Making 4% per day Will Make You Rich in a Year.

[maddog42]

Starting with $1000 and making 4% per day, and betting all of the profit:

1000
1040
1081
1124
1169
1216
1265
1315
1368
1423
1480
1539
1601
1665
1731
1800
1872
1947
2025
2106
2191
2278
2369
2464
2563
2464
2563
2665
This is the total after 26 days. After 52 days: 7390
After 130 days $37,894
After 234 days $129,638
After 390 days $820,288
Ok, maybe not rich, but "well off".
I personally would find it difficult to make $250,000 worth of wagers in 1 day.
I was trying to verify some of the numbers being bandied about in another thread, about whales. Wagering 1 million per day! Some of the pools would go on tilt and probably destroy your edge unless you spread this money across 20 tracks. I counted 20 mid-major type tracks running this weekend. That is 40k per track on average, but you could wager that easily in the big tracks, so you would probably have to triple up and wager $120k on the big ones 15k to 25k on the small ones. This whale betting would be fun, but a pain in the ass.

[jdhanover]

$40k/track...say 10 races (to make the math easy)...$4k/race say $2k to win and $2k in exotics. Doesn't sound out of reach (would be bigger at larger tracks and vice-versa)

Another way to look at it:
45,000 races/year (approx). Say one plays 2/3: 30,000 Even if one bet "only" $1000/race, this is $30 million a year. 4% net is $1.2 million

Not saying I can do this...nor any single person..but this is the kind of math I suspect the whales look at. And this is the lower end of the range from what I have heard. Remember, there are rebates in the world.

There are others on here that know this math much better......

[Dave Schwartz]

$40k/track...say 10 races (to make the math easy)...$4k/race say $2k to win and $2k in exotics. Doesn't sound out of reach (would be bigger at larger tracks and vice-versa)

Let's come down to earth a little:

A single handicapper
* Find 3 playable races out of every 5
* Handicap 10 tracks
* Wager $500 in win pool, $500 in exacta pool = $1,000 per race
* Earn 4% profit after rebate
* Play 3 days per week (Friday, Saturday, Sunday)

10 tracks x 9 races = 90 x 60% = 54 plays

54 races per day x $1,000 per race = $54,000 wagered x 4% = $2,160

$2,160 x 3 days per week = $6,480 per week


$6,480 per week x 44 weeks per year = $285k


In order to accomplish this, one must have a tool that allows them:

1) to handicap very quickly
2) to assess value at least semi-automatically
3) manage your day (i.e. post times, etc)
4) create a bet file for uploading
5) process scratches automatically
6) update the toteboard automatically

Sounds a lot like HSH, doesn't it?

[Turkoman]

The other problem is that you're not going to make a profit every single day of the week.

[jdhanover]

The other problem is that you're not going to make a profit every single day of the week.

No, but some days higher, other days lower....these are based on an average profit of 4%

[Robert Fischer]

If you are somehow able to consistently profit and increase wager-size that type of "exponential gain" is possible until you reach the pool size limits of the tracks and wager-types within your profitable play.

quote - maddog42
"2563
2665
This is the total after 26 days. After 52 days: 7390"

This is a good example. After "only" 25 days you need to earn $100 to get to day26.
(using 5%)After 10-15 more days that number is now $200.

The "power" of the exponential gain is now starting to approach the pool size plateau for mid-level tracks.
8 more days, and you need $300 to get to the next day.
Sooner or later when you get into that kind of territory your gain will switch from a smooth(although it will never be smooth) exponential progression, to an appropriate daily goal for that day's opportunity.
For the first 10 days if you hit a $200 plateau we are talking $700 below plan(doing a 5%). Over the course of the next month $8K less than planned. etc...

Plateaus continue to arrive(exponentially) and become increasingly complex. There are simply realistic limits even if you are skilled enough to beat a plateau or two. Exponential gain is not sustainable but it is one of the natural ways to progress early on.

[IrishRail76]

The TV program "60 Minutes" had a segment about such a person a year ago or so.

He operates out of Hong Kong for the tax advantages. He wagers 24/7/365. He plays Place and Show.

He doesn't wager on anything himself. He has over 25 employees to handle the wagering and a nice computer program that makes the picks for them.

His office and "pit" for the employees take up one story of a high-rise there.

It took him time, financial backing, great software, etc., to make it to that level, but now it simply operates like a finely-tuned machine. He comes in daily, very much like the head of any other company, and oversees the operation.

It was very interesting, and he is like any other big business chief.

[Robert Goren]

The TV program "60 Minutes" had a segment about such a person a year ago or so.

He operates out of Hong Kong for the tax advantages. He wagers 24/7/365. He plays Place and Show.

He doesn't wager on anything himself. He has over 25 employees to handle the wagering and a nice computer program that makes the picks for them.

His office and "pit" for the employees take up one story of a high-rise there.

It took him time, financial backing, great software, etc., to make it to that level, but now it simply operates like a finely-tuned machine. He comes in daily, very much like the head of any other company, and oversees the operation.

It was very interesting, and he is like any other big business chief. Where is the kick in that? Most horseplayers I know couldn't stand that kind of existence. They would go nuts craving the action. I know a lot of posters here think this kind of life is their dream, but if they had to live it, it would be a nightmare.

[thaskalos]

Where is the kick in that? Most horseplayers I know couldn't stand that kind of existence. They would go nuts craving the action. I know a lot of posters here think this kind of life is their dream, but if they had to live it, it would be a nightmare.

You are right...

The average horseplayer would be terribly uncomfortable carrying all these profits to the bank.

And, where is the thrill of struggling to keep a step ahead of our creditors?

Super-successful horseplaying can be mighty boring indeed...

Who needs it...?

[jdhanover]

You are right...

The average horseplayer would be terribly uncomfortable carrying all these profits to the bank.

And, where is the thrill of struggling to keep a step ahead of our creditors?

Super-successful horseplaying can be mighty boring indeed...

Who needs it...?

:lol: :lol: :lol: Love this post, Gus! I'll take boring (though not really boring since others doing the 'work) and making a ton of money any day of the week!

[Inglewood Flamingo]

What whale(s) were ever profiled by 60 minutes? I have heard this mentioned in previous threads here but the only whale I ever remember was Billy Walters.

[teddy]

[QUOTE=Dave Schwartz]Let's come down to earth a little:

A single handicapper
* Find 3 playable races out of every 5
* Handicap 10 tracks
* Wager $500 in win pool, $500 in exacta pool = $1,000 per race
* Earn 4% profit after rebate
* Play 3 days per week (Friday, Saturday, Sunday)

10 tracks x 9 races = 90 x 60% = 54 plays

54 races per day x $1,000 per race = $54,000 wagered x 4% = $2,160

$2,160 x 3 days per week = $6,480 per week




Where do we sign up!... please process how much you lose if you lose 4% a day!


LOOK at the state college kids!

[JustRalph]

3 out of 5 races playable? Where?

That's 6 out of a 10 race card?

Where the hell do you find that nowadays?

[maddog42]

Every comment in this thread seems to be at least partially true. I came up with
4% because that seemed feasible. I am very skeptical of some of the claims made by people on this board about the whales and syndicates. I am openminded and thought this thread might shed some light on things. Some of these people that claim very high ROI's are also driving me crazy. This is not possible for most of us. I don't think I could ever make 800k even with a legitimate 4% edge. It would be damn hard work.
You will definitely have to play a lot of tracks and pools to get these kind of results. I'll bet anything these whales don't have a positive ROI over every track in the country.

[Dave Schwartz]

3 out of 5 races playable? Where?

I find that every day (that I play). Only about 30% of the races are big bets but I actually play about 65% of all races.

[teddy]

Ok if you ever saw the printout from some of the adw's you would be astonished how few winning players there are. Nill If you do find one then its an real freak situation. They play just one track. How many people you know play just one track?

[maddog42]

This is the latest info I could find about the Aussie whales. Pretty much a
reprint of an earlier article that someone posted a few weeks back.


http://calvinayre.com/2012/05/18/business/australian-betting-whale-move-to-cost-race-bookies-millions/

[Dave Schwartz]

If you do find one then its an real freak situation. They play just one track. How many people you know play just one track?

