The End of Handicapping Software | The ONLY Way to Play the Ponies

[theartfuldodger]

1. Horses do not post trial times as they do at Indy, running one at a time around the track as fast as they possibly can for the distance of today's race. Speed and pace are a function of the mix of race participants both in past races and in today's race. Therefore any system or method that is based primarily upon speed or pace is seriously flawed from the start.

2. Class is the primary factor, closely coupled with projected form. Track class and race class are both vitally important in true contender selection along with projected form.

3. Speed and pace come last, as a means of separating very closely-matched contenders. Many times it doesn't even need to be addressed.

4. Racetrack economics 101 is the basis for the above assertions and provides the map to the gold. It's pretty much all you'll ever need to know. It comprises the following facts:

a. most trainers and all backstretch workers work long hours and make lousy money.

b. they supplement their meager wages betting on their horses. consequently, they would prefer to have nice odds when doing so.

c. owners must pay for feed, vet bills, stabling, training, etc each and every month whether the horse wins or not. these bills pile up. pressure is exerted on the trainer to get the horse in the money and to preferably win.

d. horses are not machines. they have a form cycle. they come off a layoff, get fit, a very small window of opportunity opens, and then it slams shut and another layoff begins.

e. therefore, it behooves the trainer to make the most of this small window. and this is how he does it. in the case of most horses coming off a layoff, they are not ready to win. the trainer merely runs them around the track telling the jockey not to do anything to win or even come close. the next outing the trainer is looking for a sign. he tests the horse. he tells the jockey to pass a few on the turn or come hot out of the gate and fade in the stretch or whatever will tell the trainer what he wants to know which is the answer to the question "will my horse be ready to fire next out?". if he sees what he likes then he puts a few things in the horse's favor next out, distance, surface, jockey are all set up for a win. the window is now open. time to strike. the odds will be good since the animal hasn't looked particularly good yet. the horse wins and everybody gets laid.

f. subsequent races within the window are artfully dealt with perhaps throwing in an off-distance/surface clunker to help the odds and then another strike. but it's that first race in the window where the money is made.

5. therefore, analyzing the PPs with an eye towards identifying the horse coming off a recent layoff and showing a bit of a move coupled with some changes for today's race typically involving distance and jockey is how to pick winners. anticipation of performance coupled with decent odds is how to make money at the track. it takes eyes to do that and software doesn't come equipped with those.

6. the trick is that there are variations on this theme. sometimes it's the first race out after a layoff where a move will be asked for and a test made. depends on the horse. sometimes with classy horses the simple run around the track in competition is all the horse needs and the jockey change is made next out. no move is even asked for (presumably it was seen in a workout). sometimes a cycle within the cycle will begin following an all-out win. a race is given to keep the horse fit yet allow it to regain top form. then a move is asked for. you are paid for anticipating future performance not for finding the obvious numbers from a past performance no matter how you want to slice and dice them.

7. when you play the game this way it is fun. it takes perhaps 10 minutes to select a winner at most. you don't need a computer or even a pencil, just a form. and you get paid lavishly. if your choice is going off at under 2/1 you may decide to pass the race. and that's OK. we don't have to ante up in this game.

Number crunching is not the answer. It is akin to card counting at blackjack. Perhaps mildly effective but not a whole lot of fun. Too much like work. And there are much better and much easier ways to skin this cat.

[bob60566]

Great post
Mac

[thaskalos]

Not your normal, ordinary, first post...:)

[bob60566]

Charles D taught him how to post
Mac

[BillW]

Number crunching is not the answer. It is akin to card counting at blackjack. Perhaps mildly effective but not a whole lot of fun. Too much like work. And there are much better and much easier ways to skin this cat.

How else can you win at blackjack? :confused:

[Overlay]

I agree that a key question to answer is that of which horse's conditioning has prepared it to make an optimum effort under the unique circumstances of today's race, as opposed to focusing solely on which horse has shown the best performance in races leading up to today (and thus may already have passed the peak of its form cycle). Nevertheless, there are also established patterns of thoroughbred performance that allow valid assessments of the probability as to how a horse will run today, without necessarily taking into account intentions and maneuvers on the part of the horse's connections that are not apparent from the horse's printed record.

[AITrader]

Number crunching is not the answer. It is akin to card counting at blackjack. Perhaps mildly effective but not a whole lot of fun. Too much like work. And there are much better and much easier ways to skin this cat.

Interesting post. I don't think anyone who knows these systems would ever claim they are superior to an experienced human handicapper.

If it weren't for the casinos permanently booting successful counters, Blackjack's 1 1/2% edge would be quite a nice living. It is a bit monotonous and you have to hang out in casinos. But at least you are your own boss and play when you decide to.

A successful software handicapping system is like counting except a) you don't have to hang out in casinos, b) it runs automatically, and c) it has a 10%+ edge.

[Tom]

:sleeping: Wake me up if he posts anything worth reading. :sleeping:

[Dave Schwartz]

The End of Handicapping Software | The ONLY Way to Play the Ponies

Well, I guess I am just wasting my time, then.

Thanks for straightening me out before I wasted ANOTHER year cashing tickets and making withdrawals.

:rolleyes:

[PaceAdvantage]

:sleeping: Wake me up if he posts anything worth reading. :sleeping:While I won't say what this person wrote isn't worth reading, I will say that anyone who states in his title "THE ONLY WAY TO PLAY THE PONIES" and then ends with "there are much better and much easier ways to skin this cat" can't really be trusted... :lol:

Which is it? Is there only ONE WAY, or are there many ways?

Of course there are MANY ways...many profitable ways...many ENJOYABLE ways...

Some folks ENJOY using computers and figures to handicap a race. If you're truly a WINNER, you understand that EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT.

And one of the KEYS to winning is finding a way that is COMPATIBLE WITH YOU and your way of thinking.

The title to this thread is nonsense, and leads me to believe that the person who created it doesn't really understand what they are talking about and is just looking to stir up shit. But what else is new?

