Does the track really matter?

[Solid_Gold]

I mean when you consider yourself a handicapper shouldn't you be able to cap any track or surface based on the horses in the race?

Looking for opinions is all.

[Greyfox]

I mean when you consider yourself a handicapper shouldn't you be able to cap any track or surface based on the horses in the race?

Looking for opinions is all.

How today's track is playing is absolutely critical to determining who wins.
A group of horses on a fast track will finish quite differently than the same group of horses on a deeper slower track that is killing off speed.
A concept entitled "Track Energy" that has been outlined by Brohamer and Sartin if you are looking for more info on this idea.

[Wagergirl]

How today's track is playing is absolutely critical to determining who wins.
A group of horses on a fast track will finish quite differently than the same group of horses on a deeper slower track that is killing off speed.
A concept entitled "Track Energy" that has been outlined by Brohamer and Sartin if you are looking for more info on this idea.


I think his question is.. If you can handicap at Belmont, shouldn't you be able to transfer those skills to handicapping at say, PARX?

[maddog42]

I think his question is.. If you can handicap at Belmont, shouldn't you be able to transfer those skills to handicapping at say, PARX?

He did say SURFACE and this is probably more important than almost any single factor in this day of synthetics. I will often use "horses for courses" angle to break ties in my handicapping because it surely makes a difference.

[Greyfox]

I think his question is.. If you can handicap at Belmont, shouldn't you be able to transfer those skills to handicapping at say, PARX?

Of course you can. But track surface and what today's track is allowing to win is first and foremost.
Handicapping skills are transferable for sure. However handicappers who focus on a given track or two will have an edge with respect to local trainers practices and local biases (gate position, surface etc), in contrast to handicappers who hopscotch across a variety of tracks.

[BlueChip@DRF]

I think his question is.. If you can handicap at Belmont, shouldn't you be able to transfer those skills to handicapping at say, PARX?

"Should", but sadly it is never the case. Have you also taken course configuration into account? The Belmont turns are totally different from any other track in North America.

[MaTH716]

I think having the ability/information to identify any sort of bias and adjust your handicapping accordingly, is the most important factor surrounding tracks/surfaces.

[Solid_Gold]

I think his question is.. If you can handicap at Belmont, shouldn't you be able to transfer those skills to handicapping at say, PARX?

Wagergirl is correct. That was my question! I see lots of posters concentrating on one or two tracks? This is what I don't get.

If you consider yourself a good capper at say Belmont why can't you pick winners at say Arlington? A horse is a horse right and their pp's are right in front of you. Seems to me this specialization is somewhat over rated. If you think you can win on dirt why can't you win on poly or turf from a capping perspective?

[Dahoss9698]

Track doesn't matter when you make 4 picks per race, every race, at every track.

For those who actually bet, of course track matters, as does surface, etc.

[horses4courses]

Wagergirl is correct. That was my question! I see lots of posters concentrating on one or two tracks? This is what I don't get.

If you consider yourself a good capper at say Belmont why can't you pick winners at say Arlington? A horse is a horse right and their pp's are right in front of you. Seems to me this specialization is somewhat over rated. If you think you can win on dirt why can't you win on poly or turf from a capping perspective?

You state that specialization is overrated.
I would say that familiarity is important.

Knowing the trainers, jockeys, horses, on certain circuits is a key tool when it comes to handicapping races.
Is sticking to, say, one or two circuits necessary to be successful at this game? Depends on the player.

The more tracks I bet into, the harder it is for me to turn a profit in the long run. I find there is a law of diminishing returns when you spread your efforts over too many circuits. But that's just me. Certain players have angles that they can apply at many tracks. My advice for them would be "if it ain't broke, no need to fix it"

Good luck to you!

[BlueChip@DRF]

You state that specialization is overrated.
I would say that familiarity is important.

Knowing the trainers, jockeys, horses, on certain circuits is a key tool when it comes to handicapping races.
Is sticking to, say, one or two circuits necessary to be successful at this game? Depends on the player.

The more tracks I bet into, the harder it is for me to turn a profit in the long run. I find there is a law of diminishing returns when you spread your efforts over too many circuits. But that's just me. Certain players have angles that they can apply at many tracks. My advice for them would be "if it ain't broke, no need to fix it"

Good luck to you!