You and I run in different circles.

I know many winning players and they all play multiple tracks.

[maddog42]

From the above article:

"Ranogajec headed a shadowy group known as the Punters Club, consisting largely of math-inclined gambling geeks, reportedly including high-stakes poker player David Steicke (http://calvinayre.com/2012/01/28/poker/super-high-rollers-here-today-growing-tomorrow/). "

Paraphrasing George C. Scott in Dr. Strangelove "I wish we had one of them Punters Clubs". Maybe we aren't Geeky enough ?

[Dave Schwartz]

Maddog,

As "geeky" as I am, I do not qualify.

Seriously.

(But I am trying.)


Dave

[bob60566]

You and I run in different circles.

I know many winning players and they all play multiple tracks.

Dave

What does it involve or can the normal gambler/ Handicpper ever get to this point and what is the $ he needs to play the game.

Mac :)

[steveb]

Dave

What does it involve or can the normal gambler/ Handicpper ever get to this point and what is the $ he needs to play the game.

Mac :)

Unlike Mr Shwartz, I know of only one person that wins and goes it alone.
That one person has written software that allows him to bet every bet type in every race, at every track that is covered by pari mutuel companies in Australia.
His bet sizes are mostly small, but when you have so many bets, the profits just keep adding up.
For the main part, the go it alone professionals are dead in the water....they simply can't compete with the teams.


What it takes I suppose is to have an interest in racing and be fairly knowledgeable of one or more aspect of it.
Probably just like half the guys reading this board.
Then you post on places like PA, and hope you come to the attention of one of those teams, and get invited to see if you have something that can add to their models.
From experience I know half the guys working or consulting for teams(that I know of) are not so smart.
I guess the smartness comes from those that can mesh all those parts together and produce winning models.

[Dave Schwartz]

What does it involve or can the normal gambler/ Handicpper ever get to this point and what is the $ he needs to play the game.

Bob,

Do you mean, "Can a normal" player win?

If, by "normal" you mean "average," no, of course not. It is a 2% game. Only the extraordinary player is able to do more than get lucky.

Considering the fact that most players lose, one of the first requirements to becoming a winning player is to stop listening to players who are not winning.

Imagine that you want to play golf.

The first logical thing to do as a beginner is to get lessons. Who do you get lessons from? Well, logically, you will get better instruction from a golf pro but the truth is that as a beginner, you can get lessons from any pretty good golfer. After all, he knows more than you do.

However, if you aspire to be better than your teacher, ultimately you must step up to the club pro for lessons.

If you aspire to the PGA tour, even the local club pro may not be able to get you there. After all, he probably tried to make it on the pro circuit and failed. He will likely teach what he knows and whatever it was that prevented him from making it, he may teach you.

Golf is different than horse racing in the sense that horse racing is not physical. A golf pro may know what he needs to do but not be able to execute at the level of near-perfection necessary to be competitive on the PGA tour.


For a "normal" human being (i.e. not overly gifted with education or intelligence; neither of which guarantee success at racing, BTW) to win at the races he must be willing to:

1. Listen
2. Learn
3. Change

Most players are too busy explaining why their way is right despite the fact that they lose consistently. Horse racing is much like chess: being an expert is not enough.


Remember, it is a 2% game. That's 2 in 100.

To quote Matthew: "Many are called but few are chosen." (King James)


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[maddog42]

If you are somehow able to consistently profit and increase wager-size that type of "exponential gain" is possible until you reach the pool size limits of the tracks and wager-types within your profitable play.

quote - maddog42
"2563
2665
This is the total after 26 days. After 52 days: 7390"

This is a good example. After "only" 25 days you need to earn $100 to get to day26.
(using 5%)After 10-15 more days that number is now $200.

The "power" of the exponential gain is now starting to approach the pool size plateau for mid-level tracks.
8 more days, and you need $300 to get to the next day.
Sooner or later when you get into that kind of territory your gain will switch from a smooth(although it will never be smooth) exponential progression, to an appropriate daily goal for that day's opportunity.
For the first 10 days if you hit a $200 plateau we are talking $700 below plan(doing a 5%). Over the course of the next month $8K less than planned. etc...

Plateaus continue to arrive(exponentially) and become increasingly complex. There are simply realistic limits even if you are skilled enough to beat a plateau or two. Exponential gain is not sustainable but it is one of the natural ways to progress early on.

Whoops, made an error copying my results to the thread. I think the final numbers are correct.

[bob60566]

The last two posts would anyone even think of going down that path but they seem to have the IQ to beleive it.
Mac :confused:

[teddy]

2% my rear end.. Try 1 in a thousand. The rare individuals make money in this game. I have no info on TEAMS but the people I know a that made millions now say its not possible anymore. That the pools are correcting to the point that they now cant make a dime. Only ones I know for sure are at obscure tracks in harness and in another situation that I wont release on a board. The people making money in Harness are followed by 20 freaks all day and they only make 50k a year or so. They never lose, but its not get rich quick. With a 10% wps rebate you can maybe make 1%, lot of effort for that. If you play carryovers only AND get a huge rebate you may make something, most players that have any advantage are playing big money against small pools. Squeezing out the super pools in wide open races. With a 20% rebate.

[Dave Schwartz]

The rare individuals make money in this game. I have no info on TEAMS but the people I know a that made millions now say its not possible anymore.

Simply not true based upon my day-to-day experience.

[PaceAdvantage]

Ok if you ever saw the printout from some of the adw's you would be astonished how few winning players there are. Nill If you do find one then its an real freak situation. They play just one track. How many people you know play just one track?We all know there are few winning players. This isn't news.

Are you trying to say the few winning players there are only play one track? As a former member of this board was fond of saying, "I ain't buying that stock."

[proximity]

We all know there are few winning players. This isn't news.

Are you trying to say the few winning players there are only play one track? As a former member of this board was fond of saying, "I ain't buying that stock."

i don't buy the one track thing either, but i do think a lot of people on here are struggling with how easy mr schwartz is making the game sound. for example we saw you do some great handicapping on the met the other day (basically tossing an 8/5 favorite) but still the only value you got was 3.4-1 on a 3-1 shot on your line. not a lot of room for error there. this in a race where you were pretty confident that the favorite was way overbet, and how many times a day do situations like this happen? certainly not in 60% of all races.

[Dave Schwartz]

First, I am only "Mr. Schwartz" when I am in trouble with my wife.

Second, I never mean to make it sound easy. It isn't.

I think it is like push-starting a freight train. It is hell to get it going but once you get it going, it seems to go on by itself.


Not easy. Not simple.

[pondman]

I'd welcome a whale of this size into the game. The more the better. They can only help the size of the pool. There is plenty of inefficiency within their play. It's still difficult for a whale to hit an optimal, and not step into a diminishing return.

This helps the $2 player, if they have an understanding of gambling and horse racing

[PaceAdvantage]

i don't buy the one track thing either, but i do think a lot of people on here are struggling with how easy mr schwartz is making the game sound. for example we saw you do some great handicapping on the met the other day (basically tossing an 8/5 favorite) but still the only value you got was 3.4-1 on a 3-1 shot on your line. not a lot of room for error there. this in a race where you were pretty confident that the favorite was way overbet, and how many times a day do situations like this happen? certainly not in 60% of all races.I don't really find anything Dave has written in this thread "easy."

And secondly, I should point out that that line of mine has a 25% overlay built into it, so the true odds on my line for both Shackleford and Caleb's Posse was slightly below 5/2.

[TrifectaMike]

Dave

What does it involve or can the normal gambler/ Handicpper ever get to this point and what is the $ he needs to play the game.

Mac :)

It is less about the money needed to play and more about competing against teams/syndicates.

The primary tool for the majority of teams/syndicates is the binary logistic regression model or the probit variant. And they are light years ahead of the average joe trying to apply these techniques.

In the last few years these models have "maxed" themselves out.

These models are either normalized finish centered or normalized speed rating centered. In each case numerous factors are added to the "core" variable in an attempt to increase the models predictabilty (greater and greater explanation of variance). This is not an easy task and an enormous undertaking.