[lamboguy]

this game is easy! its just a question of how much you want to pick up

[headhawg]

Wasn't the OP simply summarizing one of Quinn's books? Or maybe it was one of Cramer's?

Ok, I'll bite. Hey Artful. Pick a card, any card, and post your simple method picks in the selection section. And don't...um...dodge this request.

(That was even painful for me to type.)

[Some_One]

Clueless first post, awful advice.

[Robert Goren]

I expect an ad for a tout service is not far behind. I seen this kind of post before. It is usually followed by some sort of link to picks in the next week or so.

[PaceAdvantage]

I expect an ad for a tout service is not far behind. I seen this kind of post before. It is usually followed by some sort of link to picks in the next week or so.I doubt that...

[rastajenk]

I have a problem with 4 a and b. Those people who work long hours for little pay aren't in much of a position to affect the odds. They don't "supplement" their income. More often than not they lose it.

[erikeepper]

If you're truly a WINNER, you understand that EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT.

And one of the KEYS to winning is finding a way that is COMPATIBLE WITH YOU and your way of thinking.


QFT! :ThmbUp:

[Maximillion]

I thought there was a lot of truth in the post....if your only playing these types of horses and its working for you great...you still have to make the determination that the horse at its "best"( or close to it) is a player in the race... and this involves some type of handicapping.

To say this is the "best"or only way to play, cant agree with that.

[theartfuldodger]

Well, I guess I am just wasting my time, then.

Thanks for straightening me out before I wasted ANOTHER year cashing tickets and making withdrawals.

:rolleyes:

1. I understand that you sell computer software for a living. So your opinion, though heavily biased, is understandable. But with an operating margin of 2-3% it makes my point for me. It's like card counting at blackjack. You've got to do everything right just to squeak out a profit.

2. I'm sure you cash tickets and make withdrawals. The question is how much money do you really make betting the ponies? Once again, 2-3% is not going to change anybody's life unless they're pushing hundreds of thousands thru the window every month. Consequently, you sell computer software for a living.

3. I don't appreciate the rolling of the eyes icon. It's disrespectful. I came here to share not to be ridiculed by you.

[theartfuldodger]

While I won't say what this person wrote isn't worth reading, I will say that anyone who states in his title "THE ONLY WAY TO PLAY THE PONIES" and then ends with "there are much better and much easier ways to skin this cat" can't really be trusted... :lol:

Which is it? Is there only ONE WAY, or are there many ways?

Of course there are MANY ways...many profitable ways...many ENJOYABLE ways...

Some folks ENJOY using computers and figures to handicap a race. If you're truly a WINNER, you understand that EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT.

And one of the KEYS to winning is finding a way that is COMPATIBLE WITH YOU and your way of thinking.

The title to this thread is nonsense, and leads me to believe that the person who created it doesn't really understand what they are talking about and is just looking to stir up shit. But what else is new?

By the title "The Only Way to Play the Ponies" I am referring to playing without a computer and even without a pencil and just using your eyes plus your knowledge of the game to select winners.

The approach I laid out was clear in saying that it is not a by-the-numbers procedure. That there are variations employed by the trainers. What is incontrovertible is racetrack economics. That is the backdrop from which all of this plays out. It is as certain and reliable as gravity. And to ignore it and to pretend that manipulating numbers on a computer is telling you something of value is foolish.

I have programmed computers for a living since 1976. I am not anti-computer. Computers have their place in this world. Just not in the handicapping world. Unless you're content with 2-3% and you have hundreds of thousands to bet each month. I won't be specific but one program I have seen is so complex it actually made me laugh. It's like the handicapping "system" with 14,000 rules and 137 exceptions.

No, the "one way" just refers to the approach I outlined. Using your knowledge of racetrack economics to see the PPs thru the eyes of the trainer. What else you bring to the table to differentiate between close contenders and to improve your play is all well and good.

[theartfuldodger]

Wasn't the OP simply summarizing one of Quinn's books? Or maybe it was one of Cramer's?

Ok, I'll bite. Hey Artful. Pick a card, any card, and post your simple method picks in the selection section. And don't...um...dodge this request.

(That was even painful for me to type.)

Sure thing. As soon as you drop the attitude. But first, why don't you jump thru a few hoops for me.

[PaceAdvantage]

By the title "The Only Way to Play the Ponies" I am referring to playing without a computer and even without a pencil and just using your eyes plus your knowledge of the game to select winners.

The approach I laid out was clear in saying that it is not a by-the-numbers procedure. That there are variations employed by the trainers. What is incontrovertible is racetrack economics. That is the backdrop from which all of this plays out. It is as certain and reliable as gravity. And to ignore it and to pretend that manipulating numbers on a computer is telling you something of value is foolish.

I have programmed computers for a living since 1976. I am not anti-computer. Computers have their place in this world. Just not in the handicapping world. Unless you're content with 2-3% and you have hundreds of thousands to bet each month. I won't be specific but one program I have seen is so complex it actually made me laugh. It's like the handicapping "system" with 14,000 rules and 137 exceptions.

No, the "one way" just refers to the approach I outlined. Using your knowledge of racetrack economics to see the PPs thru the eyes of the trainer. What else you bring to the table to differentiate between close contenders and to improve your play is all well and good.Most folks on the backstretch (trainers, jockeys, agents, etc.) are mediocre handicappers and even worse bettors...the basis for your argument therefore doesn't even begin to hold water.

In addition, many trainers and agents utilize numbers, particularly "The Sheets," in order to properly place their horses, make claims, etc.

Another hole that kind of blows your theory apart, wouldn't you say?

[theartfuldodger]

I have a problem with 4 a and b. Those people who work long hours for little pay aren't in much of a position to affect the odds. They don't "supplement" their income. More often than not they lose it.

"Those people" have inside information from the trainer that today's race is a go and the chances are good. It isn't about them affecting the odds. It's about them having inside knowledge that permits them to take advantage of higher odds than there should be.

This is not a theory of mine. This goes on every day. Why on earth wouldn't it?

