What should I read next?

[Overlay]

To clarify, I'm not saying that trainers always enter horses in races with the express intention of winning, or that there is no such thing as a race where one or more horses are running primarily for conditioning purposes as part of their training/form cycle. But, to me, those instances are satisfactorily addressed from a handicapping standpoint through analysis of published form and the use of fair odds. What I take issue with or find implausible (as I stated) is the extent of collusion, the denial of self-interest, and the degree of control that would be required over events that cannot be absolutely assured, for one or more trainers to engineer a betting coup based on a guarantee that a particular horse will win at high odds in a specific race.

Totemaster: I've been there and done that with the tote analysis. I was watching the win and exacta pools back in the early 1980's, long before most others did. It was spot-on at the harness races in Chicago. I was one of the first to use E-Horse Arbitrage when it came out. I made good money analyzing the betdowns. Then, too many guys got the same idea, and the horses were getting hammered at the last minute. I still trot out ATR once in a while and take a look. The betdowns are still getting hammered, and there aren't as many of them because more of the "smart guys" are sending it in late so that it doesn't show in the pool until after the race is started.

I used your website's free trial along with screen saves of ATR. I have a pretty good idea of what your software is doing to get your "proprietary information". Out of respect for copyright laws, I won't divulge my beliefs. If my beliefs are correct, however, what you're doing is a simpler spin on what I did, and if so, it isn't going to show a profit.

[Tom Barrister]

Originally Posted by Tote Master

The “Write-off’s” are usually groups or syndicates that use their involvement in horse racing as just that: A tax write-off. Keep in mind that owning horses is considered farming by the government tax standards. So they could care less about whether or not they win or lose.

That's the stupidest thing I have seen today.

FYI most horsemen are losers at their betting.

Most trainers make money from the monthly fee they charge owners. If they get extra from their 10% of the purse that's a bonus. If not, they still get their monthly fee. Most owners are small-timers, not syndicates. They expect to lose and are in this for fun, not a tax writeoff.

Horses fall under agriculture, which is a broader category than farming.

[Tote Master]

Overlay
To clarify, I'm not saying that trainers always enter horses in races with the express intention of winning, or that there is no such thing as a race where one or more horses are running primarily for conditioning purposes as part of their training/form cycle. But, to me, those instances are satisfactorily addressed from a handicapping standpoint through analysis of published form and the use of fair odds. What I take issue with or find implausible (as I stated) is the extent of collusion, the denial of self-interest, and the degree of control that would be required over events that cannot be absolutely assured, for one or more trainers to engineer a betting coup based on a guarantee that a particular horse will win at high odds in a specific race.

Thanks for the clarification! You might want to further clarify how “those instances” regarding “conditioning purposes” “are satisfactorily addressed from a handicapping standpoint through the analysis of published from”. I assume you’re talking about after the race is over? Too bad, because some of us would like to know in advance “who’s trying and who’s not! So, in your estimation seeing it published will somehow tell those who detect and understand it, that now the animal is fit and ready to roll in its next race!? Oh I forgot, it’s a “form cycle” so it might not be the very next one, perhaps it’s the one after that. Or maybe its something similar to what some accused trainer, John Shirrefs as doing: Hiding the form of the KY Derby winner, Giacomo. Now there’s one hell of a form cycle! Imagine that! In stakes races no less where we can generally assume that they’re all trying to win. Good for you John! You fooled them all!

So, you might find such a plan or conspiracy as implausible, but then again keep in mind its only a game. I can imagine how would you feel being bluffed in a high stakes poker game? How do you feel pulling a one-arm-bandit, knowing the odds are “set” against you? How might you even feel reading a really fun fiction book called “Fourth and Fixed”? To be that naive to think that there’s no collusion is I think pretty silly. Its as simple as giving a jockey some instructions or as complex as a “milk-shake”. But you are right, nothing is airtight in a horserace. Sometimes even the best-laid plans are spoiled by an unexpected event. You talk about control, but I think you’re forgetting about who’s actually in control. Remember the animal doesn’t even know it exists. In training, all it knows how to do is eat, sleep and run. (Okay sometimes they walk too). Ask yourself this; does any horse in a race even know the track condition? Does it know that there’s a strong head wind in the backstretch? Does it even know what kind of health or condition its in? Does it know how far it’s going to have to run today? No, but there are those who do.

Midnight
I used your website's free trial along with screen saves of ATR. I have a pretty good idea of what your software is doing to get your "proprietary information". Out of respect for copyright laws, I won't divulge my beliefs. If my beliefs are correct, however, what you're doing is a simpler spin on what I did, and if so, it isn't going to show a profit.