For those presently using the above mentioned models there is a glimpse of hope. The one area which has not been properly exploited is in the area of the second stage regression (odds "smoothing"). In the last few years, I have made strides in this area. Although, I personally don't use any of the metrics I have developed.

( There is a Benter guy on this board that has successfully taken one of the metrics I developed and has successfully incorporated the metric, which yielded greater significance and additional predictability to "his" overall model)

No, I will not disclose who he is ( I like him and he is very, very sharp).

And if you believe things couldn't get anymore difficult for the average player, some of the teams/syndicates are turning toward Bayesian techniques. Initially how they "construct" their explanatory variables, data analysis and some are seeking full-blown Bayesian approaches.

Now, for the good news. The average Joe can still win at this game without any of the above techniques. In order to do so, he will need to develop metrics which are not finish or speed/pace centered. He will need to begin with a metric far removed from their models. It can be done. And I personally know some that have done so.

Mike (Dr Beav)

[steveb]

It is less about the money needed to play and more about competing against teams/syndicates.

The primary tool for the majority of teams/syndicates is the binary logistic regression model or the probit variant. And they are light years ahead of the average joe trying to apply these techniques.

In the last few years these models have "maxed" themselves out.

These models are either normalized finish centered or normalized speed rating centered. In each case numerous factors are added to the "core" variable in an attempt to increase the models predictabilty (greater and greater explanation of variance). This is not any easy task and an enormous undertaking.

For those presently using the above mention models there is a glimpse of hope. The one area which has not been properly exploited is in the area of the second stage regressiob (odds "smoothing"). In the last few years, I have made strides in this area. Although, I personally don't use any of the metrics I have developed.

( There is a Benter guy on this board that has successfully taken one of the metrics I developed and has successfully incorporated the metric, which yielded greater significance and additional predictability to "his" overall model)

No, I will not disclose who he is ( I like him and he is very, very sharp).

And if you believe things couldn't get anymore difficult for the average player, some of the teams/syndicates are turning toward Bayesian techniques. Initially how they "construct" their explanatory variables, data analysis and some are seeking full-blown Bayesian approaches.

Now, for the good news. The average Joe can still win at this game without any of the above techniques. In order to do so, he will need to develop metrics which are not finish or speed/pace centered. He will need to begin with a metric far removed from there models. It can be done. And I personally know some that have done so.

Mike (Dr Beav)

I reckon I know who your Benter guy is. :)
Could he be somebody that knows somebody from Chon....., or maybe it's THAT guy.

But really there are probably lots of people involved in teams either reading these boards(to get ideas and/or to make sure no one is spilling the beans), or posting to them.

[thaskalos]

Now, for the good news. The average Joe can still win at this game without any of the above techniques. In order to do so, he will need to develop metrics which are not finish or speed/pace centered. He will need to begin with a metric far removed from there models. It can be done. And I personally know some that have done so.

Mike (Dr Beav)

In your opinion...can the "average Joe" still win at this game WITHOUT these metrics which ignore/downplay finish and speed/pace?

[TrifectaMike]

In your opinion...can the "average Joe" still win at this game WITHOUT these metrics which ignore/downplay finish and speed/pace?

In all honesty it is becoming more and more difficult. And much depends on what you mean by "win".

Let me take Pondman, for example, from reading his posts (although, I have kidded and referred to his method as the shipping thingy), I have reason to believe he has a "winning" approach. It just doesn't fit my definition of "winning".

Can profits be made by the average Joe? Short answer, yes. And a sharp player can make profits in the exotics (verticals is my suggestion).

Mike (Dr Beav)

[baconswitchfarm]

The people making money in Harness are followed by 20 freaks all day and they only make 50k a year or so. They never lose, but its not get rich quick.



Can you explain what this means ?

[Dark Target]

Of course there are also many small, inefficient markets that would take no where near the amount of work put in by the syndicates in the larger markets.

Obviously you cant get as much out of the markets but it depends on how greedy you are...

[proximity]

I don't really find anything Dave has written in this thread "easy."

And secondly, I should point out that that line of mine has a 25% overlay built into it, so the true odds on my line for both Shackleford and Caleb's Posse was slightly below 5/2.

earlier in the thread dave gave a "down to earth" example of finding value in 3 out of every 5 races. some posters (at least teddy (12) and just ralph (13)) are struggling to believe so much value exists. maddog42 (14) is "skeptical" of all the whale talk. i also have a hard time believing this, but i'm a very conservative player and possibly a prisoner of my own personality.

ok, so you're line on shackleford was really 5-2. he still only went off 3-1. in the traditional charts of dick mitchell and barry meadow that isn't even a bettable overlay. my point is that you basically eliminated an 8-5 favorite and still barely got value in the race. and you aren't going to be tossing favorites so enthusiastically in 60% of all races. maybe there are better handicappers than you that can play more races, but really, how much better are they? that's what readers here are struggling to believe.

[TrifectaMike]

earlier in the thread dave gave a "down to earth" example of finding value in 3 out of every 5 races. some posters (at least teddy (12) and just ralph (13)) are struggling to believe so much value exists. maddog42 (14) is "skeptical" of all the whale talk. i also have a hard time believing this, but i'm a very conservative player and possibly a prisoner of my own personality.

ok, so you're line on shackleford was really 5-2. he still only went off 3-1. in the traditional charts of dick mitchell and barry meadow that isn't even a bettable overlay. my point is that you basically eliminated an 8-5 favorite and still barely got value in the race. and you aren't going to be tossing favorites so enthusiastically in 60% of all races. maybe there are better handicappers than you that can play more races, but really, how much better are they? that's what readers here are struggling to believe.

Put those traditional charts in the garbage. In plain language, they'll drive you nuts. There are team members who track and predict (and manipulate) final odds using state space and Kalman filitering.

It's late, but I do want to give something to think about. What if I said to you,"stop looking toward the tote-board to find your "overlays". Instead create your own defintion of an overlay and work within that construct.

One such way is to use the morning line. Use the morning line as your baseline (your tote). It doesn't have to be that accurate. Your line only needs to more accurate than the ML on a relative basis. If you play against it consistently, your perceived overlays will be nearly as good as "true" overlays reflected on the tote (if you could accurately predict the final odds).

Mike (Dr Beav)

[proximity]

also one of your own moderators, cj recently posted this on a valento thread called lots of racing unbettable:


I would say more than 50% of races across North America aren't worth handicapping.


now i know that there are some great players out there. but that they can find sooooooo much more value than even the godfather of pace figures is, imo, what many good posters here are skeptical about.

[proximity]

Put those traditional charts in the garbage. In plain language, they'll drive you nuts. There are team members who track and predict (and manipulate) final odds using state space and Kalman filitering.

It's late, but I do want to give something to think about. What if I said to you,"stop looking toward the tote-board to find your "overlays". Instead create your own defintion of an overlay and work within that construct.

One such way is to use the morning line. Use the morning line as your baseline (your tote). It doesn't have to be that accurate. Your line only needs to more accurate than the ML on a relative basis. If you play against it consistently, your perceived overlays will be nearly as good as "true" overlays reflected on the tote (if you could accurately predict the final odds).

Mike (Dr Beav)

i remember you posting about that concept before and i actually do employ it or at least a version of it. with so many tracks going much of the time i think being a slave to the toteboard is what could drive a player nuts, lol.

[proximity]

Instead create your own defintion of an overlay and work within that construct.


i didn't always do this so reading your post(s) on the subject and seeing a player like track collector use a similar concept in live play probably pushed me towards doing something like this in my own game.

[PaceAdvantage]

earlier in the thread dave gave a "down to earth" example of finding value in 3 out of every 5 races. some posters (at least teddy (12) and just ralph (13)) are struggling to believe so much value exists. maddog42 (14) is "skeptical" of all the whale talk. i also have a hard time believing this, but i'm a very conservative player and possibly a prisoner of my own personality.

ok, so you're line on shackleford was really 5-2. he still only went off 3-1. in the traditional charts of dick mitchell and barry meadow that isn't even a bettable overlay. my point is that you basically eliminated an 8-5 favorite and still barely got value in the race. and you aren't going to be tossing favorites so enthusiastically in 60% of all races. maybe there are better handicappers than you that can play more races, but really, how much better are they? that's what readers here are struggling to believe. when I bet him he was 4-1...and I wrote a program to monitor the tote and place bets for me...slightly enhanced conditional wagering if you will...