It is also no guarantee that the horse will win of course yet the practice continues. Have you not ever seen the board open up well below M/L on a horse and creep back up steadily all the way to post? Much of that money was bet early by "these people".

[PaceAdvantage]

"Those people" have inside information from the trainer that today's race is a go and the chances are good. It isn't about them affecting the odds. It's about them having inside knowledge that permits them to take advantage of higher odds than there should be.

This is not a theory of mine. This goes on every day. Why on earth wouldn't it?

It is also no guarantee that the horse will win of course yet the practice continues. Have you not ever seen the board open up well below M/L on a horse and creep back up steadily all the way to post? Much of that money was bet early by "these people".And if you look at the parking lot, a lot of those people are driving shit boxes and/or living in dilapidated track dorms.

They don't appear to be doing very well at "supplementing..." Your choice of word, not mine.

Maybe you can name a few low profile barns that make a significant amount of money wagering on their charges...

[theartfuldodger]

I thought there was a lot of truth in the post....if your only playing these types of horses and its working for you great...you still have to make the determination that the horse at its "best"( or close to it) is a player in the race... and this involves some type of handicapping.

To say this is the "best"or only way to play, cant agree with that.

I use track class and race class to determine true contenders as opposed to speed and pace. I outline that in my post.

The reason so few people win at this game is they think the process can be broken down to consistent steps. It can't. Reality is much too complex. Winning requires good judgment. Which isn't all that difficult if you're focusing on the right horses to begin with. You will not always be correct but you will make money and you'll make far more than 2-3%.

[proximity]

b. they supplement their meager wages betting on their horses. consequently, they would prefer to have nice odds when doing so.
.

they should just get a job working in the casino.

beattie and ness just crush people like this.

they are about as good at handicapping as your average dealer is at poker.

[theartfuldodger]

Most folks on the backstretch (trainers, jockeys, agents, etc.) are mediocre handicappers and even worse bettors...the basis for your argument therefore doesn't even begin to hold water.

In addition, many trainers and agents utilize numbers, particularly "The Sheets," in order to properly place their horses, make claims, etc.

Another hole that kind of blows your theory apart, wouldn't you say?

I think you need to re-read my post. I mean, if you think I was making the case for backstretch workers being great handicappers then you've missed everything completely.

Trainers and agents know what I laid out for you. They use the Sheets to supplement this knowledge and to make fine distinctions between close contenders. You can do that too if you want. My belief is, as I said, that pace and speed are more a product of the race and have less to do with an animal's maximum capability. I put far more trust in where the horse has been competing and with what group of animals. This is why I score 8/1 winners and not a handful of 8/5.

[theartfuldodger]

And if you look at the parking lot, a lot of those people are driving shit boxes and/or living in dilapidated track dorms.

They don't appear to be doing very well at "supplementing..." Your choice of word, not mine.

Maybe you can name a few low profile barns that make a significant amount of money wagering on their charges...

Did I ever make the claim that "these people" were making a significant amount of money?

What I said was that they supplement their meager incomes by betting on their own horses. Do you really doubt this? Really?

And this fact is hardly the lynchpin of my entire argument. My point is that the window of opportunity to score with the average race horse is very small and that a trainer, rather than trusting chance, will attempt to manipulate the situation as much as possible in order to maximize his profit. Consequently, he will test the animal first and then get all his ducks in a row for the score. If you know what to look for you can see this play out in damn near every single race.

[theartfuldodger]

they should just get a job working in the casino.

beattie and ness just crush people like this.

they are about as good at handicapping as your average dealer is at poker.

Not the point. But please, ignore everything I said and carry on with whatever you were doing.

[Maximillion]

I use track class and race class to determine true contenders as opposed to speed and pace. I outline that in my post.

The reason so few people win at this game is they think the process can be broken down to consistent steps. It can't. Reality is much too complex. Winning requires good judgment. Which isn't all that difficult if you're focusing on the right horses to begin (#) with. You will not always be correct but you will make money (http://#) and you'll make far more than 2-3%.


Yes, i read your entire post.....interesting....so if the horse didnt make the cut as far as track class and race class it wouldnt be a play? Imo I think Id be more interested in the horse if he was from a "lesser" track shipping in.......

[Greyfox]

" Have you not ever seen the board open up well below M/L on a horse and creep back up steadily all the way to post? Much of that money was bet early by "these people".

You make some valid points, but in racing nothing is written in stone.
Whatever works for you, may not work for me and vice versa.
Every track has guys who follow tote angles like watching for early money on the board and odds creep.
They are supposedly watching what the "inside information" players know.
Maybe some of these "Chartists" are successful. The majority though go broke or discouraged after awhile.
The problem with "inside information" is that is exactly what it is.
A barn knows it's horse, but it doesn't have "inside info" on the next barn's horse.
The Triple Crown races are good examples of this. Before the Derby every trainer there was touting his steed.
You can deprecate Pace and Speed figures if you want.
They aren't the only way to handicap a race for sure.
However in over 80% of races the winner is coming from those who have high figures, and often as an overlay. To ignore those figures completely is foolish.

The other point that I would make is that if you think that people who use Pace and Speed figures aren't aware of other factors such as Class, pedigree, surface biases, track profiles, barn changes, and so on, you'd be wrong.
Pace and Speed figures are a tool. But they are not the only tool that numbers players have in their arsenal.

[Greyfox]

theartfuldodgerIf you know what to look for you can see this play out in damn near every single race.

Go for it. Give us your Preakness pick.

[proximity]

:sleeping: Wake me up if he posts anything worth reading. :sleeping:

the end of section 4 e where the horse wins and everybody gets laid was about it. :)

[theartfuldodger]

Yes, i read your entire post.....interesting....so if the horse didnt make the cut as far as track class and race class it wouldnt be a play?