Yes you’re right! You used it for all of (3) days! That must have been inspiring, especially since you’ve seen it all and done it all before. My friend, I appreciate your respect for copyrights! But if you actually believe that what you might have done back in the 80’s (with perhaps a calculator and a team of observers) is even remotely related to what I’m doing today, then please don’t worry yourself about any infringements. I’m sorry to hear that you hit a dead end. Fortunately I haven’t.

Originally Posted by Tote Master
The “Write-off’s” are usually groups or syndicates that use their involvement in horse racing as just that: A tax write-off. Keep in mind that owning horses is considered farming by the government tax standards. So they could care less about whether or not they win or lose..

Don’t you just love it when things are pulled out of context and then made issue of? Well here’s another example.

response Posted by TomB
That's the stupidest thing I have seen today.
FYI most horsemen are losers at their betting.

Most trainers make money from the monthly fee they charge owners. If they get extra from their 10% of the purse that's a bonus. If not, they still get their monthly fee. Most owners are small-timers, not syndicates. They expect to lose and are in this for fun, not a tax writeoff.

Horses fall under agriculture, which is a broader category than farming.

This is what was actually written:
So what’s changed? Well, today I believe there are basically ( 3 ) types of racing stables. I categorize these owners into the following “W” groups: the Wealthy, the Write-off and the Wagering.

Notice that I use the word “owners”. Is there any mention of trainers?

TomB
Most owners are small-timers, not syndicates.

Perhaps the next group I mentioned was missed?

The “Wagering” are those that make up the majority of owners, who fill most of the race cards at every track. These people bet on their charges (and others) in order to survive in this game, and it’s no surprise considering the costs of keeping an animal in proper training and care.

You caught me though on that farming and agriculture thing! Sorry if anyone else misunderstood what I was trying to say.

So what can I say? Nah. Why even bother!
Enjoy whats left of your weekend!

Originally Posted by Tote Master

please don’t worry yourself about any infringements.

Thanks for your permission to divulge, but after consideration, I've come to the conclusion that I really don't have to get your permission to offer my opinion on how I believe your tote-analysis methodology works.

If anybody here, who has 100 posts or more (no ghosts, thanks), wants to know how I believe Tote Master's site analyzes the tote, just send me a PM.

[the little guy]

God am I glad I stumbled upon this thread!

I have a question for Totemaster.....if you don't read the pps, how do you have any idea of what prices horses should be versus what prices they are on the board, thus supposedly knowing which horses are taking this supposed smart money?

[Tote Master]

little guy
God am I glad I stumbled upon this thread!

I have a question for Totemaster.....if you don't read the pps, how do you have any idea of what prices horses should be versus what prices they are on the board, thus supposedly knowing which horses are taking this supposed smart money?

That’s a fair and typical question. I assume that’s it coming from your experiences as a traditional handicapper. I would like nothing better then to provide you with some good answers, but since I’ve already been accused of advertising on this forum in the past, I won’t provide them here. I certainly will not give those small-minded individuals another opportunity to make their superficial comments. If you’re really interested, just drop me an e-mail message and I’ll be glad to oblige.

If you don’t find that my answers are satisfactory, you can always contact Midnight. He apparently has concluded that the tote board analysis is of little value, yet he proclaims to have an insight into my methods. Wishful thinking I’m afraid.

Besides this thread is titled “What should I read next…”. Right? Since I haven’t written a book yet, I can only comment on what’s already out there. By the way, I should clarify one thing and mention that both Tom Ainsle and Joe Takach are two authors that have provided some insight into the tote board activities.

Best of Luck!

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by Tote Master

By the way, I should clarify one thing and mention that both Tom Ainsle and Joe Takach are two authors that have provided some insight into the tote board activities.

I'd like to be able to quote Ainslie verbatim (so I could be totally accurate), but I distinctly recall verbiage from either The Compleat Horseplayer or Ainslie's Complete Guide to Thoroughbred Racing to the effect that any race will contain multiple entries whose connections truly believe that "today could be the day", and that the way to slice through this confusion, and reliably separate contenders from non-contenders, is to handicap based on the fundamental principles such as distance, class, and form that Ainslie always espoused. One quote of his that I do remember exactly was, "Inside information is for the sparrows."

[46zilzal]

Originally Posted by Overlay

remember exactly was, "Inside information is for the sparrows."

EXACTLY after standing around the saddling enclosure one would think both Bid and Secretariat were in the contests listening to the connections.

[Tote Master]

Overlay
I'd like to be able to quote Ainslie verbatim (so I could be totally accurate), but I distinctly recall verbiage from either The Compleat Horseplayer or Ainslie's Complete Guide to Thoroughbred Racing to the effect that any race will contain multiple entries whose connections truly believe that "today could be the day", and that the way to slice through this confusion, and reliably separate contenders from non-contenders, is to handicap based on the fundamental principles such as distance, class, and form that Ainslie always espoused. One quote of his that I do remember exactly was, "Inside information is for the sparrows."

