Most Likely Mistakes Made by Beginners

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by GameTheory

I would also tell newbies to avoid the books, at least the ones about handicapping. I'd tell them to get a good piece of handicapping software and concentrate all their efforts on learning how to bet.

Having a beginner read a good handicapping book or two is a GOOD thing, IMO. How can it be a mistake for the total beginner to read a book like Brad Free's "Handicapping 101", or...Jim Quinn's "Recreational Handicapping"?

The problem is that beginners are often encouraged to read the WRONG books...and they begin adopting handicapping philosophies they are not yet ready for.

Case in point:

On this very site, I have repeatedly seen people recommend Beyer's book "Picking Winners" to beginning players...a TERRIBLE choice IMO.

If "PICKING WINNERS" were the FIRST book a beginning player read, he would conclude that ..."speed figures are the way, the truth, and the light"..."class has NOTHING to do with the outcomes of races"...and that..."the concept of PACE is laughable...and pace has NO affect on the final times of races".

A novice player could only be led ASTRAY by such a book. This was Beyer's EARLY philosophy, and his opinions on the game have changed MARKEDLY through the years...as evidenced by his latter works.

The novice player's journey is a LONG one...and a few carefully chosen books can only HELP him along the way...

He just needs to remember that these books are just a FINGER pointing at the final destination...and not the final destination itself.

It will still take a long time and great effort to become proficient in this maddening game of ours.

[Dave Schwartz]

This was a great topic.

I have made my response into a blog post, which you can find here:
http://thehorsehandicappingauthority.com/?p=966



I think the biggest mistake people make is having no understanding of the logical order of things. By “things” I mean that they must have a logical process for everything.

Consider someone who is going to take up golf. One can certainly go buy a set of clubs, get a few buckets of balls, find a driving range and start hitting balls. Over time they will learn to hit the ball farther and straighter. But is this the best way?

Imagine how much faster they would develop as a player if they had some real guidance, not just in technique – that certainly has value – but in the process of development.



Example for golf:

“First, work on proper grip and stance. Then move on to understanding how the club-face impacts the ball.”

(Not being a golfer, I have no idea what this process might entail for golf, but I most certainly know what it is for a horse player.)

The typical horse player subscribes to the idea, “If I just keep hitting golf balls somehow I will become Tiger Woods.” (Jokes, aside, he is still the best example I can think of.) This is not the likely outcome of “just hitting golf balls.”



Not only does one need a developmental plan but they also need a plan for technique. I would not be so quick to dismiss books as learning aides as many people in this thread have suggested. After all, without the teaching materials of others, you have absolutely zero sources for learning anything. For that matter, even a golfer who learns from a book is far ahead of the golfer who learns through just his own trial and error.

Rather, if one is going it on their own, they need to begin with the classic books – Quirin and Brohamer are tops on that very short list in my opinion. The reason these two books are so good is that they are the two major paths to horse racing enlightenment.

From those two you choose a path: basically statistical handicapping or pace handicapping. Now you can narrow your focus to one path, learning all that you can.

It is easy for the highly experienced PA people to say things like “ignore the books” because they have already read those books; they have absorbed that knowledge. And that is what you need to do: absorb knowledge.

There is a lot of horsepower on the PA forum. I think what the more learned members of that group really mean is to say is that, every horse player will find that the systems and methods in the books will not be enough; that there will be something missing.

Ultimately, each player must determine for themselves what is missing and figure out how to get it.



Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

The beginner should have a trial period to get accustomed to the list of available wagers and then listen to the established players for the do's and most importantly DO NOT'S involving these wagers. Once the new player sorts out the learning curve..he or she must decide what their particular 'comfort zone' is. Where they will be able to wager with confidence and without hesitation in order to play this game with a long-term profit motive, if that's what they seek.

[Fingal]

Imo, the main problem of newbies are several, with one being the reluctance to even consider concepts that go outside the comfort zone of
" I know what I know, & don't need to listen to anyone else. " Once you admit you don't know, then you open yourself to knowing.

And the second main one would be impatience. Just because these races are offered with all the exotic possibilities it doesn't mean you have to bet all of them. Patience is a virtue. One learns by observing, & passing a race doesn't mean you'll be asked to leave the premises.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

I would not be so quick to dismiss books as learning aides as many people in this thread have suggested. After all, without the teaching materials of others, you have absolutely zero sources for learning anything. For that matter, even a golfer who learns from a book is far ahead of the golfer who learns through just his own trial and error.

Even Greg Norman learned to play golf from reading a Jack Nicklaus book.
Detective Goren and Trifecta Mike are up Acacia trees.
The belief that authors write horse racing books to make money is fallacious.
Some people write as a hobby. They won't get rich at it.
There is not that much money to be made in Horse Race book publishing.
Quiren didn't quit horse racing because he couldn't make money. That was never his sole objective in applying computers to the races.
He was fed up with the partnerships that he had formed in the game and how he was getting screwed royally by them. Many of his discoveries are still worth noting. His passion for the game was never there.
If you can get just one idea from a book that changes your approach to horse racing, the book has served it's purpose.
Books are guides. They give suggestions that may help you.
You still have to learn the game on your own.

