Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
That's a notch over my pay grade. 
I'm doing simpler things.
I tend to test single handicapping ideas in my database to see if they have any betting value (for example showed speed against a closer bias). Then I start breaking them down into smaller and smaller categories (sprint, route, dirt, turf, stakes, claiming, favorites, longshots, turf routes, dirt sprints, projected to get loose today etc..)
If I find something negative or positive (in terms of ROI relative to the take) that doesn't look like it's due to a couple of fluky results, I create a permanent query that brings up all the horses that fit that category that are running today.
I have a bunch of queries like that to go along with my handicapping information.
I try to refine the queries over time and also try combining different factors. I also keep testing them to stay current and make sure they've been working well recently.
What I like best is when I find both a negative and positive inside the same race and the positive is a serious contender and the negative is the favorite. If the positive is probably not good enough to win, I'll see if I can construct something that makes sense where all he has to do is hit the board.
It's very hard to find sustainably positive stuff. I had one that was close to break even with no handicapping at all for a few years. Then it suddenly collapsed for over a year. I recently checked it again it's doing great in 2020 so far. So you can get whipsawed by some of this. |
IMO, every angle should approach losing the track take. Not claiming the market is totally efficient, but just because a horse has an angle going for him that is "hidden gold" doesn't mean the horse is going to be under bet. Most horses are over bet to some degree. Say hypothetically you have a magical computer that has the ability to give with 100% accuracy the chances of each horse winning a race. It would go something like this
computer chances, final odds
1) 3-1, 4-1
2) 5/2, 7/5
3) 6-1, 5-1
4) 6-1, 6-1
5) 7-2, 2-1
Now you multiply this type of activity by 1000s of races and the majority of horses will be bet too much, no matter what factors they have going for them. In the hypothetical race only 1 horse is has a positive roi and whether he has the "magical angle" that you are looking for is pretty random.
Let's say my magical angle is that horses that finish well beaten in last 3 races but all of a sudden show speed to the first call in their last race and are dropping significantly in class, that sounds to me like a very solid angle. The increased early speed a sign the horse is sharper (maybe even a sign the the barn is getting the horse ready so they can make a betting score), the fact he is well beaten in last 3 races so he appears off form to most, but at the same time for any number of reasons he can be over bet in this upcoming race despite having what is likely a positive angle going for him.
I have never done the angle hunting thing via computer(so I am speaking only using logic not with any experience in doing so), but I do think in general you are looking for angles that lose significantly below the track take (maybe 50% to 60% of it) or significantly above the track take(maybe 50% above), but imo these are not to make money to bet blindly but positive/negative factors that you would use to incorporate a more accurate estimation of each horses chances today (or a better odd line for those of us who believe that there is a purpose for making our own odds line).