"Inside information is for the sparrows." Truer words could not have been spoken, but unfortunately (as espoused here) not many traditional handicappers understand their “true” meaning! As an example, just look at the very next comment:

46zilzal
EXACTLY after standing around the saddling enclosure one would think both Bid and Secretariat were in the contests listening to the connections.

And that folks is EXACTLY the interpretation that most traditional handicappers would come away with after reading that passage or even experiencing some pre-race ramblings.

As far as I’m concerned, the “Word’s” of an insider hold very little water. But again I’m not searching for “Words” (as I assume other’s might be when trying to find answers anong all those books and PP’s).
Perhaps you’ve also heard the expression, “Actions speak louder then Words”! For those that don’t get it, it simply means that the “action of betting” is far more meaningful then “touting of an animal”. (I hope that doesn't require an explanation!) So I'll just add some more insight to Mr. Ainsile’s expression by saying “Inside information is for the sparrows, but Inside money is for the hawks”. And you can quote me on that too!

Best of Luck!

[GameTheory]

Totemaster --

So do you believe your success in toteboard methods is mainly due to following stable money, or do you think you can get any special insight from following public betting habits as well (assuming you can tell the difference)? With regard to stable money, do you look for specific patterns that match up with specific barns, or do you find universal patterns and don't really pay attention to the identities of the trainers/owners?

[Tote Master]

Totemaster --

Game Theory
So do you believe your success in toteboard methods is mainly due to following stable money, or do you think you can get any special insight from following public betting habits as well (assuming you can tell the difference)? With regard to stable money, do you look for specific patterns that match up with specific barns, or do you find universal patterns and don't really pay attention to the identities of the trainers/owners?

As I responded before to the little guy
That’s a fair and typical question….. I would like nothing better then to provide you with some good answers, but since I’ve already been accused of advertising on this forum in the past, I won’t provide them here. I certainly will not give those small-minded individuals another opportunity to make their superficial comments. If you’re really interested, just drop me an e-mail message and I’ll be glad to oblige.

Sorry Game Theory, as I mentioned, I’m not going to subject myself to the likes of some on this forum. It’s really not worth the aggravation. It seems that while there’s a lot of interesting commentary on PA, most of it is based on tunnel vision. Or maybe I should say that if you’re not wearing the blinkers don’t post anything outside the realm of traditional handicapping. But that’s okay really, because I think the best place to express yourself as a player is not on some forum where words are cheap, but rather at the betting windows.

Best of Luck!

Not surpisingly, nobody has sent me a PM asking for more information. That must mean that nobody cares.

Neither do I. Do you suppose somebody will take the hint?

It must be nice to have the run of the place: to be able to advertise a website and to berate and belittle people at will.

For all you toteboard watchers: buy At The Races Pro and keep an eye on the win/place and win/show ratios. You'll do about as well as you would paying $25 per race card per day for something else. You probably won't win, but you'll do just about as well.

[the little guy]

Is it me or has this thread become PA's version of " I've Got a Secret "?

[Tote Master]

Wow! Talk about predictions! Its too bad I couldn’t have placed a bet on it. This is the same guy who accused me of advertising the last time I posted a few comments. I guess he’s got nothing better to do with his time.

Midnight
Not surpisingly, nobody has sent me a PM asking for more information. That must mean that nobody cares. Neither do I. Do you suppose somebody will take the hint?

Hey don’t worry about it. Perhaps there were some other reasons why you weren’t contacted. Who knows maybe you should take the hint? Whats funny though is that I received some e-mail with some very interesing questions. I’m not sure if they’re all sincere, but generally I give people the benefit of the doubt.

Midnight
It must be nice to have the run of the place: to be able to advertise a website and to berate and belittle people at will.

Gee, I’m not aware of any special privileges here on the PA forum. I’m also not quite sure where the “berating and belittling” occurred on my posts, nor the advertising. If I’m not mistaken I was actually trying to avoid any confusion about that, by deliberately not discussing my methodology on this thread. Did you miss that too? Perhaps those previous questions were poised in an attempt to make me to do just that? Who knows and who cares!

Midnight
For all you toteboard watchers: buy At The Races Pro and keep an eye on the win/place and win/show ratios. You'll do about as well as you would paying $25 per race card per day for something else. You probably won't win, but you'll do just about as well.

And there you have it, not just an advertisement, but an actual public endorsement! When in fact, you don’t even need “At The Races Pro” to provide that basic information! Just visit the Brisnet tote, it provides the very same stuff for “FREE”. All you have to do is some simple math. Or didn’t you know that either? If this is all you’ve got, its no wonder you hit a dead end! You’re right it’s certainly not enough to win consistently, but I’m sure they appreciate your support!

the little guy
Is it me or has this thread become PA's version of " I've Got a Secret"?

Now that's a good question! And a funny one at that!

Good Luck & Good Night!