+1

[Solid_Gold]

Track doesn't matter when you make 4 picks per race, every race, at every track.

For those who actually bet, of course track matters, as does surface, etc.

When were your last picks, BigMouth? I see 6/16 and you lost them all!
0-5 No wonder you're so bitter!

[Robert Fischer]

Tracks have different general biases that are mostly from configuration and surface.
These are invaluable guides to looking at individual trips.

[Solid_Gold]

You state that specialization is overrated.
I would say that familiarity is important.

Knowing the trainers, jockeys, horses, on certain circuits is a key tool when it comes to handicapping races.
Is sticking to, say, one or two circuits necessary to be successful at this game? Depends on the player.

The more tracks I bet into, the harder it is for me to turn a profit in the long run. I find there is a law of diminishing returns when you spread your efforts over too many circuits. But that's just me. Certain players have angles that they can apply at many tracks. My advice for them would be "if it ain't broke, no need to fix it"

Good luck to you!

But aren't all those records J/T and horses included in the pp's? I'm thinking the bottom line is whatever the capper is comfy with may be the most important regardless whether the capper wins or loses?

Thanks h4c and BOL to you as well

[Solid_Gold]

Tracks have different general biases that are mostly from configuration and surface.
These are invaluable guides to looking at individual trips.

I'm not one for the bias thingy. I think it has more to do with the steed.
JMO though

[horses4courses]

But aren't all those records J/T and horses included in the pp's? I'm thinking the bottom line is whatever the capper is comfy with may be the most important regardless whether the capper wins or loses?

Thanks h4c and BOL to you as well

If any handicapper is comfortable with losing (in the long run), they need a new hobby.

[BlueChip@DRF]

If any handicapper is comfortable with losing (in the long run), they need a new hobby.

I need a new hobby....

[Dahoss9698]

When were your last picks, BigMouth? I see 6/16 and you lost them all!
0-5 No wonder you're so bitter!

I'm actually glad you started this thread, because it really drives my point home.

Track doesn't matter for you, because you're playing bingo....which is why it bothers you when your "work" goes unnoticed.

[atlasaxis]

The Ten Commandments of Handicapping

by Dick Mitchell

1. Thou shalt know thy track.
2. Thou shalt understand Ability.
3. Thou shalt understand Form and Condition.
4. Thou shalt understand Angles and Hot Stats.
5. Thou shalt understand "Wager Value."
6. Thou shalt make a Betting Line.
7. Thou shalt not bet against a legitimate favorite.
8. Thou shalt recognize false and vulnerable favorites.
9. Thou shalt keep detailed records.
10. Thou shalt never stop learning about handicapping.

If you follow and abide by all ten, you can't do anything but win. You have no choice. These laws are as inviolable as the law of gravity. If you're not winning, or not winning as much as you should, the chances are you're violating one or more of these commandments.

The first commandment is very simple: know what's going on at the tracks you play. You must figure out what winners are doing, and only bet on horses that have the winning profile. You must also know the trainers, and their manipulations. You should be able to identify the jockeys they win with, and the jockeys they rarely succeed with. You must be aware of any track bias. In general, you should be fully cognizant of what wins and what loses at the racetracks you play.

The next four commandments are the core of the handicapping process. Together, they comprise an orderly and structured approach to handicapping. The first thing to do is assess the ability of each contender. Those horses found lacking in ability are eliminated. Second, determine the current form and condition of each of your contenders. Horses not meeting form and condition standards are then discarded. Third, look for extenuating circumstances or angles. These include "hot stats" and other reasons, outside the mainstream of speed, class and form, that a horse should still be considered. Fourth, look for value.

One of the biggest frauds ever perpetrated on the handicapper is that the name of this game is picking winners. That's simply not true. Nobody picks winners better than the public. The public, year in - year out, gets approximately 33% right, betting every race, and still loses money. If you bet every public favorite, you would receive less than eighty-five cents for every dollar that you wagered. There's no handicapper on earth, Tom Brohamer, James Quinn, Andrew Beyer, Mark Cramer, Gordon Pine or anybody you can name that's going to get 33% right betting every race. It's just not going to happen. If you know anybody who feels they want to take this up as a challenge, please send them to me. I'll book their action as long as they bet the same amount on every race. I'll pay track odds. We'll settle up at the end of the race meeting.