[Saratoga_Mike]

when I bet him he was 4-1...and I wrote a program to monitor the tote and place bets for me...slightly enhanced conditional wagering if you will...

How time consuming was this?

[detective]

Hi,

I'm not saying this can or can't be done but if you can find 10 plays a day that go off at 5/2 some higher of course, and you can win 30% of your bets at 5/2 min. That's a 5% edge on the game. There are a few full time horse players around and I would think more would speak up. I would like to here what there edge is day to day. I don't even think you need to look for overlays just find 30% winners at 5/2. It would seem like you could just handicap the race and find out who you think will win and if they are 5/2 or higher and it's one of your horses that come in 30% of the time, make the bet. It won't matter what you made the line at as long as you hit your numbers. I understand the over lays ect and why this is done but it seems if all you need is 5% to make a good profit then why would this not work?

[teddy]

Can you explain what this means ?

Sure, One guy is really good and has 20 people that show up and dup his bets, and he lets them. Call it egocentric or whatever.

[teddy]

It is less about the money needed to play and more about competing against teams/syndicates.

The primary tool for the majority of teams/syndicates is the binary logistic regression model or the probit variant. And they are light years ahead of the average joe trying to apply these techniques.

In the last few years these models have "maxed" themselves out.

These models are either normalized finish centered or normalized speed rating centered. In each case numerous factors are added to the "core" variable in an attempt to increase the models predictabilty (greater and greater explanation of variance). This is not an easy task and an enormous undertaking.

For those presently using the above mentioned models there is a glimpse of hope. The one area which has not been properly exploited is in the area of the second stage regression (odds "smoothing"). In the last few years, I have made strides in this area. Although, I personally don't use any of the metrics I have developed.

( There is a Benter guy on this board that has successfully taken one of the metrics I developed and has successfully incorporated the metric, which yielded greater significance and additional predictability to "his" overall model)

No, I will not disclose who he is ( I like him and he is very, very sharp).

And if you believe things couldn't get anymore difficult for the average player, some of the teams/syndicates are turning toward Bayesian techniques. Initially how they "construct" their explanatory variables, data analysis and some are seeking full-blown Bayesian approaches.

Now, for the good news. The average Joe can still win at this game without any of the above techniques. In order to do so, he will need to develop metrics which are not finish or speed/pace centered. He will need to begin with a metric far removed from their models. It can be done. And I personally know some that have done so.

Mike (Dr Beav)


Most of my models show a few variables..class and workout ratings, always seem to be as good as anything.

[DJofSD]

Starting with $1000 and making 4% per day, and betting all of the profit:

1000
1040
1081
1124
1169
1216
1265
1315
1368
1423
1480
1539
1601
1665
1731
1800
1872
1947
2025
2106
2191
2278
2369
2464
2563
2464
2563
2665
This is the total after 26 days. After 52 days: 7390
After 130 days $37,894
After 234 days $129,638
After 390 days $820,288
Ok, maybe not rich, but "well off".
I personally would find it difficult to make $250,000 worth of wagers in 1 day.
I was trying to verify some of the numbers being bandied about in another thread, about whales. Wagering 1 million per day! Some of the pools would go on tilt and probably destroy your edge unless you spread this money across 20 tracks. I counted 20 mid-major type tracks running this weekend. That is 40k per track on average, but you could wager that easily in the big tracks, so you would probably have to triple up and wager $120k on the big ones 15k to 25k on the small ones. This whale betting would be fun, but a pain in the ass.

Your premise is all wrong. Trees do not grow to the sky in the stock market or at the race track.

Redo your sequence with some losing days.

[maddog42]

Your premise is all wrong. Trees do not grow to the sky in the stock market or at the race track.

Redo your sequence with some losing days.

I do not think this is possible either. I am demonstrating the mathematics of compounded growth. The Losing days are built in. This is an average. Some days will have 50% growth others -40% loss. I had a nephew that was giving me a hard time, when I told him 4%-5% profit was in my neighborhood of expected profit Long term.( I am being optimistic, that is what my ROI has worked out for the past 100 days.) Who cares about making 4 cents on the dollar, he would say? This has opened his eyes.
I have talked in other threads about my skepticism of the claims of some about whales and their supposed profits. They almost surely exist, but after being bombarded for years about Get Rich Quick offerings in my mail and other
places, I try to be realistic.
I also try to be fair, so thats why I posted those numbers.
Just to be totally honest, I had at least 10 consecutive months where I LOST
in the 4% ,6% and 8% range, and I was DAMN proud of those numbers. I don't think many on this board are much better.

[wonatthewire1]

Instead of concentrating on 4% why not try to accumulate a positive net odds point approach

Example, I targeted 10 net odds points per day and increased my betting to make more. Was not that difficult for me to accomplish to do (I'm an evening and weekend player) when I got 10+ I stop. The only other "rule" that I have is if I am up more than 12 points, I'll continue to play until I lose 2 in a row. Have had quite a few runs where I'll get to more than 30 odds points before losing 2 in a row.

Try it - so often I hear of players that get discouraged because they give everything back after getting a few scores. That is a quick way to get discouraged.

[teddy]

We all know there are few winning players. This isn't news.

Are you trying to say the few winning players there are only play one track? As a former member of this board was fond of saying, "I ain't buying that stock."


Sorry to burst your bubble. The only ones I can actually say I know for sure 100% sure of and have seen the books. PLAY one track or at most two at different times of the year. The rest is just hearsay, nobody on here knows anyone on mystical teams. With 50 employees, damn sure they dont disclose a thing on boards. Not asking anyone to believe me or care but I know what I know and only ones I know that make a dime are specialists. Really now, think of the logic here. Do you really think If I only play MTN and you and your goofy software and all your backfitting think you can beat me when I know every trainer move and every bias and every nuance... You got no shot brother. Thats why the specialists will destroy you when you play there or try to play 10 tracks.

[Dave Schwartz]

Example, I targeted 10 net odds points per day and increased my betting to make more. Was not that difficult for me to accomplish to do (I'm an evening and weekend player) when I got 10+ I stop. The only other "rule" that I have is if I am up more than 12 points, I'll continue to play until I lose 2 in a row. Have had quite a few runs where I'll get to more than 30 odds points before losing 2 in a row.

I know you tried to explain this to me once before but I simply never understood what you meant. Still don't.

What are "odds points" and what do you mean by "net odds points?"

[teddy]

Not sure he would do it but He might speak to this subject because I know for a fact he has said on his show many times how important it is to follow this circuit very closely to survive. Probably can"t disclose his roi at MTN but lets suffice it to say I think its better than 4% in any category. I think he said he plays Charlestown also.

[Maximillion]

Sorry to burst your bubble. The only ones I can actually say I know for sure 100% sure of and have seen the books. PLAY one track or at most two at different times of the year. The rest is just hearsay, nobody on here knows anyone on mystical teams. With 50 employees, damn sure they dont disclose a thing on boards. Not asking anyone to believe me or care but I know what I know and only ones I know that make a dime are specialists. Really now, think of the logic here. Do you really think If I only play MTN and you and your goofy software and all your backfitting think you can beat me when I know every trainer move and every bias and every nuance... You got no shot brother. Thats why the specialists will destroy you when you play there or try to play 10 tracks.

I kinda idolize people who are masters of one track,im all ears whenever they
have insights into races I never would have had.....but at the same time id bet there are a few races at any track where local knowledge may get trumped by another approach.....it may even be a "goofy" approach.

[wonatthewire1]

I know you tried to explain this to me once before but I simply never understood what you meant. Still don't.

What are "odds points" and what do you mean by "net odds points?"

Pretty straight forward - odds points means cumulative net winnings.
I normally bet 2 horses in a race

For example
Bet two horses, a 9/2 and a 7-1, the 9/2 wins then we net 3.5 odds points
Next race, both our horses run out, net -2 odds points, so far we've netted 1.5 total
Next race, a 15-1 and a 6-1 shot, the 15-1 wins, we net 14, add to our 1.5 gets 15.5 total, I have reached my goal of 10 so I can keep playing if finding something or stop.