[Robert Goren]

I think a new handicapper would be better off throw darts to pick winners than follow the advice of what is in most if not all hanicapping books. While there might be a glimmer of truth of what is in some of them, you can be sure that it is over bet to the extent that he would be better off throwing darts.
I have read almost every reasonably priced poker poker written before 2007, I have yet to read something that I hadn't thought of myself before hand. The only thing I ever read in a handicapping book that I hadn't thought of was when Beyer first wrote about how to develop his speed rating. It was not too long before that idea had become so wide spread, if not because of the number of users, but then surely because the amount of money being bet from using it, that it had become more or less useless in turning a turning a profit.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

I think a new handicapper would be better off throw darts to pick winners than follow the advice of what is in most if not all hanicapping books..

Actually, the most long time rail birds have followed that sort of thinking for years.
Over 60% of the horseplayers that I know have never read handicapping books,
not even one. They are as stupid now as they were in 1970.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

I think a new handicapper would be better off throw darts to pick winners than follow the advice of what is in most if not all hanicapping books. While there might be a glimmer of truth of what is in some of them, you can be sure that it is over bet to the extent that he would be better off throwing darts.
I have read almost every reasonably priced poker poker written before 2007, I have yet to read something that I hadn't thought of myself before hand. The only thing I ever read in a handicapping book that I hadn't thought of was when Beyer first wrote about how to develop his speed rating. It was not too long before that idea had become so wide spread, if not because of the number of users, but then surely because the amount of money being bet from using it, that it had become more or less useless in turning a turning a profit.

Robert, I very seldom find myself in COMPLETE disagreement with you...but this seems like one of those cases.

We ALL acknowledge how COMPLICATED our game is, especially for the novice player; are we now advising this novice player to "go at it alone"...and to pick up the knowledge he needs along the way by..."trial and error"?

What exactly is wrong with reading a book about the fundamentals of the game...and how is the novice player supposed to think of these things entirely on his own?

It's one thing to tell someone not to believe everything he reads...but to advise him not to read anything at ALL?

Is there any OTHER field of intellectual pursuit that advocates this...or don't you consider handicapping to be an intellectual pursuit?

[Robert Fischer]

failure to understand the system

[Robert Goren]

Keep reading those books if that what you want, who am I to stop you? I am just saying that everything written in those books is reflected in the odds with approximately the right weight in most races. As an example, it doesn't matter that front runner win most of the races as pointed out in some books because the odds already reflect that. It is a waste of time to read a book about that, except as an intellectual pursuit. All handicappers, new or otherwise, need to find something that is not correctly expressed in the odds. Nothing written in a book stays that way very long if it was ever that way.

[dav4463]

Not reading books about handicapping is stupid in my opinion. Just because a guy writes a book doesn't mean he is not making any money at the track. Lots of guys are successful and are not selfish enough to keep all their learned information to themselves.

It's like saying a lawyer shouldn't read law books and go to school.

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

.

We ALL acknowledge how COMPLICATED our game is, especially for the novice player; are we now advising this novice player to "go at it alone"...and to pick up the knowledge he needs along the way by..."trial and error"?

I don't acknowledge that at all. The premise of the game is pretty simple. Find something few bettors are using to produce a profit. Books just show what other bettors are using. These methods all lose money today. He is far better off using "trial and error" than wasting his time trying learn things that will not show a profit. The only case that can be made for reading books is to learn what will not work.
Youbet a number of years ago put a "beat the guest handicapper" contest over several weekends. The handicapper was a writer whose book is often pushed here. Almost everyone in the contest beat him. It could have been almost any author because the people betting on line back then were miles ahead of anything that had been published to that date.
"Aw, but I was so much smarter then.
I'm dumber than that now." Bob Dylan

[rastajenk]

I think some of you are confusing a new person's desire to know enough to have some fun with the game, with a desire to "beat the races." There's already too much information for a new bettor to digest; telling him he needs to know even more is like opening the door for him on the way out, while saying, "Thanks for coming...now beat it."

I think tracks should provide, as an alternative to the Form and the TMI Equibased programs, a scaled-back program that looks more like the Form did in the 60's and 70's. I believe someone new to the game could see where winning horses come from just as easily from that; and then, after attaining a level of comfort and experience, they might move on to more sophisticated methods and angles (or they might be happy with that...it's recreational, don't forget). That's the way many of us have got to this point. That might include reading books, or investing in computer programs.

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by dav4463

Not reading books about handicapping is stupid in my opinion. Just because a guy writes a book doesn't mean he is not making any money at the track. Lots of guys are successful and are not selfish enough to keep all their learned information to themselves.

It's like saying a lawyer shouldn't read law books and go to school.

Name one.
I had an old very successful lawyer once tell me that law school is not about learning the law. It is about getting rid of your conscience.

[lamboguy]

from TVG: LEAVE OUT PLETCHER YOU LEAVE IN A STRETCHER