyone actually heeds the old timers' wisdom that they should practice on paper first before using real money. That would be ideal way to go.
Is "punter" what a horseplayer is called in Battle Creek, Michigan?

[Capper Al]

Is "punter" what a horseplayer is called in Battle Creek, Michigan?

If it wasn't for the Internet, I be out of the racing game in Battle Creek. The Brits use the term Punter. I haven't read this book and am not recommending. It just has the word "Punter" in the title.

http://www.highstakes.co.uk/shop/product.php/210/0//182532503a8e50516eff1634ef920a0b


A definition of the word is someone who bets. I think it refers more to the novice, but can't prove that.

[HUSKER55]

i go with pace, class and form. Think about this. You have a bright shiny vega that purrs like a kitten. Your opponent is a ferrari that the driver just started up and got in.


get my meaning? but that is me and if you are going to the bank then you are perfect.

JMHO :)

[salty]

I generally agree with you have stated just our approach might differ. Your point on starting with class is well taken. I was picking it from after a punter has read his first handicapping book and was ready to start the journey from there.

Although I agree that wagering is important and must be learned early, one needs to understand the risk involved first. This would be like boiling down a die as having only six sides. Once this is understood (which isn't as easy with racing), the math follows. I doubt anyone actually heeds the old timers' wisdom that they should practice on paper first before using real money. That would be ideal way to go.


My point is that after reading one handicapping book for the first time: speed, pace, and form probably flew right over their heads. Knowing class and conditions are enough to start someone off in this game. Maybe after the first year other factors will begin to make more sense. Find me somebody who actually could apply their first book read to actual races. Proper wagering is the only way to success; knowing how exotic bets pay out, which horse to base a wager around and how to back up a bet is the most essential. As far as understanding the risk, then the first thing a newbie should be interested in is takeout rates at each track and minimum payouts.

Punter- I enjoy hearing the Australian track handicappers talk about the punters all night long.

[Capper Al]

My point is that after reading one handicapping book for the first time: speed, pace, and form probably flew right over their heads. Knowing class and conditions are enough to start someone off in this game. Maybe after the first year other factors will begin to make more sense. Find me somebody who actually could apply their first book read to actual races. Proper wagering is the only way to success; knowing how exotic bets pay out, which horse to base a wager around and how to back up a bet is the most essential. As far as understanding the risk, then the first thing a newbie should be interested in is takeout rates at each track and minimum payouts.

Punter- I enjoy hearing the Australian track handicappers talk about the punters all night long.

How many players test their methods on paper first? I'll give you that there is something to starting with simple numbers and working one's way into handicapping. This is what most likely happens. We all want to play first. If we win, we can justify our efforts.

[raybo]

How many players test their methods on paper first?

Me, went to LaD 2 times in 1978-79, then didn't place another wager for 25 years. The first year, after studying the game for all those years, I made a substantial profit and haven't had a losing year since.

[Capper Al]

Me, went to LaD 2 times in 1978-79, then didn't place another wager for 25 years. The first year, after studying the game for all those years, I made a substantial profit and haven't had a losing year since.

You have more discpline than me and most players that I know.