Attachment has 2 examples

First is an example where I lost the first 3 races then hit two, last column shows the net odds points

Second is a longer run where I continued past 10 cumulative until 2 consecutive losses

Based on time (and available races) - it can be a rather quick accomplishment.

[pondman]

Let me take Pondman, for example, from reading his posts (although, I have kidded and referred to his method as the shipping thingy), I have reason to believe he

Mike (Dr Beav)

I welcome you into this game. I welcome the whale who is playing those short prices. It's not my game.

You'll only help me. In return, I'll warn you about Charles Town. Be careful, that's a life I've lead. You have no idea what you are stepping in. You ever have any affiliations with anyone in West Virginia? Jockeys, trainers, owners? I'd look for some place with a racing commission to do your math. Anywhere else.

[Dave Schwartz]

wonatthewire1,

Perfect explanation1 I love it!

Great idea.

Did you think of this all by yourself?


Dave

[PaceAdvantage]

Sorry to burst your bubble. The only ones I can actually say I know for sure 100% sure of and have seen the books. PLAY one track or at most two at different times of the year. The rest is just hearsay, nobody on here knows anyone on mystical teams. With 50 employees, damn sure they dont disclose a thing on boards. Not asking anyone to believe me or care but I know what I know and only ones I know that make a dime are specialists. Really now, think of the logic here. Do you really think If I only play MTN and you and your goofy software and all your backfitting think you can beat me when I know every trainer move and every bias and every nuance... You got no shot brother. Thats why the specialists will destroy you when you play there or try to play 10 tracks.Please, spare me the "my dick is bigger than yours" nonsense.

Another genius who thinks his way is the only way, and nobody else can make a dime. There is software out there that will DESTROY you, me and everyone else on this board. And all the trainer moves, bias, and nuance ain't going to save you from that software dipping its ethereal hand into your wallet and scooping out the cash.

You can have your one track specialty. I prefer to find a true edge, however small, and then act like a casino, taking advantage of any and every race at any and every track that qualifies. A small edge will add up to BIG BUCKS when applied nationwide.

Just because you can't handle that kind of inventory doesn't mean nobody else can...

[PaceAdvantage]

Not sure he would do it but He might speak to this subject because I know for a fact he has said on his show many times how important it is to follow this circuit very closely to survive. Probably can"t disclose his roi at MTN but lets suffice it to say I think its better than 4% in any category. I think he said he plays Charlestown also.I'd love to see any concrete proof of this...

[Robert Goren]

Why do the whales have 25-50 employees? Do they have an employee assigned to each track? Just asking.

[dkithore]

Why do the whales have 25-50 employees? Do they have an employee assigned to each track? Just asking.

Robert,I love the way you frame questions. You are one authentic man!

DK

[steveb]

Why do the whales have 25-50 employees? Do they have an employee assigned to each track? Just asking.

racing experts of varying kind
traders
modellers
statisticians
video watchers
programmers
accountants
ceo
etc
etc
etc

just my guesses .......

[Dave Schwartz]

The play is not automated. Each race is handled by a single person. Thus, it takes a significant staff to handle a full day of racing. Remember, this is every day, 364 days per year.

If you look at the scheduling needs to handle a full week - 4-5 at a time on a busy Saturday, plus a supervisor to deal with problems - it takes a complete staff. In addition, people do not work a 14-hour shift. Tuesdays are light but it still takes at least two at all times.

As Steve said, there are programmers, analysts, and support staff. Remember that these are hourly people, not partners. Plus, when you have this many, you need someone to handle payroll and accounting. It is a real business.

I liken the structure to a retail business. When you are "open" which is like from noon (east coast time) to say midnight, you need a full compliment. But you also have work going on before - race prep (importing data, etc.), computer maintenance, network and facilities management, etc. Heck, you need people to empty the trash and clean the break room.

In other words, it takes all kinds.


Yes, this is what we are up against.

[teddy]

Please, spare me the "my dick is bigger than yours" nonsense.

Another genius who thinks his way is the only way, and nobody else can make a dime. There is software out there that will DESTROY you, me and everyone else on this board. And all the trainer moves, bias, and nuance ain't going to save you from that software dipping its ethereal hand into your wallet and scooping out the cash.

You can have your one track specialty. I prefer to find a true edge, however small, and then act like a casino, taking advantage of any and every race at any and every track that qualifies. A small edge will add up to BIG BUCKS when applied nationwide.

Just because you can't handle that kind of inventory doesn't mean nobody else can...



Were not supposed to use foul language on here. You got on me for that a while back. Lets follow our own rules. The software you are talking about cost more than 90% of these guys make in a lifetime. If it still is effective after there are 5 copies floating around. Any black box method will always fail, you cant keep that roi up because as soon as its profitable everyone guy with a laptop sees it and bets it into oblivion. IT DOES HOWEVER GIVE MANY OF THEM THE ONE THING THEY NEED. HOPE.

HOPE SELLS ... PLUG IN SOME FR1 VARIABLES AND SPIT OUT A POSITIVE ROI.. THEN THEY SAY TO THEMSELVES I CAN GET RICH WHEN I DO THIS OVER AND OVER AT MANY TRACKS. Too much software out there that does the same things. Lets suckers mine themselves to death. They are trying to come up with better horses than guys with million dollar programs. NO shot. They may come up with a contender set to handicap from but thats all I see its worth over 10 years of playing with them. You have to give your own head a chance.

Oh and I never said mine was the only way, or that it was my way. I just said that the successful betters I know of only play one or two tracks. I got to where I was playing MTN nightly and what do you know...checked my roi and realized I was making money at this one track year to year. Just like the other guys that specialized.

Lets see your proof on your small edge, big bucks theory. OVER TIME

Like to see a spot play that has shown a profit year after year for 10 years, backed by results.

Either Mountainman doesnt want in this discussion or can't be. I would bet my last dollar hes better than 4% WINNER AT HIS HOME TRACK. I am really surprised you would think he is not.

[PaceAdvantage]

Lets see your proof on your small edge, big bucks theory. OVER TIME

Like to see a spot play that has shown a profit year after year for 10 years, backed by results.

Either Mountainman doesnt want in this discussion or can't be. I would bet my last dollar hes better than 4% WINNER AT HIS HOME TRACK. I am really surprised you would think he is not.That was far from what I consider foul language...

And I never made any claims as to my own success...the only claims being made here are by you, both for yourself and mountainman....and like you, I don't have enough faith in mankind to go by your word alone...so why don't you back up your own personal claims, and if I should ever publicly proclaim on here that I have in my possession a certain edge, I'll be happy to back it up with proof....

[Hard2Like]

Been looking for a conversion chart ,if you will,of a sports wagering money management /betting sequence system I previously used and you've provided that info and then some.Seems to fit my style of playing and desired approach to profit mgmt.Thanks again 1.

[wonatthewire1]

wonatthewire1,

Perfect explanation1 I love it!

Great idea.

Did you think of this all by yourself?


Dave

Yes, I came up with it 6 years ago to smooth out my boom and bust cycles. Much more consistent with a decent method of for win bets. The question I asked myself was at what level of wins was I getting a net profit. My first goal was a bit too high (20 odds points per day). Noticed that I hit 10 over 90% of the time and have incrementally increased my bet size.

Remember that odds points need to be multiplied by bet size for $ amounts. I could see someone saying "hey, you only made $15.50? So what?"

For the examples, using a $20 win bets:

The 15.5 one would work out to net $310.00

The spreadsheet ones, I was at $50 win bets:
The 31.65 one = $50 * 31.65 = $1,582.50

The 45.1 one = $50 * 16.2 = $810; doing the run to 2 consecutive losses: $50 * 45.1 = $2,255.00

[HuggingTheRail]

The play is not automated. Each race is handled by a single person. Thus, it takes a significant staff to handle a full day of racing. Remember, this is every day, 364 days per year.

If you look at the scheduling needs to handle a full week - 4-5 at a time on a busy Saturday, plus a supervisor to deal with problems - it takes a complete staff. In addition, people do not work a 14-hour shift. Tuesdays are light but it still takes at least two at all times.

