Handicapping Method

[ultracapper]

You're averaging 70 posts per month. That's reasonable.

[cutchemist42]

Brisnet PDF, while keeping a spreadsheet open to write opinions down or run some numbers quickly while I read the PDF. Also consult a word doc I keep on Tampa Bay.

Other than that, I need the comp for replays and charts.

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by raybo

Thanks Tom!

Congrats on 10,002 posts

And many more.........

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by pandy

I can't disagree or agree with you. If you need all that, and you show a profit, then I agree with you. But, not everyone does. You can show a profit betting without watching a single replay, without doing any breeding analysis, without analyzing people trends.

Many so-called handicapping factors have catch-22 consequences. I watch replays, but I would hesitate to say that watching replays adds to my bottom line. I find that the numbers (pace and speed figures especially) are much more reliable than trips. Yes, when you see a horse get a rough trip and race gamely, and bet the horse next time, and it wins, you feel like a real wiseguy. But of course the next 10 horses you bet off trips lose.

Same with pedigree handicapping. For most handicappers, pedigree analysis will do nothing to actually improve your bottom line. The problem with pedigree handicapping, say you bet a horse in its turf debut because it has a good turf pedigree and it wins. You feel great, boy are you smart. But most horses with strong turf pedigrees lose their turf debut and most don't even turn out to be good turf horses. Betting horses off what I called "unknown variables" is not a good approach. And I've hit a lot of longshot winners off these angles, such as well bred first time starters or horses making their turf debut. But, in the long run, it's fool's gold.

Speed and pace figures, when used properly by someone who knows how to interpret them, give you the greatest insight into a horse's ability and capability of winning against the horse's it is matched up against today. If you have a horse that matches up well and is a price, you have a good bet that will prove profitable over the long run. Nothing else is as reliable.

I really enjoyed reading this. I can tell we are different in 1 way, correct me if I'm wrong please, I love maiden races and lightly raced horses & you have no problem playing established claimers and what not. Is that a fair assessment?

I detest all OPEN claiming races. Won't go into why. So I stick to everything but which coincidentally brings us to MDN races and N2L's/N1X's etc. I just believe that ALL factors should be weighed especially in those races. Hence why I look at all replays, pedigree etc besides pace #'s, strength of races etc.

No right or wrong. I am weak when it comes to guessing who will tap a horse at AQU on the drop. Or which claimer will show up today. I admit it.

Again, liked your thoughts Pandy.

[pandy]

Originally Posted by EMD4ME

I really enjoyed reading this. I can tell we are different in 1 way, correct me if I'm wrong please, I love maiden races and lightly raced horses & you have no problem playing established claimers and what not. Is that a fair assessment?

I detest all OPEN claiming races. Won't go into why. So I stick to everything but which coincidentally brings us to MDN races and N2L's/N1X's etc. I just believe that ALL factors should be weighed especially in those races. Hence why I look at all replays, pedigree etc besides pace #'s, strength of races etc.

No right or wrong. I am weak when it comes to guessing who will tap a horse at AQU on the drop. Or which claimer will show up today. I admit it.

Again, liked your thoughts Pandy.

Thanks. I prefer the same races you like, lightly raced horses. My favorite races are msw, mdn claimers, and races for N2L including claiming races. N3L claiming races are okay, too. You can eliminate most of the field in a lot of these races for lightly raced horses, the horses are sound because they're young, you can spot a horse that's just figuring things out, key drops are huge, and workouts mean something.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by pandy

Thanks. I prefer the same races you like, lightly raced horses. My favorite races are msw, mdn claimers, and races for N2L including claiming races. N3L claiming races are okay, too. You can eliminate most of the field in a lot of these races for lightly raced horses, the horses are sound because they're young, you can spot a horse that's just figuring things out, key drops are huge, and workouts mean something.

Where you been Pandy? This is your first good post in weeks..

[Lucky Dave]

Pen and PPs only - and whatever brainpower I can muster for that card! The fun for me is the multi-variable analysis, so why let a computer get a piece of that action. I use Bris, but I don't look at the Bris selections or ratings until after I've done my own analysis. Sometimes their computers and I are way off in our opinions. I get a kick out of then trying to figure out why.