There are handicappers who achieve rates higher than 33%, but they don't bet every race. They're very selective. That's their edge. The name of this game is not just picking winners. It's picking winners that offer value. You can pick winners at a rate of 25% and make a very nice profit. If your average odds are 4-to-1 and you're picking winners at the rate of 25%, you're making a very handsome return. Picking one winner in four and getting paid an average of 4-to-1 means that you're losing three out of four bets. When you win, you win four units and when you lose, you lose one unit. Hence, in four bets you gain one unit profit. That's a 25% return on investment (ROI). There are investment fund managers who would give at least one of their vital organs to get this kind of return.

The sixth commandment is the key to winning at the track. The question most often asked at a racetrack is, "Who da ya like?" It's typically answered, "I like the five horse but I'm afraid of the nine." This answer is vague at best. A much better answer would be, "I'll take the five at 5-to-2, or the nine at 4-to-1." Most handicappers refuse to bet on any horse other than their top pick. This is what keeps many of them from the win window. How often have you heard a handicapper complain after a juicy longshot wins, "I circled that horse - I had him!"? When you ask if he bet the horse, he answers in the negative. The reason he didn't bet the horse was that it wasn't his top pick.

You should always bet on horses that offer value and avoid the low-priced underlays. An underlay is a horse that is offering less odds than its probability of winning demands. If a horse has a 33% chance to win the race and he is going off at even-money, it's no bet.

An overlay is just the opposite. Consider the same horse with a 33% chance to win going off at 3-to-1. What a bargain. That's the time to "send it in."

The seventh and eighth commandments remind us that races are divided into two groups: races that have a legitimate favorite and races that don't. A legitimate favorite is the class of the field, the speed of the field, and is in form and condition to deliver his ability. Anything less and you have a vulnerable favorite.

The ninth commandment is probably the most violated commandment of all. The vast majority of handicappers haven't the foggiest clue about their performance. Not one in a hundred could answer the following questions: What is your overall win percentage for the past 200 races? What's your average mutuel for the past 200 races? What's your ROI in turf races? What's your ROI in dirt sprints? If someone were to wake you up in the middle of the night and ask you these questions, and you could answer them correctly, it's certain you're a winning handicapper.

The last commandment should be self-evident. This game is dynamic. It's forever changing. In the seventies, you could win a lot of money using speed figures to predict adjusted final times. Today, you'd be lucky to break even using these methods. (The published Beyer Speed Figures bear witness to the truth of this statement. If you bet the highest last-race Beyer figure, you’ll win around 27% of the time, and lose close to 20 cents on the dollar.)

Please notice the tenth commandment didn't say to never stop learning about money management. That's because money management is finite and mathematical. The truth of mathematics is absolute. In mathematics, what was true fifty years ago, will be true a thousand years from now. Once you learn the principles of money management, they're yours for life. My best advice on this subject is to read and digest Barry Meadow’s Money Secrets at the Racetrack. It's a book devoted exclusively to the subject of money management. Once you digest its contents, you'll have solved a huge part of the thoroughbred handicapping-investment puzzle.

If you obey the ten commandments of handicapping, you can't avoid getting to horseplayer's heaven. If not, handicapper's perdition is your destination. In either case, you have my best wishes. I have friends in both places.


http://www.cynthiapublishing.com/MitchellArticles/dm20000922.htm

[PaceAdvantage]

When were your last picks, BigMouth? I see 6/16 and you lost them all!
0-5 No wonder you're so bitter!Stop while you're behind.

