|
There's a lot in here that I disagree with:
1- The anti-software bias, and speaking in terms of what programs "yield", as if they're black boxes that spit out selections.
2- The implication that 10% is an insufficient ROI from which you can earn a living. Hell, the people making the most money are probably operating at a 0% ROI, and making it all via rebates.
3- The implication that handicapping 50-60 races per week is somehow burdensome. I "handicapped" 70 races just yesterday alone, and it wasn't a problem. Would've been a lot more, except I only played the early east coast tracks.
4- The idea that betting to win is the only way to be successful. Sorry, but this is just complete and utter nonsense. The vast majority of winning players are profitable because of exotics. Your belief that exotics will "cause one to fail in the long run" is mind-blowing. You really need to search the discussions around here about compounding one's edge via exotics.
|