Key factors I generally take into account when evaluating the race:

-- Speed and pace figures, recent and historic for that type of race;

-- Class ratings of the horse over time vs. class of the race and competition (placement);

-- Trainer's record;

-- Form cycle;

-- Track bias;

-- Horse comportment during post parade and warm-up.

Then if I'm getting what I consider to be good odds in some betting format, whether win, exacta, or super -- I'll bet the race...or not.

Analog only - no computers except to pull up the PP, the fun for me is in the analysis and how I win, not the win itself and its financial reward.

LuckyD

[thaskalos]

I am strictly a pen and paper handicapper...and my biggest edge in this game is that I thoroughly enjoy the act of handicapping horses, even if it takes me until 5 AM to get my work done. I am a figure handicapper...and I combine speed and pace ratings in a certain way which allows me to create a performance rating for each race in the horses' PPs. It is a time-consuming process to compile all the figures that I use...but once I am done, my figures "speak to me"...and I get a much clearer picture of the quality of these past races than what the speed or pace figures alone could provide.

I will look at certain replays of each contending horse...but I don't believe in adding or subtracting from a horse's figure in accordance with what I think the replay is telling me. My figure-rating method is precise, and I don't want to inject imprecision into it by doing things like "adding 5 points to the figure because the horse found itself 3-wide around the final turn". If I think that a horse was compromised by the trip or the pace in a particular race...then I pass that race, and rely on the horse's OTHER races to form my opinion of it.

I don't base my opinion of a horse on a single pace-line, because I don't believe that the horses repeat in the future the races that they have run in the past. To me, each race performance is unique...and it is influenced by unique circumstances and differing race dynamics. I use several races in order to grade every horse, because I believe that a horse's form is always in a state of flux...and it is critical to me to determine where the horse finds itself in its form cycle. I have also created a list of "wake-up" factors...whose presence indicates to me that a particular horse is about to deliver a much better effort than what his most recent races indicate. This "improvement projection" method has been a rather recent addition to my handicapping arsenal...and I wish I would have thought of it 20 years ago.

I love sprints on the dirt...I tolerate dirt routes...I bet on grass races sparingly...and I detest races with multiple first-time starters.

[classhandicapper]

If I think that a horse was compromised by the trip or the pace in a particular race...then I pass that race, and rely on the horse's OTHER races to form my opinion of it.

It can be difficult to quantify the impact of a "complicated" tough trip (mixture of positives and negatives related to pace, bias, ground loss) , but it can also be a mistake to excuse a race too readily and go back in a horse's record. I try to compare horses within the same race that had similar trips. Sometimes that gives you a clue.

[Speed Figure]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I am strictly a pen and paper handicapper...and my biggest edge in this game is that I thoroughly enjoy the act of handicapping horses, even if it takes me until 5 AM to get my work done. I am a figure handicapper...and I combine speed and pace ratings in a certain way which allows me to create a performance rating for each race in the horses' PPs. It is a time-consuming process to compile all the figures that I use...but once I am done, my figures "speak to me"...and I get a much clearer picture of the quality of these past races than what the speed or pace figures alone could provide.

I will look at certain replays of each contending horse...but I don't believe in adding or subtracting from a horse's figure in accordance with what I think the replay is telling me. My figure-rating method is precise, and I don't want to inject imprecision into it by doing things like "adding 5 points to the figure because the horse found itself 3-wide around the final turn". If I think that a horse was compromised by the trip or the pace in a particular race...then I pass that race, and rely on the horse's OTHER races to form my opinion of it.

I don't base my opinion of a horse on a single pace-line, because I don't believe that the horses repeat in the future the races that they have run in the past. To me, each race performance is unique...and it is influenced by unique circumstances and differing race dynamics. I use several races in order to grade every horse, because I believe that a horse's form is always in a state of flux...and it is critical to me to determine where the horse finds itself in its form cycle. I have also created a list of "wake-up" factors...whose presence indicates to me that a particular horse is about to deliver a much better effort than what his most recent races indicate. This "improvement projection" method has been a rather recent addition to my handicapping arsenal...and I wish I would have thought of it 20 years ago.
I love sprints on the dirt...I tolerate dirt routes...I bet on grass races sparingly...and I detest races with multiple first-time starters.