[Wagergirl]

The Ten Commandments of Handicapping


:ThmbUp:

[turninforhome10]

For those who are condition book handicappers (minority) ie me, following more than 3 circuits is very tough.
There are spot plays that can be worked for multiple tracks, sure. That is not your question.
By your assumption a player should be able to take his skills anywhere and win.
I would equate it to this.
Comfort level.
All poker players should be able to do the same based on your idea.
While this might be true, players are creature of habit. They like finding a place where they are comfortable on all levels. Finding a game of profitability can be elusive.
A player will first get their skills by playing all over the board looking for something to cling on to.
The horses for me have just as much an intellectual pursuit as a profit pursuit as I found them to be the most challenging and rewarding for the win. I have explored many angles and tried playing multiple tracks using angles from one and moving to the other.
It has never been fruitful.
What has been fruitful is paying due diligence to the 3 circuits I follow and doing so for the last 3 yrs. Knowing the horseflesh and using the horses I follow as barometers to gauge later races. Using the condition book gives me and idea of trainer intent. Trying to keep track of more than 3 circuits is mindblowing and a fulltime job based on my process.
I agree that a player should be able to take their game anywhere, but home field advantage is a very good feeling. On big pool days, it can really make a difference especially on the undercard races.

I have found a comfort zone and don't like to leave it.
(It only took me 20 years to get there :lol: )

[Solid_Gold]

Turning, I kinda agree!

[Wagergirl]

^^ I agree. I am not a handicapper by any stretch of the imagination. But I find that I am a better bettor at the nyra tracks then I am at other tracks. I just feel more comfortable wagering there.

[Solid_Gold]

If any handicapper is comfortable with losing (in the long run), they need a new hobby.
H4C, not what I was saying.

I was saying every capper has a comfort zone whether they are winning or losing players.

[thaskalos]

I mean when you consider yourself a handicapper shouldn't you be able to cap any track or surface based on the horses in the race?

Looking for opinions is all.
They don't pay you more for being a "jack of all trades".

In today's game, there is a good case to be made for being a 'specialist'...and betting only on those races that you are really confident in.

Different handicappers have differing sets of handicapping skills...and they are often better suited to certain races and distances/surfaces -- and not to others.

Not all races can be handicapped the same way...in my opinion at least.

The key is to know one's strengths and weaknesses.

Of course...I cannot totally discount the possibility that there might be some handicapping geniuses among us...who are equally skilled in all races and surfaces.

[acorn54]

i do alright not taking into account track bias or post bias.
i might do better paying attention to those factors, but i don't.
the question i ask myself is,"can the horse win with the judgement call i made on the horse?. at x-odds he can or can not.

[Solid_Gold]

They don't pay you more for being a "jack of all trades".

In today's game, there is a good case to be made for being a 'specialist'...and betting only on those races that you are really confident in.

Different handicappers have differing sets of handicapping skills...and they are often better suited to certain races and distances/surfaces -- and not to others.

Not all races can be handicapped the same way...in my opinion at least.

The key is to know one's strengths and weaknesses.

Of course...I cannot totally discount the possibility that there might be some handicapping geniuses among us...who are equally skilled in all races and surfaces.

Your the capping GURU in here so I digress. Your opinions are always taken as the gospel of handicapping here. But doesn't a say a 10-1 winner at Belmont pay the same at Charlestown? I see we disagree on more than a few things.
BOL to you

[pondman]

A horse is a horse right and their pp's are right in front of you. Seems to me this specialization is somewhat over rated. If you think you can win on dirt why can't you win on poly or turf from a capping perspective?

My object is to make money.

I've got 30 years of data at some tracks while 0 data at others. I've model at least 20 tracks, and I've yet to find one which played the same. There are some tracks which offers what I like. And others which are dreadful. I'm not going to waste my money on the grind.

[gm10]

I think his question is.. If you can handicap at Belmont, shouldn't you be able to transfer those skills to handicapping at say, PARX?

Absolutely yes ... but remember that one of the key skills of a successful handicapper is understanding the track he or she is playing!

[rubicon55]

You state that specialization is overrated.
I would say that familiarity is important.

Knowing the trainers, jockeys, horses, on certain circuits is a key tool when it comes to handicapping races.
Is sticking to, say, one or two circuits necessary to be successful at this game? Depends on the player.

The more tracks I bet into, the harder it is for me to turn a profit in the long run. I find there is a law of diminishing returns when you spread your efforts over too many circuits. But that's just me. Certain players have angles that they can apply at many tracks. My advice for them would be "if it ain't broke, no need to fix it"

Good luck to you!

I can find no fault in your thinking and I agree, unfortanately having to discover this for myself it is better to find a handful of tracks your methods or records work and specialize on those tracks. Wagering on too many tracks sooner or later dilutes your winning percentages. Could have retired knowing that one earlier in my wagering exploits...LOL.