Well let me put it this way. If today's race is at Turfway and I see a lot of horses who have been running at Turfway or maybe Oaklawn but I spot a couple who have been doing most of their running at Churchill or Gulfstream, then I am focusing on those 2 for the winner even if their speed figs are inferior and even if they've never come closer than 5th. But I must also see more. I must see a move in the last race which in turn comes off a recent layoff or a win. I must see a decent jockey on board or know that that trainer will employ a certain jockey he likes not withstanding a so-so meet record. In short, I must have additional proof before I commit. If I don't see it then I will evaluate the rest of the horses or more likely pass the race.

But track class and race class are by far the most important factors.

This is not a simple points system that will soon be available in Phillips Racing Newsletter for only $9.95. As I say, the game does not lend itself to that.

[bob60566]

No wonder we chase people away from this site, this was a very informative post and yes they are all mentioned in various books over the years that I have read over the years.As soon as someone and i agree on this to deviate from computer handicapping and the normal way the crowd handicaps the long knives come out.This post was a breath of fresh air.As i have posted in the past this type of handicapping is for the minor tracks.


Mac

[theartfuldodger]

You make some valid points, but in racing nothing is written in stone.
Whatever works for you, may not work for me and vice versa.
Every track has guys who follow tote angles like watching for early money on the board and odds creep.
They are supposedly watching what the "inside information" players know.
Maybe some of these "Chartists" are successful. The majority though go broke or discouraged after awhile.
The problem with "inside information" is that is exactly what it is.
A barn knows it's horse, but it doesn't have "inside info" on the next barn's horse.
The Triple Crown races are good examples of this. Before the Derby every trainer there was touting his steed.
You can deprecate Pace and Speed figures if you want.
They aren't the only way to handicap a race for sure.
However in over 80% of races the winner is coming from those who have high figures, and often as an overlay. To ignore those figures completely is foolish.

The other point that I would make is that if you think that people who use Pace and Speed figures aren't aware of other factors such as Class, pedigree, surface biases, track profiles, barn changes, and so on, you'd be wrong.
Pace and Speed figures are a tool. But they are not the only tool that numbers players have in their arsenal.

If I were your teacher then your paper would be filled with red ink.

I am not making the case for watching the tote and playing a system based upon doing that. I am merely saying that is evidence that early betting is going on and it comprises many backstretch workers who can only bet early as they are busy working during the afternoon's racing.

The fact that I do not use pace and speed primarily in my handicapping does not imply that they will have no correlation to the outcome. They're bound to some of the time. I simply do not use them as my primary factors. I am picking winners from among 1 or 2 horses most the the time. How many have competitive speed figs? Perhaps half the field?

And I never said people who use pace and speed are not aware of class and other factors. It is a matter of emphasis not awareness. Picking a winning horse is like preparing a complicated recipe. Too much of this ingredient ruins it whereas in the right proportion it makes the whole dish.

I don't think you fully understand what I've posted.

[bob60566]

Well let me put it this way. If today's race is at Turfway and I see a lot of horses who have been running at Turfway or maybe Oaklawn but I spot a couple who have been doing most of their running at Churchill or Gulfstream, then I am focusing on those 2 for the winner even if their speed figs are inferior and even if they've never come closer than 5th. But I must also see more. I must see a move in the last race which in turn comes off a recent layoff or a win. I must see a decent jockey on board or know that that trainer will employ a certain jockey he likes not withstanding a so-so meet record. In short, I must have additional proof before I commit. If I don't see it then I will evaluate the rest of the horses or more likely pass the race.

But track class and race class are by far the most important factors.

This is not a simple points system that will soon be available in Phillips Racing Newsletter for only $9.95. As I say, the game does not lend itself to that.
Advertizing????

[Maximillion]

Well let me put it this way. If today's race is at Turfway and I see a lot of horses who have been running at Turfway or maybe Oaklawn but I spot a couple who have been doing most of their running at Churchill or Gulfstream, then I am focusing on those 2 for the winner even if their speed figs are inferior and even if they've never come closer than 5th. But I must also see more. I must see a move in the last race which in turn comes off a recent layoff or a win (#). I must see a decent jockey on board or know that that trainer will employ a certain jockey he likes not withstanding a so-so meet record. In short, I must have additional proof before I commit. If I don't see it then I will evaluate the rest of the horses or more likely pass the race.

But track class and race class are by far the most important factors.

This is not a simple points system that will soon be available in Phillips Racing Newsletter for only $9.95. As I say, the game does not lend itself to that.


Yes, I get what your saying,but my point was if your horse was from a "lesser" circuit, say shipping to FG from Delta or Evd, (or name your "cheap track")...he would be discounted?

[theartfuldodger]

No wonder we chase people away from this site, this was a very informative post and yes they are all mentioned in various books over the years that I have read over the years.As soon as someone and i agree on this to deviate from computer handicapping and the normal way the crowd handicaps the long knives come out.This post was a breath of fresh air.As i have posted in the past this type of handicapping is for the minor tracks.


Mac

I generally stay away from minor tracks, but easier to use track class at minor and mid-level tracks than in NY or LA yes. But race class is there to use as well as moves. You still find in NY or LA horses in long campaigns who have a lot of ITM finishes but never quite get it done. Whereas you have horses coming off layoffs or wins that were obviously given a race and now today's race shows changes in jockey, distance, surface, equipment etc or a middle move was apparent last out.

[theartfuldodger]

Yes, I get what your saying,but my point was if your horse was from a "lesser" circuit, say shipping to FG from Delta or Evd, (or name your "cheap track")...he would be discounted?

I would be looking at him or her last yes. I wouldn't throw the horse out at the start, I would merely begin my search with the class animals and go from there. I think you'll find the races where those horses ship in and win (usually on the front end) will be devoid of true contenders showing anything in recent races. And if that were the case then I would probably pass the race rather than take a chance on picking one horse out of 6 or 8. That's gambling and I don't really like to do that.

[Light]

But track class and race class are by far the most important factors.



Are you referring to Bris RR and CR?

[bob60566]

I generally stay away from minor tracks, but easier to use track class at minor and mid-level tracks than in NY or LA yes. But race class is there to use as well as moves. You still find in NY or LA horses in long campaigns who have a lot of ITM finishes but never quite get it done. Whereas you have horses coming off layoffs or wins that were obviously given a race and now today's race shows changes in jockey, distance, surface, equipment etc or a middle move was apparent last out.

