|
I think it just comes down to when you win, how much?
We know that there is enough randomness, chalk, and junk that wins races and we aren't going to have them all figured out. Any handicapping factor can be learned in the information age. Putting together in your mind a coherent picture of good is an entirely different thing. That is the skill that is the missing link. For me personally betting in accord with x return can make up for some handicapping flaws but I have the race read right. And betting into tenuous type races by handicapping logic is a gamble we all take. We know the race is wide open but the returns can be big if we have it right. Knowing a loss is a loss anyway the betting logic is justified by say a 9-1 return on 6 outcomes. It's like a batting average and OBP in baseball. The best hitters aren't likely to ever hit .400. But they don't have to. Their SLG % when they make hits drives their OPS but so does taking walks(cashing tickets). Coming directly face to face with the SLG% per race or no bet is huge when there are so many decisions to make on any race day. I personally have been a .280/.440 hitter since I kept betting records 17 years ago. But have only been making the type of money consistently recently. And all I did was use the approach to take what is there and maximize it. The revolution was not overcoming the ego of handicapping. But the ego of thinking I could hit everything. That "I am a good handicapper I am going to hit most of my p3-4 and exactas at such a high rate profit is inevitable". Teeing off on certain races or sequences is all there is. They aren't going to be plenty. Making that distinction instead of the wholesale philosophy has been huge for me. And it takes some pressure off needing to be the perfect handicapper. The older I get I find simplicity after the fact of making things such a big mentally well organized mess is the revolution.
|