[jerry-g]

Perhaps you'll have to take this with a grain
off of the track. I'm not saying anyone should
step out of their box. I have a belief that you
can play any track, any time and any where.
As long as you evaluate the horses for today's
track, distance and surface by their ability to
perform well under the same or greater conditions
of today's race, I think anyone can handicap
any race any where. I think it is more important
to see who they are facing in today's race than
whether or not I have ever been there in person
or in Space.

[PhantomOnTour]

Wagergirl is correct. That was my question! I see lots of posters concentrating on one or two tracks? This is what I don't get.

If you consider yourself a good capper at say Belmont why can't you pick winners at say Arlington? A horse is a horse right and their pp's are right in front of you. Seems to me this specialization is somewhat over rated. If you think you can win on dirt why can't you win on poly or turf from a capping perspective?
There's more to it than just the pp's right in front of you.
They contain a lot of information, but not everything you need...at least not everything i need.

Let's say CD had regular post times this wknd and i was playing CD, Bel and Mth; all running at the same time.
I find it difficult to keep up with how each track is playing, watch the horses in the paddock, track the tote and design my bets. The races come too fast for me when playing multiple tracks.
Yes, i design my bets before the races, but we all know how things tend to change btw the post parade and the running of the race. No bet is set in stone without looking at the animal i am putting my money on.
If you are a serious student and watch replays, study charts, and/or make figures of some sort then multiple tracks are just too much to cover.
90% of us have regular jobs that require a lot of our time...families also.
I follow the New York circuit (i mean i follow the s**t out of it) and it takes up a huge chunk of my non work, non social/family time.
I guess if you play east coast and west coast you can avoid the problem of tracks running simultaneously, but it's too much for me.

[castaway01]

Your the capping GURU in here so I digress. Your opinions are always taken as the gospel of handicapping here. But doesn't a say a 10-1 winner at Belmont pay the same at Charlestown? I see we disagree on more than a few things.
BOL to you

If that's all you're saying, that a 10-1 pays the same at every track, then yeah, obviously you're right.

If you're saying that you can take the exact same skills and knowledge you use at Belmont and use it at Charles Town...well, yes and no. As far as money management, looking for value, discipline, that stuff, yes. As far as what sort of horse wins a 1 1/8 turf race at Bel and a 4 1/2 furlong sprint at Charles Town, no, two totally different types of horses win those races, so you're looking for different things when you handicap. If we're handicapping Charles Town, I'll take the guy who plays that track every night over the Belmont regular who looks at Charles Town once a year.

[Maximillion]

I recall Dave S. mentioning putting a track on "probation"-if your results indicate so.....I kinda like that.

For me, I stopped playing turf races and Woodbine because im losing money doing so....I just dont have a "feel" for these races.

[Tom]

Do you handicap the Belmont Stakes the same as you handicap the maiden claimer in the finale of the card? Or as the turf sprint in the fourth?

What is the point of this thread?
All that matters is can YOU handicap all tracks the same?

If you can, have at it.
If you can't, stop playing the ones you are losing at.

[PaceAdvantage]

Your the capping GURU in here so I digress. Your opinions are always taken as the gospel of handicapping here. But doesn't a say a 10-1 winner at Belmont pay the same at Charlestown? I see we disagree on more than a few things.
BOL to youNo, he's not a capping GURU and his opinions certainly aren't always taken as gospel. Where do you get this stuff?

He's a guy looking to help. He's never positioned himself as a guru and has never said people should take what he says as gospel. Please stop trying to incite something where there is nothing.

[sammy the sage]

When were your last picks, BigMouth? I see 6/16 and you lost them all!
0-5 No wonder you're so bitter!

I wouldn't go there if I were you....His total history posting has a POSITIVE rate of return/roi...Yours...I don't even know if you've EVEN had a single postive day :lol:

I'm sure you can backfit to show it :rolleyes:

I mean after all...posting 4 horses in a 6 horse fields...sure you've hit some...but was it positive IN TOTALITY...who THE :faint: knows

[Robert Goren]

The big difference in tracks is the pace bias. At some tracks most of the time any front runner wins. At others not so much. At mile or larger tracks horses cutting back from a route often win in sprints. In the bull rings that is not true. In a bull rings front runners stretching out often steal the race. Not true so much at mile tracks. Those just a couple of the adjustments you have to make when you switch tracks. You can not bet Belmont the same way you bet Fonner Park or vice versa.