The key as you say is the move and if you can interpert these moves and with low class claimers they only get the horse ready once in the form cycle from its last two running lines. As i have stated in the past for me this does not work except low class claiming races.

[Maximillion]

I would be looking at him or her last yes. I wouldn't throw the horse out at the start, I would merely begin my search with the class animals and go from there. I think you'll find the races where those horses ship in and win (usually on the front end) will be devoid of true contenders showing anything in recent races. And if that were the case then I would probably pass the race rather than take a chance on picking one horse out of 6 or 8. That's gambling (#) and I don't really like to do that.

Interesting because Id be more leary about the lightly raced guy now showing up at the lesser track.(if we are talking about older horses)

[bob60566]

Interesting because Id be more leary about the lightly raced guy now showing up at the lesser track.

Oh yes very so and merits a pass if you do not have strong intentions on a move and that might come from the lighty raced horse and this gets back to the the point in having a reason to bet a horse

[Greyfox]

I don't think you fully understand what I've posted.

If the learner hasn't learned, the teacher hasn't taught.

I still don't see your application for this at the Preakness or the last race of the day at Pimlico.
If your gonna talk the talk, don't be afraid to walk the walk.

[pondman]

Number crunching is not the answer. It is akin to card counting at blackjack. Perhaps mildly effective but not a whole lot of fun. Too much like work. And there are much better and much easier ways to skin this cat.

The structure of horse playing is 40% know to 60% unknown. The value of a horse increases or decreases when and if the crowd exaggerate the importance of a variable. A layoff isn't in itself advantageous untl the crowd overestimates it's importance and ignores a horse because it hasn't raced in 6 months, and gives you 5 points.

I don't use rating. But not for the reason you are stating. Rating cause the crowd to over estimate their confidence in a horse.

[theartfuldodger]

Are you referring to Bris RR and CR?

No. I don't use those but they may be fine, I don't know. I look at the track itself. You don't need to make fine distinctions. Belmont trumps Churchill which trumps Delaware Park. That sort of thing.

[Tom]

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=4



Have at it.......

[theartfuldodger]

If the learner hasn't learned, the teacher hasn't taught.

As Spock would say, "illogical". And your tuition is hereby now revoked. Good luck at your new school.

[theartfuldodger]

The structure of horse playing is 40% know to 60% unknown. The value of a horse increases or decreases when and if the crowd exaggerate the importance of a variable. A layoff isn't in itself advantageous untl the crowd overestimates it's importance and ignores a horse because it hasn't raced in 6 months, and gives you 5 points.

I don't use rating. But not for the reason you are stating. Rating cause the crowd to over estimate their confidence in a horse.

I am not making the assertion that a layoff in and of itself is somehow advantageous. I am merely stating the fact that all horses must be laid off eventually and that begins a new cycle.

Of course it's all about the odds. No kidding the crowd over-plays the speed fig. Just as they over-play the finish position in the most recent race. And thank God they do or else we wouldn't have a game.

[PaceAdvantage]

No wonder we chase people away from this site, this was a very informative post and yes they are all mentioned in various books over the years that I have read over the years.As soon as someone and i agree on this to deviate from computer handicapping and the normal way the crowd handicaps the long knives come out.This post was a breath of fresh air.As i have posted in the past this type of handicapping is for the minor tracks.


MacWRONG. The long knives come out when people like theartfuldodger claim that their way is "THE ONLY WAY TO PLAY" or that you CAN'T WIN JUST AS MUCH using computers or numbers.

That's why this poster got flack. He didn't get flack for the body of his post, but because he felt the need to denigrate those who don't handicap like he does.

Get it now?

[bob60566]

WRONG. The long knives come out when people like theartfuldodger claim that their way is "THE ONLY WAY TO PLAY" or that you CAN'T WIN JUST AS MUCH using computers or numbers.

That's why this poster got flack. He didn't get flack for the body of his post, but because he felt the need to denigrate those who don't handicap like he does.

Get it now?
What is with this get it now
Yes I agree on your comment he made Only way to play or how much you can win.
Mac

[theartfuldodger]

WRONG. The long knives come out when people like theartfuldodger claim that their way is "THE ONLY WAY TO PLAY" or that you CAN'T WIN JUST AS MUCH using computers or numbers.

That's why this poster got flack. He didn't get flack for the body of his post, but because he felt the need to denigrate those who don't handicap like he does.

Get it now?

Who have I denigrated? I have merely posted a superior way to play the races to software programs of which I have written literally hundreds over my career including handicapping programs I wrote in the mid 1990's (utilizing the principles taught in Modern Pace Handicapping).

I am not the one including rolling eyes icons in my posts.

If you think squeezing out a 2-3% "edge" every month and having to bet large in order to make any real money is the way to go then you're not being honest with yourself unless you don't know any better.

My way is the only way to play if you want to make any real money doing it.

If you want to crunch numbers all day and tinker with parameters and bet four horses every race just to have the winner and eek out a minuscule profit over time then fine but don't try and tell me it's superior because clearly it isn't. I mean, I could understand why that might be popular with housewives and other people who don't know any better but not people who play the races every week.

[Maximillion]

No wonder we chase people away from this site, this was a very informative post and yes they are all mentioned in various books over the years that I have read over the years.As soon as someone and i agree (#) on this to deviate from computer handicapping and the normal way the crowd handicaps the long knives come out.This post was a breath of fresh air.As i have posted in the past this type of handicapping is for the minor tracks.


Mac

Mac I think the reason we both reacted positively to the OP is because we both focus mainly on claiming races(possibly cheaper) but Imo its not necessarily for only the minor tracks(just the minor races)
In my play I never want the guy whos been racing 9 months straight(always looking like a contender).......I only disagreed about the "track class" part but to each his own(also disagree obviously with "this is the best way" tone of the post.