As Steve said, there are programmers, analysts, and support staff. Remember that these are hourly people, not partners. Plus, when you have this many, you need someone to handle payroll and accounting. It is a real business.


Dave (and others in the know) thanks for sharing what you can about this - I find this topic very interesting. Finding the people must be incredbly difficult...and I imagine the "duds" don't stay employed too long... (Maybe I'll grab a couple of dozen people at Hastings tonight and we can start one...:lol: )

[AITrader]

The play is not automated. Each race is handled by a single person. Thus, it takes a significant staff to handle a full day of racing. Remember, this is every day, 364 days per year.


Why wouldn't they automate the betting? If the software works, the human reaction time would just be a hindrance. Or are they there as some kind of human failsafe if things go haywire? Seems like a large cost overhead for something a machine could do much more cheaply and quickly.

[teddy]

Exclude wagers ≥ $
Track Wager Type


Search Criteria
Tracks: Mountaineer
# of Bets Win % $1 ROI Wagered Payoff Profit/Loss
441 18.14% +0.05 $11194.50 $11772.90 $+578.40



Factor in about 10% rebate and least im up $1600 at this track. YTD

[teddy]

Why wouldn't they automate the betting? If the software works, the human reaction time would just be a hindrance. Or are they there as some kind of human failsafe if things go haywire? Seems like a large cost overhead for something a machine could do much more cheaply and quickly.


IF Schwartz has software that can pull scratches on its own at diff times of the day, and then run the spot play query and then place bets. That would be worth it. I said years ago on here that automation software is worth it. No one had any.

[Dahoss9698]

People actually play Mountaineer? :lol:

[Dave Schwartz]

Why wouldn't they automate the betting? If the software works, the human reaction time would just be a hindrance. Or are they there as some kind of human failsafe if things go haywire? Seems like a large cost overhead for something a machine could do much more cheaply and quickly.

1. Post time is never at zero minutes to post. It takes a visual decision to know that the horses are really at the starting gate and it is time to place wagers.

Also, since the tote board is part of the handicapping (as well as the final decision) the probabilities change continually.

2. Off-track and off-turf are an issue, as well as entry-scratches.

3. Human fail safe (as you put it) is necessary.


I only know of one big player who really automated things completely and he stopped playing a couple of years ago.

[proximity]

the recent $4328 dana parham double at buffalo harness wasn't automated?

[Dave Schwartz]

I know nothing about harness. Perhaps that is different, but my understanding is that it is not.

[teddy]

[QUOTE=Dahoss9698]People actually play Mountaineer? :lol:[/QUO

People and robots.

[PaceAdvantage]

Exclude wagers ≥ $
Track Wager Type


Search Criteria
Tracks: Mountaineer
# of Bets Win % $1 ROI Wagered Payoff Profit/Loss
441 18.14% +0.05 $11194.50 $11772.90 $+578.40



Factor in about 10% rebate and least im up $1600 at this track. YTDYou know and I know if "Schwartz" posted something like this, you'd laugh him off the board...this is meaningless...I could type a bunch of numbers too...not sure what you're trying to prove.

[teddy]

[QUOTE=PaceAdvantage]You know and I know if "Schwartz" posted something like this, you'd laugh him off the board...this is meaningless...I could type a bunch of numbers too...not sure what you're trying to prove.[/QUOTE


Proof I played 11k this year and was 1.05 roi... what the hell else you want. Oh I get it.. now i made it up.. One track MTN just like I said. Problem is here Im not selling anything so I need not make up crap. YOu asked for proof and you got it. Just forget it dude.. this is a waste of time. OH and if Schwartz posted his roi I would believe him. Because you accept his advertising, I would expect you verified it. IF you dont want to believe thats my roi then don't.


Last word on this topic, if you focus on one track then you have a much better chance to be profitable.

[bob60566]

[QUOTE=PaceAdvantage]You know and I know if "Schwartz" posted something like this, you'd laugh him off the board...this is meaningless...I could type a bunch of numbers too...not sure what you're trying to prove.[/QUOTE


Proof I played 11k this year and was 1.05 roi... what the hell else you want. Oh I get it.. now i made it up.. One track MTN just like I said. Problem is here Im not selling anything so I need not make up crap. YOu asked for proof and you got it. Just forget it dude.. this is a waste of time. OH and if Schwartz posted his roi I would believe him. Because you accept his advertising, I would expect you verified it. IF you dont want to believe thats my roi then don't.


Last word on this topic, if you focus on one track then you have a much better chance to be profitable.
Teddy
Why not just surrender like the rest of us it is a lot easier and may the field size at the Mount increase.
Mac :)

[Dave Schwartz]

Last word on this topic, if you focus on one track then you have a much better chance to be profitable.

So MNR is the only track you played last year?


Signed,
The Schwartz
(At least give me that I am
the only one posting here.)

[cj]

Last word on this topic, if you focus on one track then you have a much better chance to be profitable.

It all depends on how you play.

[PaceAdvantage]

Oh I get it.. now i made it up.. One track MTN just like I said. Problem is here Im not selling anything so I need not make up crap.You're a riot...dude. I get it...only folks selling stuff are prone to make things up on the Internet... :lol:

I'll keep that little gem of wisdom in mind... :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Tom]

Last word on this topic, if I focus on one track then I have a much better chance to be break even.

FTFY

[Robert Fischer]

Interesting thread drift to intensive vs. extensive.

couple of points
1. software can "specialize" in a track.
Sure there are people tailoring to a track(pars, bias, connections), or at the very least keeping records to know what tracks work well.

2. Players can specialize at more than 1 track. I might be lucky enough to know a particular track very well. There is no reason that I can not learn the "nuances" of an additional track without losing my place in the old favorite. Of course this may not work with 30 tracks (or at least it will be a slow process of growth), but a player could hypothetically know a several tracks during the day and a couple at night.

agree? disagree??


may add more l8tr

[Dave Schwartz]

Interesting thread drift to intensive vs. extensive.

couple of points
1. software can "specialize" in a track.
Sure there are people tailoring to a track(pars, bias, connections), or at the very least keeping records to know what tracks work well.

2. Players can specialize at more than 1 track. I might be lucky enough to know a particular track very well. There is no reason that I can not learn the "nuances" of an additional track without losing my place in the old favorite. Of course this may not work with 30 tracks (or at least it will be a slow process of growth), but a player could hypothetically know a several tracks during the day and a couple at night.

Perfect!

One of the advantages of using software is the speed with which you can do things.

[Robert Fischer]

Perfect!

One of the advantages of using software is the speed with which you can do things.

software also doesn't have greed, hangovers, etc...

[speed]

software also doesn't have greed, hangovers, etc...
My internet is so slow this evening i might disagree. :)

[kingfin66]

That was far from what I consider foul language...



...and far beyond what I would consider foul language to be.

[TrifectaMike]

I welcome you into this game. I welcome the whale who is playing those short prices. It's not my game.

You'll only help me. In return, I'll warn you about Charles Town. Be careful, that's a life I've lead. You have no idea what you are stepping in. You ever have any affiliations with anyone in West Virginia? Jockeys, trainers, owners? I'd look for some place with a racing commission to do your math. Anywhere else.

Pondman,

That was a compliment.

FYI, Charles Town is not a horror. In fact, even using simple techniques Charle Town is profitable.

Mike (Dr Beav)

[mountainman]

Very cool thread. Different viewpoints that both resonate. I don't doubt that well-conceived comp programs can beat the races, or attack in ways not specific to a single track. But that's not how I roll. I'm an old-school handicapper with limited knowledge of technology. Aside from transposing my own notes to formulator, a pair of excel d-bases- one a track profile, the other predicated on invaders- are my only interactions with the machine. A man knows his limitations and uses what he has.

No grandiose claims here, that's simply not my style-the game is too humbling and bravado too distasteful to me. So I'll let my viewers and peers judge the extent and usefulness of my knowledge.

As to roi, no analyst picking every race can show a longterm profit, and many would find it particularly impossible at mnr. I will say my website selections, posted daily since summer before last, do show a modest profit. A profit that might be higher were it not for giving my partner first pick of races- and for posting picks on too MANY races, in an effort to accomodate management. But as far as a longterm profit on ALL mnr races, no, no way, no how.