[rubicon55]

The Ten Commandments of Handicapping

by Dick Mitchell

1. Thou shalt know thy track.
2. Thou shalt understand Ability.
3. Thou shalt understand Form and Condition.
4. Thou shalt understand Angles and Hot Stats.
5. Thou shalt understand "Wager Value."
6. Thou shalt make a Betting Line.
7. Thou shalt not bet against a legitimate favorite.
8. Thou shalt recognize false and vulnerable favorites.
9. Thou shalt keep detailed records.
10. Thou shalt never stop learning about handicapping.

If you follow and abide by all ten, you can't do anything but win. You have no choice. These laws are as inviolable as the law of gravity. If you're not winning, or not winning as much as you should, the chances are you're violating one or more of these commandments.

The first commandment is very simple: know what's going on at the tracks you play. You must figure out what winners are doing, and only bet on horses that have the winning profile. You must also know the trainers, and their manipulations. You should be able to identify the jockeys they win with, and the jockeys they rarely succeed with. You must be aware of any track bias. In general, you should be fully cognizant of what wins and what loses at the racetracks you play.

The next four commandments are the core of the handicapping process. Together, they comprise an orderly and structured approach to handicapping. The first thing to do is assess the ability of each contender. Those horses found lacking in ability are eliminated. Second, determine the current form and condition of each of your contenders. Horses not meeting form and condition standards are then discarded. Third, look for extenuating circumstances or angles. These include "hot stats" and other reasons, outside the mainstream of speed, class and form, that a horse should still be considered. Fourth, look for value.

One of the biggest frauds ever perpetrated on the handicapper is that the name of this game is picking winners. That's simply not true. Nobody picks winners better than the public. The public, year in - year out, gets approximately 33% right, betting every race, and still loses money. If you bet every public favorite, you would receive less than eighty-five cents for every dollar that you wagered. There's no handicapper on earth, Tom Brohamer, James Quinn, Andrew Beyer, Mark Cramer, Gordon Pine or anybody you can name that's going to get 33% right betting every race. It's just not going to happen. If you know anybody who feels they want to take this up as a challenge, please send them to me. I'll book their action as long as they bet the same amount on every race. I'll pay track odds. We'll settle up at the end of the race meeting.

There are handicappers who achieve rates higher than 33%, but they don't bet every race. They're very selective. That's their edge. The name of this game is not just picking winners. It's picking winners that offer value. You can pick winners at a rate of 25% and make a very nice profit. If your average odds are 4-to-1 and you're picking winners at the rate of 25%, you're making a very handsome return. Picking one winner in four and getting paid an average of 4-to-1 means that you're losing three out of four bets. When you win, you win four units and when you lose, you lose one unit. Hence, in four bets you gain one unit profit. That's a 25% return on investment (ROI). There are investment fund managers who would give at least one of their vital organs to get this kind of return.

The sixth commandment is the key to winning at the track. The question most often asked at a racetrack is, "Who da ya like?" It's typically answered, "I like the five horse but I'm afraid of the nine." This answer is vague at best. A much better answer would be, "I'll take the five at 5-to-2, or the nine at 4-to-1." Most handicappers refuse to bet on any horse other than their top pick. This is what keeps many of them from the win window. How often have you heard a handicapper complain after a juicy longshot wins, "I circled that horse - I had him!"? When you ask if he bet the horse, he answers in the negative. The reason he didn't bet the horse was that it wasn't his top pick.

You should always bet on horses that offer value and avoid the low-priced underlays. An underlay is a horse that is offering less odds than its probability of winning demands. If a horse has a 33% chance to win the race and he is going off at even-money, it's no bet.

An overlay is just the opposite. Consider the same horse with a 33% chance to win going off at 3-to-1. What a bargain. That's the time to "send it in."

The seventh and eighth commandments remind us that races are divided into two groups: races that have a legitimate favorite and races that don't. A legitimate favorite is the class of the field, the speed of the field, and is in form and condition to deliver his ability. Anything less and you have a vulnerable favorite.