[PaceAdvantage]

What is with this get it now
Yes I agree on your comment he made Only way to play or how much you can win.
MacWell, I'm quite tired of people writing falsehoods about this message board.

You write as if theartfuldodger innocently started a post about a way to handicap using something other than computer programs or numbers and that he was attacked for it.

What you fail to to mention is that the very title of his thread and parts of the body are nothing but flame-bait, designed to cause a confrontation with those who do use computers and figures. Once you realize that, then you'll realize that theartfuldodger isn't just an innocent newbie trying to start a thoughtful discussion.

His main mission is to cause conflict, not to educate or learn.

[Tom]

Who have I denigrated? I have merely posted a superior way to play the races to software programs which I have written...

FTFY.

My way is the only way to play if you want to make any real money doing it.

Talk is cheap.

Most here have already proven themselves, posting winners, winning contests, you know, before the race is run, not just with blather.

btw you have been here before.....many, many times. :sleeping:

[PaceAdvantage]

Who have I denigrated? I have merely posted a superior way to play the races to software programs of which I have written literally hundreds over my career including handicapping programs I wrote in the mid 1990's (utilizing the principles taught in Modern Pace Handicapping).

I am not the one including rolling eyes icons in my posts.

If you think squeezing out a 2-3% "edge" every month and having to bet large in order to make any real money is the way to go then you're not being honest with yourself unless you don't know any better.

My way is the only way to play if you want to make any real money doing it.

If you want to crunch numbers all day and tinker with parameters and bet four horses every race just to have the winner and eek out a minuscule profit over time then fine but don't try and tell me it's superior because clearly it isn't. I mean, I could understand why that might be popular with housewives and other people who don't know any better but not people who play the races every week.2-3%? Yes, that must be what YOU could get out of that method of play. To claim this is a universal truth is patently ridiculous...

You can continue to dance your little dance, but you're not fooling anyone.

If your intentions were pure, there would have been no need to start with the flame-bait.

FOR YOU it might be the ONLY way to play the ponies, but don't think for one second it would be the ONLY way to play the ponies for everyone else. I already know you're full of it if you're talking like that...

[AITrader]

I have programmed computers for a living since 1976. I am not anti-computer. Computers have their place in this world. Just not in the handicapping world. Unless you're content with 2-3% and you have hundreds of thousands to bet each month. I won't be specific but one program I have seen is so complex it actually made me laugh. It's like the handicapping "system" with 14,000 rules and 137 exceptions.


I've never seen a ruled based system that worked well. Minsky is all but discredited now. And 14,000 is far more than any human being could keep track of. Logit systems do work and most do quite a bit better than 2-3%. Though perhaps the t-bred market in the USA is more saturated than other places.

You've been programming about four years longer than I. 1976...an old COBOL guy perhaps? Or <*shudders*> 360 assembler?

I think most here are reacting to the absolutist headline in your post more than its content...

[bugboy]

whats the formular for figuring r.o.i.?

[bob60566]

I've never seen a ruled based system that worked well. Minsky is all but discredited now. And 14,000 is far more than any human being could keep track of. Logit systems do work and most do quite a bit better than 2-3%. Though perhaps the t-bred market in the USA is more saturated than other places.

You've been programming about four years longer than I. 1976...an old COBOL guy perhaps? Or <*shudders*> 360 assembler?

I think most here are reacting to the absolutist headline in your post more than its content...

That is incorrect statement.
The content is the basis of my posts and would like to see your comments on this.
Mac :confused:

[PaceAdvantage]

I think most here are reacting to the absolutist headline in your post more than its content...I'm also reacting to this nonsense:

"Number crunching is not the answer. It is akin to card counting at blackjack. Perhaps mildly effective but not a whole lot of fun. Too much like work. And there are much better and much easier ways to skin this cat."

Maybe to HIM...but not to me and a whole lot of other handicappers.

[bob60566]

Well, I'm quite tired of people writing falsehoods about this message board.

You write as if theartfuldodger innocently started a post about a way to handicap using something other than computer programs or numbers and that he was attacked for it.

What you fail to to mention is that the very title of his thread and parts of the body are nothing but flame-bait, designed to cause a confrontation with those who do use computers and figures. Once you realize that, then you'll realize that theartfuldodger isn't just an innocent newbie trying to start a thoughtful discussion.

His main mission is to cause conflict, not to educate or learn.

Well I happen to use a computer and figures from advertisers from this site to make my selections at Mountineer.
Mac :confused:

[PaceAdvantage]

Well I happen to a computer and figures from advertisers from this site to make my selections at Mountineer.
Mac :confused: :confused: I don't understand what you're saying or how it relates to the part of my post you highlighted in bold.

[GARY Z]

NOW ITS CLEAR , ALL RACES ARE FIXED, NO TRAINER LIKES
TO WIN AS THE FAVORITE , OWNERS LOOK TO ARBITRAGE THEIR
EXPENSES BY BETTING THEIR HORSES AT HIGH ODDS,
AND OF COURSE THE AUTHORITIES AND STEWARDS BLINK AT ALL OF
THIS, MAYBE THEY ARE EVEN INVOLVED..

SO, WHEN THE FAVORITE DOES WIN ,THE RACE IS FIXED, SINCE NONE
OF THE LONGSHOTS TECHNICALS WORKED..


I THINK I NEEDED TO GET JUICED(IE WITH MY NINJA) :bang:

[njcurveball]

My way is the only way to play if you want to make any real money doing it.



You are the most important man on Pace Advantage! Horses run to the Windows to bet the artful dodger. When he feeds them hay, they spit old gold crums. Upon arriving at the track, the Racebook Manager immediately calls the bank to send more money.

Yes, you are the most important man here! Congrats! :ThmbUp:

[ldiatone]

If I were your teacher then your paper would be filled with red ink.

I am not making the case for watching the tote and playing a system based upon doing that. I am merely saying that is evidence that early betting is going on and it comprises many backstretch workers who can only bet early as they are busy working during the afternoon's racing.