I'd like to add that i've learned more on this forum than could possibly have been learned from me, and enjoy communicating with handicappers of a different ilk.

[teddy]

SO some of the picks on the selection page are Nancys, often wondered why they were out of sequence. Anyway to tell whose are whose?

[Dave Schwartz]

I have a couple of great conversations with the man from da mountain, and he is definitely the real deal. Aside from having that great "radio voice" he knows his stuff.

As he said, his style is not my style but he is good at what he does.

Dave

[teddy]

I have a couple of great conversations with the man from da mountain, and he is definitely the real deal. Aside from having that great "radio voice" he knows his stuff.

As he said, his style is not my style but he is good at what he does.

Dave


Did I miss something? Didn't see him mention you in his post. Just as I sat down to dinner after posting I said to myself " I bet Schwartz posts next after a semi celebrity posts.

[thaskalos]

Very cool thread. Different viewpoints that both resonate. I don't doubt that well-conceived comp programs can beat the races, or attack in ways not specific to a single track. But that's not how I roll. I'm an old-school handicapper with limited knowledge of technology. Aside from transposing my own notes to formulator, a pair of excel d-bases- one a track profile, the other predicated on invaders- are my only interactions with the machine. A man knows his limitations and uses what he has.

No grandiose claims here, that's simply not my style-the game is too humbling and bravado too distasteful to me. So I'll let my viewers and peers judge the extent and usefulness of my knowledge.

As to roi, no analyst picking every race can show a longterm profit, and many would find it particularly impossible at mnr. I will say my website selections, posted daily since summer before last, do show a modest profit. A profit that might be higher were it not for giving my partner first pick of races- and for posting picks on too MANY races, in an effort to accomodate management. But as far as a longterm profit on ALL mnr races, no, no way, no how.

I'd like to add that i've learned more on this forum than could possibly have been learned from me, and enjoy communicating with handicappers of a different ilk.

It's impossible not to like this guy...:ThmbUp:

[Dave Schwartz]

Teddy,

I really need your number on speed dial so that your approval can be assured before making a post.


LOL - What's next? Gonna get a big rig?

[teddy]

Really Dave, I heard you were not quite the hit at the last toga party...funny how egos can fool us.

[teddy]

Feel free to hit the ignore button on my posts.. I wont be offended.

[Dave Schwartz]

Really Dave, I heard you were not quite the hit at the last toga party...funny how egos can fool us.

Not sure why you would say that. I had a great 10 days - started slow but finished strongly to be highly profitable by the end.

But then, you are all about "Super-Teddy" aren't you?


(I will attempt to be finished with this. It is a waste of my time.)

[bob60566]

Very cool thread. Different viewpoints that both resonate. I don't doubt that well-conceived comp programs can beat the races, or attack in ways not specific to a single track. But that's not how I roll. I'm an old-school handicapper with limited knowledge of technology. Aside from transposing my own notes to formulator, a pair of excel d-bases- one a track profile, the other predicated on invaders- are my only interactions with the machine. A man knows his limitations and uses what he has.

No grandiose claims here, that's simply not my style-the game is too humbling and bravado too distasteful to me. So I'll let my viewers and peers judge the extent and usefulness of my knowledge.

As to roi, no analyst picking every race can show a longterm profit, and many would find it particularly impossible at mnr. I will say my website selections, posted daily since summer before last, do show a modest profit. A profit that might be higher were it not for giving my partner first pick of races- and for posting picks on too MANY races, in an effort to accomodate management. But as far as a longterm profit on ALL mnr races, no, no way, no how.
I'd like to add that i've learned more on this forum than could possibly have been learned from me, and enjoy communicating with handicappers of a different ilk.

Thanks Mark
For the very informative post and would be redboarding to say how similar our top picks are

Mac :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[PaceAdvantage]

Really Dave, I heard you were not quite the hit at the last toga party...funny how egos can fool us.You need to expand your circle of friends beyond Patrick the Truck Driver.

[PaceAdvantage]

SO some of the picks on the selection page are Nancys, often wondered why they were out of sequence. Anyway to tell whose are whose?So you can't even figure out which picks are Mountainman's and which are Nancy's, yet you hit us with this gem earlier in the thread:I would bet my last dollar hes better than 4% WINNER AT HIS HOME TRACK. I am really surprised you would think he is not.Wave goodbye to your credibility as it beats a hasty retreat out the door.

[mountainman]

I just assumed that interested parties could easily distinguish my reasoning and writing style from hers. But since both formats are terse and stacatto ( I really don't have time for more elaborate analysis on mnr's website), that could be difficult, I guess. From here on out, I'm changing my font to blue. I'm not here to flog the website, and do appreciate being allowed to link it to my posts, but some clarification seemed required. Now please, since my analysis, written or oral, just isn't germane to this thread, get back to the compelling debate of computer versus man.

Incidentally, I would much prefer that players read my blog rather than selections. I take considerable pride in it. (Sorry, pace, about the plug. I'll return the favor tenfold on our show.)

[maddog42]

PA is getting a bargain, with a plug.

[mountainman]

It's impossible not to like this guy...:ThmbUp:

Back at ya, pal. And make it double. I've long considered you the true heart of this posting board.

[mountainman]

Thanks Mark
For the very informative post and would be redboarding to say how similar our top picks are

Mac :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

I dig the analysis you post on night school. Nice work, guy.

[teddy]

So you can't even figure out which picks are Mountainman's and which are Nancy's, yet you hit us with this gem earlier in the thread:Wave goodbye to your credibility as it beats a hasty retreat out the door.

I dont think you look at the selections on there or you would get it. Same font , same color and no where does it even say there are 2 people posting selections. The assumption would be that its one person. Goto any other website and you will see it clearly says whose pics are which track handicapper.

LOl you want me to discern writing styles??? The second comment you made makes no sense. But whatever... your worried about credibility and you didnt even believe when I posted my roi at MTN. Same old arguments, different day.
You wanted proof Im profitable at one track, I gave it to you. Then you attack it like I had something monetary to gain. I won there last night tooo... I can send that proof too...

Im guessing you are saying mountainman does not make 4% at his own track, from his post. Thats not what he said, he said because he has to post every race, then its not possible. HE did say his selections were modestly profitable. Which is in effect the same as my wagers, spot plays on some of the races.

OK DAVE lets you chime in now.. know your dying to. :lol:

[teddy]

You need to expand your circle of friends beyond Patrick the Truck Driver.


Never spoke to this person and not sure the reference. After Dave said that I went back and saw where hes not a fan of Dave. Something about Dave sold him software and then cut him off when he posted pics that lost I assume.

[Dave Schwartz]

Yes, I am going to chime in.

If you want to do a battle of wits, then come with some real ammunition. As it is now you use innuendo and gossip whenever possible.

What you are doing is merely taking cheap shots. IMHO, this makes you appear even smaller than you probably are.

I will decline to play your silly game as much as possible.

I do not enjoy being in a hostile environment and you have decided to make this such a place for me.

I will reconsider my postings on PA in light of this environmental change.

[teddy]

Cheap shots, You are making fun of someone named truck driver. I think you should reconsider your postings. Making fun of people just because they dont like you is really not going to put you in a great light there Dave. Just mean spirited. Oh and no one believes for a minute you will stop posting or cut back in any fashion. Im done in this thread and please steer clear of my posts and I will do likewise.

As I told another poster, IF you meet a guy on the street and he gives you advice you say thanks, I might try that. In a forum you give advice and they call you a braggard, loser, idiot or eccentric, fake .... you name it and they call you it.. oh and a liar.

[Helles]

Hey Dave,

I would hate to see several people on this board stop posting or curtail their posts. There are some original thinkers on this forum that have much to offer. You are one of those people.

If I may offer some unsolicited advice, remain above the fray. Those that know you, and I imagine the vast majority of those that read you, know you're a class individual.

Doug

[PaceAdvantage]

I dont think you look at the selections on there or you would get it. Same font , same color and no where does it even say there are 2 people posting selections. The assumption would be that its one person. Goto any other website and you will see it clearly says whose pics are which track handicapper.