I pretty much to the same thing and this is why I had my software made. I didn't want to spend all that time handicapping. I have my performance ratings, projected ratings, hidden form, possible overlays and many other things with the click of a button. The program crunches the numbers and displays everything in a nice clear format.

[ultracapper]

I can't believe I never voted or commented in this thread other than to let Raybo know that I didn't feel he unnecessarily posted too often.

Voted mix. Use the computer to watch replays and the DRF traditional racing form for certain bits of information.

When I think of a computer handicapper, I think of the database and variant making guys. The people that are using the real power of a computer, not the people like me that are just using the computer for what we used to use the TV and VCR for. So I'm not really a computer handicapper in the sense most would use that term. The handicapping records I keep are like nobody else's I've ever seen or heard discussed, other than the standard profit/loss records portion. I use the DRF different than anybody I've ever met also, as my primary data collection method is the replay, and the info that so many find primary in the DRF, such as the point of call position/lengths behind (what many refer to as the running line), makes that info of limited importance to me. Actually, if I blacked out the running line I'd be doing myself a favor.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

I can't believe I never voted or commented in this thread other than to let Raybo know that I didn't feel he unnecessarily posted too often.

Voted mix. Use the computer to watch replays and the DRF traditional racing form for certain bits of information.

When I think of a computer handicapper, I think of the database and variant making guys. The people that are using the real power of a computer, not the people like me that are just using the computer for what we used to use the TV and VCR for. So I'm not really a computer handicapper in the sense most would use that term. The handicapping records I keep are like nobody else's I've ever seen or heard discussed, other than the standard profit/loss records portion. I use the DRF different than anybody I've ever met also, as my primary data collection method is the replay, and the info that so many find primary in the DRF, such as the point of call position/lengths behind (what many refer to as the running line), makes that info of limited importance to me. Actually, if I blacked out the running line I'd be doing myself a favor.

Not taking a jab at you, or replays, but how do you record the data you glean from replays? Do you keep records of each horse and constantly append those records with new race data? If so, then is this in pen and paper form, or do you keep track of all those horses and their data in a computer app?

You know what I'm getting at, I'm sure. How do you use this replay data going forward, and how do you organize the horses that you have replay data on? Seems like a whole lot of data that must be manually "looked up" for every race you handicap, unless you are using a computer app, or spreadsheet to link horse names to replay data? Or, do you have total recall which allows you to immediately remember all the replay data for every horse in every race you handicap, etc.?

[mrhorseplayer]

watch replays, see a horse you think is a good wager next time out, put horse name in stable mail, get email notification next time horse is entered.

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by raybo

Not taking a jab at you, or replays, but how do you record the data you glean from replays? Do you keep records of each horse and constantly append those records with new race data? If so, then is this in pen and paper form, or do you keep track of all those horses and their data in a computer app?

You know what I'm getting at, I'm sure. How do you use this replay data going forward, and how do you organize the horses that you have replay data on? Seems like a whole lot of data that must be manually "looked up" for every race you handicap, unless you are using a computer app, or spreadsheet to link horse names to replay data? Or, do you have total recall which allows you to immediately remember all the replay data for every horse in every race you handicap, etc.?

Forgive me Ultracapper for answering this post.


Formulator's value is visible in the questions you ask. I use it for 1 reason. To record every single trip note for every horse I see run. I also use it to remind me of every card's track bias and specific notes of every race I watch. (4h duel, collapse, boat race, fastest fractions of day, etc etc etc).

Without it, all my work would be wasted.

Again, sorry Ultra. I had to chime in as I love that function of formulator.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by EMD4ME

Forgive me Ultracapper for answering this post.


Formulator's value is visible in the questions you ask. I use it for 1 reason. To record every single trip note for every horse I see run. I also use it to remind me of every card's track bias and specific notes of every race I watch. (4h duel, collapse, boat race, fastest fractions of day, etc etc etc).

Without it, all my work would be wasted.

Again, sorry Ultra. I had to chime in as I love that function of formulator.

I can see that Formulator is an excellent tool for such things. But, Ultracapper stated that he only uses a computer to watch replays, so I would be interested in how he records the replay data, and then how he accesses those records during live play. I don't see anything in his post that suggests he uses Formulator, or any other mainstream computer program.