The fact that I do not use pace and speed primarily in my handicapping does not imply that they will have no correlation to the outcome. They're bound to some of the time. I simply do not use them as my primary factors. I am picking winners from among 1 or 2 horses most the the time. How many have competitive speed figs? Perhaps half the field?

And I never said people who use pace and speed are not aware of class and other factors. It is a matter of emphasis not awareness. Picking a winning horse is like preparing a complicated recipe. Too much of this ingredient ruins it whereas in the right proportion it makes the whole dish.

I don't think you fully understand what I've posted.
i dont think so...Foie-butter-veal jus ALWAYS make the dish better.

[bob60566]

You are the most important man on Pace Advantage! Horses run to the Windows to bet the artful dodger. When he feeds them hay, they spit old gold crums. Upon arriving at the track, the Racebook Manager immediately calls the bank to send more money.

Yes, you are the most important man here! Congrats! :ThmbUp:

When does he mention betting his selections or feeding them hay in order to produce gold is that your assumption or have i read the orginal post wrong
Mac :confused:

[AITrader]

That is incorrect statement.
The content is the basis of my posts and would like to see your comments on this.
Mac :confused:

Sorry Mac, didn't mean any disrespect. Just my 2c that some folks find "my way or the highway" headlines annoying.

I am a computer jockey and run a pure statistics based system. I am pretty much clueless to the nuances of human based handicapping and the content (or lack thereof) in the original post.

[Some_One]

Who have I denigrated? I have merely posted a superior way to play the races to software programs of which I have written literally hundreds over my career including handicapping programs I wrote in the mid 1990's (utilizing the principles taught in Modern Pace Handicapping).

I am not the one including rolling eyes icons in my posts.

If you think squeezing out a 2-3% "edge" every month and having to bet large in order to make any real money is the way to go then you're not being honest with yourself unless you don't know any better.

My way is the only way to play if you want to make any real money doing it.

If you want to crunch numbers all day and tinker with parameters and bet four horses every race just to have the winner and eek out a minuscule profit over time then fine but don't try and tell me it's superior because clearly it isn't. I mean, I could understand why that might be popular with housewives and other people who don't know any better but not people who play the races every week.

LOL! So you hit one 20-1 shot and now think you're the greatest capper in the world?

[bob60566]

LOL! So you hit one 20-1 shot and now think you're the greatest capper in the world?

Now you can see how the cavalry come out to play on attack mode in a simple thread that has very good content, and good angles how to handicap is that so bad.

Mac :)

[theartfuldodger]

Well, I'm quite tired of people writing falsehoods about this message board.

You write as if theartfuldodger innocently started a post about a way to handicap using something other than computer programs or numbers and that he was attacked for it.

What you fail to to mention is that the very title of his thread and parts of the body are nothing but flame-bait, designed to cause a confrontation with those who do use computers and figures. Once you realize that, then you'll realize that theartfuldodger isn't just an innocent newbie trying to start a thoughtful discussion.

His main mission is to cause conflict, not to educate or learn.

Who the hell are you to declare what my "main mission" is or that my post was "designed" to do anything? What you are doing is called projecting. Look it up if you have to. Then go see a doctor for your problem.

[theartfuldodger]

2-3%? Yes, that must be what YOU could get out of that method of play. To claim this is a universal truth is patently ridiculous...

You can continue to dance your little dance, but you're not fooling anyone.

If your intentions were pure, there would have been no need to start with the flame-bait.

FOR YOU it might be the ONLY way to play the ponies, but don't think for one second it would be the ONLY way to play the ponies for everyone else. I already know you're full of it if you're talking like that...

2-3% is what Dave Schwartz claims using his software. You claim you do better? Fine. But take your insinuations and your attitude elsewhere.

[theartfuldodger]

FTFY.



Talk is cheap.

Most here have already proven themselves, posting winners, winning contests, you know, before the race is run, not just with blather.

btw you have been here before.....many, many times. :sleeping:

Yes Tom, we get it. You're oh so above it all and bored. But know this. My post wasn't written for people like you. I don't care whether you continue to fail. And make no mistake, if you're using software to handicap, you may be making some money (or not) but you are most certainly failing.

[Maximillion]

No. I don't use those but they may be fine, I don't know. I look at the track itself. You don't need to make fine distinctions. Belmont trumps Churchill which trumps Delaware Park. That sort of thing.


And in a cheap (maybe conditional claimer) Del may trump Churchill and Bel...not knocking you but by ignoring other styles of handicapping may be a bit arrogant if I may say....still look forward to reading more of your posts,

[Karakiozis]

BRAVO!!!!!!!

[theartfuldodger]

NOW ITS CLEAR , ALL RACES ARE FIXED, NO TRAINER LIKES
TO WIN AS THE FAVORITE , OWNERS LOOK TO ARBITRAGE THEIR
EXPENSES BY BETTING THEIR HORSES AT HIGH ODDS,
AND OF COURSE THE AUTHORITIES AND STEWARDS BLINK AT ALL OF
THIS, MAYBE THEY ARE EVEN INVOLVED..

SO, WHEN THE FAVORITE DOES WIN ,THE RACE IS FIXED, SINCE NONE
OF THE LONGSHOTS TECHNICALS WORKED..


I THINK I NEEDED TO GET JUICED(IE WITH MY NINJA) :bang:

No Gary. Apparently you don't get it. But please, feel free to remain in the dark.

[thaskalos]

2-3% is what Dave Schwartz claims using his software. You claim you do better? Fine. But take your insinuations and your attitude elsewhere.
Artfuldodger,

Your handicapping method reminds me of those trainer-angle systems I have been seeing in the American Turf Monthly for about 30 years now.

Do these things still work; I gave up on them about 20 years ago...

Seriously though...are you telling us that you win "big" in this game just by glancing at the DRF for a few minutes a race, without even picking up a pencil?

[theartfuldodger]

You are the most important man on Pace Advantage! Horses run to the Windows to bet the artful dodger. When he feeds them hay, they spit old gold crums. Upon arriving at the track, the Racebook Manager immediately calls the bank to send more money.

