Quote:
|
Originally Posted by acorn54
personally i don't follow trends. i believe in the efficient market hypothesis.
when information becomes widely available for public consumption, it is incorporated in the "price" of the horse given to the bettor for wagering on it.
horseracing is a rapidly changing game, and one has to stay a step ahead of one's contemporaries if one is to remain even remotely close to beating the take-out.
also from my betting records i see that every penny counts. for the amount i bet if i bet at the track instead of with a rebate house i would make around 5000 dollars less just this past year. something is going to change in this area, but that is a topic for another thread.
|
that is a very interesting subject. from a personal standpoint, i would rather turn back the clock to when there was no such thing as rebates. i did better with a lot less work, i bet a lot more per race, and i had more of a life. today i have to work all day to get the top rebate, if i don't bet over $1 million a year my rebates go down to a lesser level. the amount of money in pools is way down from the good old days except for larger tracks who don't pay good rebates. so when you play the larger tracks the takeout is much higher. i have to play 20 different tracks a day, with much smaller wagers than what i was used to in order to make my handle. i have had 1 winning year this century without a rebate andthat was because i was able to take down 2 huge daily double and exact pools in Saratoga.