LOl you want me to discern writing styles??? The second comment you made makes no sense. But whatever... your worried about credibility and you didnt even believe when I posted my roi at MTN. Same old arguments, different day.
You wanted proof Im profitable at one track, I gave it to you. Then you attack it like I had something monetary to gain. I won there last night tooo... I can send that proof too...

Im guessing you are saying mountainman does not make 4% at his own track, from his post. Thats not what he said, he said because he has to post every race, then its not possible. HE did say his selections were modestly profitable. Which is in effect the same as my wagers, spot plays on some of the races.

OK DAVE lets you chime in now.. know your dying to. :lol:You made it seem like a dead-lock cinch that YOU KNOW Mountainman makes more than 4% at MNR. THOSE WERE YOUR WORDS.

Then, IN YOUR WORDS, you admit to not even knowing what his selections are each night, so how the hell would you be able to know how much or how little he makes?

And we're supposed to take your word on all the other bullshit you spout about people like Dave?

No thanks buddy...you've shown you're highly unreliable when it comes to opinion.

[PaceAdvantage]

Something about Dave sold him software and then cut him off when he posted pics that lost I assume.Yeah, you assume...that's another golden moment for you...

Your assumptions suck...you have proven that already all by your lonesome.

Dave cut him off when he realized he was hopeless (just like a bunch of other people have realized on this forum about Patrick...if you're truly an honest person, you'll go back and read all of Patrick's posts...especially the ones that don't concern Dave...and all the advice others (most with nothing to sell) have given him...)

But you won't do that, will you?

[teddy]

You made it seem like a dead-lock cinch that YOU KNOW Mountainman makes more than 4% at MNR. THOSE WERE YOUR WORDS.

Then, IN YOUR WORDS, you admit to not even knowing what his selections are each night, so how the hell would you be able to know how much or how little he makes?

And we're supposed to take your word on all the other bullshit you spout about people like Dave?

No thanks buddy...you've shown you're highly unreliable when it comes to opinion.

God as I tried I wanted to not respond but getting misquoted is too much of a lure. OK, What was meant was that if I make more than 6% or whatever, I know MTNman makes more than me. I never claimed to be as good as him at the MTN.. thats impossible. I still bet he makes more than I do. THe selections posted on the website are his and Nancys, Just tonight that came to light for me at least. Before hand there was no notation to that fact. Just dont expect his profits come from just those pics. BUT he did say they are profitable if thats any clue to you. Also on his live show he posts his pics with the caveat that they cant be profitable long term because he MUST pick every race. I DO NOT bet his pics, however I do add some to my pick 4 bets.


05/2012 09:30 PM Reconciled Mountaineer R7 $1.00 PK4 2,3/6,8,9/1,2,3,5/4,5,7 $72.00 $290.10
06/05/2012 09:29 PM Reconciled Mountaineer R7 $1.00 PK4 2,3,7,9/6,8,9/1,2,3,5/4,5,7 $144.00 $290.10

Pick 4 twice tonight.. nuff said... also check the transcript for the bombs away bob show and see what I posted there before the race.

OH but I probably made that up too

[PaceAdvantage]

God as I tried I wanted to not respond but getting misquoted is too much of a lure. OK, What was meant was that if I make more than 6% or whatever, I know MTNman makes more than me. I never claimed to be as good as him at the MTN.. thats impossible. I still bet he makes more than I do. THe selections posted on the website are his and Nancys, Just tonight that came to light for me at least. Before hand there was no notation to that fact. Just dont expect his profits come from just those pics. BUT he did say they are profitable if thats any clue to you. Also on his live show he posts his pics with the caveat that they cant be profitable long term because he MUST pick every race. I DO NOT bet his pics, however I do add some to my pick 4 bets.


05/2012 09:30 PM Reconciled Mountaineer R7 $1.00 PK4 2,3/6,8,9/1,2,3,5/4,5,7 $72.00 $290.10
06/05/2012 09:29 PM Reconciled Mountaineer R7 $1.00 PK4 2,3,7,9/6,8,9/1,2,3,5/4,5,7 $144.00 $290.10

Pick 4 twice tonight.. nuff said... also check the transcript for the bombs away bob show and see what I posted there before the race.

OH but I probably made that up tooWhy can't you just admit you have absolutely no clue what Mountainman makes or doesn't make?

That would be refreshingly accurate for a change...

And people who post supposed lines from their ADW account screens consistently make me laugh. As if that proves a thing.

I don't care whether you win or lose...how's that?

[bigmack]

Last word on this topic, if you focus on one track then you have a much better chance to be profitable.
What happened to this statement you made 4 days ago?

Oh, & the statement is a pile of manure.

The essence of the thread is churn. Know what that means?

[Buchan]

What happened to this statement you made 4 days ago?

Oh, & the statement is a pile of manure.

The essence of the thread is churn. Know what that means?


actually i think he is basically correct, although i suppose it depends on your methodology to start with.
if you work alone then you are probably better off doing one place well, rather than many mediocre.
churning is preferable imo, but not everybody is in a position to do that, nor may they want to.

[teddy]

What happened to this statement you made 4 days ago?

Oh, & the statement is a pile of manure.

The essence of the thread is churn. Know what that means?

They keep draggin you back in ! Im pretty sure 99% of the people that post lines from their betting account do not make it up. Thats just me though, I think most of us are honest people. When we have nothing to gain at least.

Churn, I totally have seen someone bet $150k an afternoon, on one track. He churned the best I have ever seen. Even he says its much harder now than 10 years ago. That the public has caught up and the dumb money is no longer there like it used to be.

[maddog42]

They keep draggin you back in ! Im pretty sure 99% of the people that post lines from their betting account do not make it up. Thats just me though, I think most of us are honest people. When we have nothing to gain at least.

Churn, I totally have seen someone bet $150k an afternoon, on one track. He churned the best I have ever seen. Even he says its much harder now than 10 years ago. That the public has caught up and the dumb money is no longer there like it used to be.

Why don't we call a truce so this thread can get back to crackpot betting schemes.?

[PaceAdvantage]

They keep draggin you back in ! Im pretty sure 99% of the people that post lines from their betting account do not make it up. Thats just me though, I think most of us are honest people. When we have nothing to gain at least.

Churn, I totally have seen someone bet $150k an afternoon, on one track. He churned the best I have ever seen. Even he says its much harder now than 10 years ago. That the public has caught up and the dumb money is no longer there like it used to be.I never meant to imply you were making the lines from your betting account up...I meant to imply that it doesn't matter...

[tracksim]

Hi,

I'm not saying this can or can't be done but if you can find 10 plays a day that go off at 5/2 some higher of course, and you can win 30% of your bets at 5/2 min. That's a 5% edge on the game. There are a few full time horse players around and I would think more would speak up. I would like to here what there edge is day to day. I don't even think you need to look for overlays just find 30% winners at 5/2. It would seem like you could just handicap the race and find out who you think will win and if they are 5/2 or higher and it's one of your horses that come in 30% of the time, make the bet. It won't matter what you made the line at as long as you hit your numbers. I understand the over lays ect and why this is done but it seems if all you need is 5% to make a good profit then why would this not work?

Why look for a winner? Why not look at a track like Mountaineer that pays 2.20 to show and has a 10% return on your winning show bets and reduces risk on your win wager?

[castaway01]

I dig the analysis you post on night school. Nice work, guy.

Not for nothin', but that's BombsAwayBob who does the analysis on night school, TVG, various other places---not this guy. The other Bob also posts here if you want to message him.

[Robert Fischer]

Why don't we call a truce so this thread can get back to crackpot betting schemes.?

Hey, I'll have you know that the thread starter is a well respected mem...

[bigmack]

Churn, I totally have seen someone bet $150k an afternoon, on one track.
I'll freely admit, I was skeptical until you used "totally." I'm a true believer now. :rolleyes:

Is your involvement in this thread (which has been laughable) TOTALLY wrapped-up now?

Mighty impressive adventures you're living. Totally !

[maddog42]

Hey, I'll have you know that the thread starter is a well respected mem...

Respected? Well I wouldn't go that far. Perhaps tolerated is more accurate.


PS Were you about to call me a member? Well I guess that is better than some things.