Yes, you are the most important man here! Congrats! :ThmbUp:

Got that out of your system? Now, if you have anything worthwhile to contribute I'm all ears.

[theartfuldodger]

Artfuldodger,

Your handicapping method reminds me of those trainer-angle systems I have been seeing in the American Turf Monthly for about 30 years now.

Do these things still work; I gave up on them about 20 years ago...

Seriously though...are you telling us that you win "big" in this game just by glancing at the DRF for a few minutes a race, and without even picking up a pencil?

I don't think I ever used the word "glancing". Once again, you come pre-loaded with a negative attitude. And what would I need with a pencil? My memory isn't that poor yet.

[bob60566]

And in a cheap (maybe conditional claimer) Del may trump Churchill and Bel...not knocking you but by ignoring other styles of handicapping may be a bit arrogant if I may say....still look forward to reading more of your posts,

That is making the mainstream so angry that there style is being attacked and it is not.
Mac

[theartfuldodger]

Sorry Mac, didn't mean any disrespect. Just my 2c that some folks find "my way or the highway" headlines annoying.

I am a computer jockey and run a pure statistics based system. I am pretty much clueless to the nuances of human based handicapping and the content (or lack thereof) in the original post.

You didn't mean any disrespect???

ROTFLMFAO.

[vegasone]

Yawn.....Just because you are a programmer doesn't mean you have a clue what it takes to create a handicapping system. You have less of a clue as to the results available to the ones running computer systems. You are using as basis someones results from a system created to get certain types of winners to get a certain profit margin. Different systems are capable of different ROI. Depends on the programmer and his/her desire to achieve desired results.

shows your ignorance basically

[Karakiozis]

Go for it. Give us your Preakness pick.

You have missed the whole point of his post, I don't think that the connections that the THEARTFULLDODGER is talking about will be using the Preakness to supplement their income.

[bob60566]

Yawn.....Just because you are a programmer doesn't mean you have a clue what it takes to create a handicapping system. You have less of a clue as to the results available to the ones running computer systems. You are using as basis someones results from a system created to get certain types of winners to get a certain profit margin. Different systems are capable of different ROI. Depends on the programmer and his/her desire to achieve desired results.

shows your ignorance basically

On the original thread posted your comments seem to have your opinion out to lunch on the angles he provided .Yes Or No.

Mac :)

[Saratoga_Mike]

You have missed the whole point of his post, I don't think that the connections that the THEARTFULLDODGER is talking about will be using the Preakness to supplement their income.

The vast majority of his contentions about backstretch workers/trainers/owners are just plain stupid. I would say ill-informed, but he's so arrogantly ignorant that stupid is the right word.

[thaskalos]

I don't think I ever used the word "glancing". Once again, you come pre-loaded with a negative attitude. And what would I need with a pencil? My memory isn't that poor yet.
You stated in your original post that all methods which use speed and pace figures as primary tools are "seriously flawed"...right?

Well...since I myself am a speed/pace handicapper...don't I have the right, in turn, to say that your own handicapping logic is seriously flawed?

Of course I do...so I am saying it:

Your methods have been around since the very beginning of this game...and I don't think they are profitable.

If you can criticize OUR methods...then we can criticize yours.

[bob60566]

You stated in your original post that all methods which use speed and pace figures as primary tools are "seriously flawed"...right?

Well...since I myself am a speed/pace handicapper...don't I have the right, in turn, to say that your own handicapping logic is seriously flawed?

Of course I do...so I am saying it:

Your methods have been around since the very beginning of this game...and I don't think they are profitable.
If you can criticize OUR methods...then we can criticize yours.

Very good and your methods???

Mac

[Karakiozis]

You stated in your original post that all methods which use speed and pace figures as primary tools are "seriously flawed"...right?

Well...since I myself am a speed/pace handicapper...don't I have the right, in turn, to say that your own handicapping logic is seriously flawed?

Of course I do...so I am saying it:

Your methods have been around since the very beginning of this game...and I don't think they are profitable.

If you can criticize OUR methods...then we can criticize yours.


Bravo re thaskale ala ego nomizo oti kseri ti lei autos.

[bob60566]

Bravo re thaskale ala ego nomizo oti kseri ti lei autos.
Are you talking about the Greek economy

Mac :) :bang:

[thaskalos]

Bravo re thaskale ala ego nomizo oti kseri ti lei autos.

Arxidia kserei...

Se kapio biblio ta thiabase...

[Karakiozis]

Arxidia kserei...

Se kapio biblio ta thiabase...

Autos pou lei yia tin Elada pios einai;

[thaskalos]

Very good and your methods???

Mac

The skill is not in the method, my friend...it's in the player.

All the methods are tools...and, to do a good job, they have to be used by a "craftsman".

That's why I say that our friend here should not be criticizing the handicapping methods of others...when he knows nothing about them as players...and what their skill level is.

I never criticize another's handicapping method, and only did so in this case to prove a point.

[Greyfox]

T and K : Why don't you two guys just PM each other?

That's all Greek to me.

[thaskalos]

Autos pou lei yia tin Elada pios einai;
Enas malakas...pios nomizeis oti eine.

Ginane oloi eksipnoi.

Then koitane ta xalia tis xoras tous...

[thaskalos]

T and K : Why don't you two guys just PM each other?

That's all Greek to me.
You are right Fox...I apologize.

It will never happen again.

[bob60566]

Enas malakas...pios nomizeis oti eine.

Ginane oloi eksipnoi.

Then koitane ta xalia tis xoras tous...

That is why we have soap on the rope

Mac :) :bang:

[PaceAdvantage]

All this guy has to do is post picks...then he can show us how this really IS the only way to play the ponies.

All the rest tires me...closing this thread to avoid any further nonsense.

Or better yet, since bob60566 has taken a real liking to the guy and fully endorses what has been written here, maybe HE can post picks using theartfuldodger's methodology and really prove a point.

Go for it bob...we're all waiting...