The ninth commandment is probably the most violated commandment of all. The vast majority of handicappers haven't the foggiest clue about their performance. Not one in a hundred could answer the following questions: What is your overall win percentage for the past 200 races? What's your average mutuel for the past 200 races? What's your ROI in turf races? What's your ROI in dirt sprints? If someone were to wake you up in the middle of the night and ask you these questions, and you could answer them correctly, it's certain you're a winning handicapper.

The last commandment should be self-evident. This game is dynamic. It's forever changing. In the seventies, you could win a lot of money using speed figures to predict adjusted final times. Today, you'd be lucky to break even using these methods. (The published Beyer Speed Figures bear witness to the truth of this statement. If you bet the highest last-race Beyer figure, you’ll win around 27% of the time, and lose close to 20 cents on the dollar.)

Please notice the tenth commandment didn't say to never stop learning about money management. That's because money management is finite and mathematical. The truth of mathematics is absolute. In mathematics, what was true fifty years ago, will be true a thousand years from now. Once you learn the principles of money management, they're yours for life. My best advice on this subject is to read and digest Barry Meadow’s Money Secrets at the Racetrack. It's a book devoted exclusively to the subject of money management. Once you digest its contents, you'll have solved a huge part of the thoroughbred handicapping-investment puzzle.

If you obey the ten commandments of handicapping, you can't avoid getting to horseplayer's heaven. If not, handicapper's perdition is your destination. In either case, you have my best wishes. I have friends in both places.


http://www.cynthiapublishing.com/MitchellArticles/dm20000922.htm

I love Dick Mitchell -IMO he contributed a lot to handicapping. His methods, books and tools are one of my primary tools. Rest in peace Dick and thanks for the insights.

[Exotic1]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahoss9698
Track doesn't matter when you make 4 picks per race, every race, at every track.

For those who actually bet, of course track matters, as does surface, etc.


When were your last picks, BigMouth? I see 6/16 and you lost them all!
0-5 No wonder you're so bitter!

I don't post selections and for that everyone can thank me. I'm horrible at win % - I do hit the occasional exotic tough. Besides being very good at selecting winners - by good I mean bottom line ROI - Dahoss offers insight into the race that can help beyond his selections. He has the skill to correctly project race collapse, loose speed etc.

Look what he wrote about Race 10 on CD Oaks day: "10th- #10 Travel Advisory- Done little wrong in his turf starts. Was very impressive two back, romping at Fair Grounds. Was able to make up some ground last time against Silver Max and at least proved he can compete with these. More speed lined up today and I think another forward move puts him square in the middle of things."

You know why I remember this? Because I bet (boxed) Silver Max and Travel Advisory. You know what the freakin exacta came back? $279 dollars and for that I owe gratitude. You've got to be from Pluto not to value his skill.

[ten2oneormore]

There is a lot that isn't in the pps.

Say trainer A has a horse in the race that he just claimed 2 weeks ago, that is different then if he were to have a horse in the race that he claimed 6 months ago and is turning back in distance.All you see is that he is 20%+ 1st off the claim or whatever he is.

Or trainer A has a firster in a MSW , big difference then if it were a statebred MSW.All you see is his 20%+ with firsters.

Is it a sign of confidence if a trainer has a horse that looks in over its head or commonplace?

There are tons of subtleties that you can't possibly keep track of for more than a few circuits and that is just the trainer angles.Is a horse screwed drawing outside or is the inside dead?Does a speed horse that bombed have a chance at a big price moving to the inner turf?Can you safely toss a big figure horse shipping in from xxx?Which bugs are good even if their win % doesn't show it?

[Solid_Gold]

Thanks for all the input everyone!
I'm really not looking for a pissing contest with every post I make.

[fmolf]

I can only concentrate on two tracks at any time during the year.I try to watch every race at every NYRA track(i'm from Long Island),usually Monmouth is my second track when they run.Now do to their reduced schedule I have followed churchill and will also follow one other undecided track.Perhaps Ellis or calder.I find i do not fare well if i do not know trainer tendencies and how the track is playing.This is in regards to biases speed or rail etc. etc....