Sidebar

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

That would all be absolutely correct.

The results are amazing and have to be seen to be believed.

To sum it up in a single paragraph, "Since we know that the bet down horses win such a huge percentage of the races, our goal is to predict who the likely bet down horses will be. The end result is that when a horse looks like he should be a good bet, he is the most likely bad bet."

There are some exceptions. For example, a horse that figures to be (say) 3/5 or below, tilts the figures so badly that one cannot make sense of anything in the race. Perhaps we will discover a better understanding in the future.

BTW, I am certainly not saying that this strategy is perfect. What I am saying is that horses that are projected to be dead, generally return their backers around $1.30 or so for every $2 wagered. The goal is to identify horses like this because they add fuel the profit on whoever we eventually bet.

That $1.30 is a far cry from the $1.75 or more that is usually return on horses at 3/1 and below in this age.

[edit] One last clarification. I am not saying the horse will be "dead on the board," precisely. I am saying "dead" as in "won't run" or "won't persevere."

I think you are on to something BIG here.