Quote:
Originally Posted by ultracapper
To sum up this thread, the whale's chink, if they have one, is in the gambling sector, the longer priced horses. As the game is formatted presently, they can grind away at underlayed favorites, in a very calculated manner, and play them very heavily, and still make money. What an incredible opportunity for them. It defies all logic in a level playing field scenario.
|
That would not be my summary.
In fact, it would be almost the opposite of what I am saying.
I'm saying that the whales have done such a good job of sharpening their tools to the point where longshots are far worse bets than they used to be. Effectively, they've made the likely long-priced winners (those from the front half of the field in key factors) pay substantially less.
What is hurting the whales is that they are hurting each other's payoffs because they agree way to often. They do not make money on the favorite who is hammered down.
The public perceives this as, "the whales make money on favorites," which is not true. What really happens is that the whales make 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th choices INTO favorites. When those horses get bet down too far (because the whales are in agreement) then they all lose money.
I would say that the chink in the armor is that the odds themselves have become so highly predictable that variations in them point to the "live" horses even before the whales have been bet.
For example...
1. If I am using an "aML" object, (i.e.
artificial morning line) that has historically proven to do a good job of predicting the odds then I have a handle on how this race should be bet.
2. My "Handicapping" object will follow suit, pushing winners to the top but also correlating with the tote odds.
3. So, what happens when a horse that DOES NOT FIGURE to have a high hit rate in my HANDICAPPING figures to be bet down from the aML object?
4. The answer to #3 is that my system would perceive that horse to be an underlay.
5. Conversely, a horse that DOES fit in the handicapping but DOES NOT figure in the aML (artificial morning line), would be perceived as an OVERLAY.
6. My experience is that the OVERLAYS will turn out to be the UNDERLAYS, and vice versa.
7. The higher the rebate the more likely this will be true.
8. If a handicapper is currently competitive using a "conventional overlay approach" he should play tracks with little or no rebate, where the competition is not so strong.
From my earlier response:
Quote:
IMHO, because there are so many winners who are showing up as bet downs after the gate opens, the handicapper who EXPECTS to be competitive, needs to address these issues:
1. Which horse(s) are likely to be bet down below what they should be?
2. Which, of the low-odds horses is a true bet against horse?
This may seem like handicapping 101 but it is actually far different than what most players do now.
|
The strategy outlined is far different from the handicapping used by most handicappers.
Regards,
Dave Schwartz
