Got what it takes to be a PRO?

[NorCalGreg]

To estimate the expected losing streaks, find the closest figure to your win percentage in the "%W" column - the second column of the*average losing streak chart below. If you are near the closest value of14.3%....of which I am.....good luck.

Looking along this line and we see that our winners would have to average 6-to 1 odds just to break even and that the expected largest losing streak in a series of 1000 bets would be 34 losers in a row.

If I win 25% of my win bets (I don't--not even close-primarily I'm a longshot player)--but if I was..I would have to average an $8.00 mutual just to break even..and could expect a 20+ race losing streak, among many smaller-- at some time during the next 1,000 wagers. That's probably a year's total bets for a committed hobbyist.

Psychologically, it is difficult for the average horse player to endure a losing streak of 10 or more losers in a row.

Confining our attention to these large losing streaks...again, looking at the chart we see that in every 1000 bets there would be an average of 27 losing streaks of 10 or more losers in a row. Can that be correct? Yes it can.

So even if our average winner was paying over 8-to-1 odds and we were making a good profit, we would still be playing through a losing streak of 10 or more losers in a row much of the time. This is the Achilles' heel of most long shot horse racing betting systems.

This, ladies and gentlemen...is why so few of us horseplayers can win year in and year out. Humans aren't naturally hard-wired for this task. If you're one of the handful who can succeed in this game...you will have accomplished an extremely rare feat. You will get no kudos, no slaps on the back...your own family couldn't care less. Your enormous horse racing accomplishments will impress exactly no one.

It's the mental aspect that we can't overcome--not the actual handicapping.

Personally...I know for a fact---and I'm not boasting at all, I COULD get seriously dedicated to becoming a winning horseplayer--and do it. I just could never make a living this way.

The thing is--I don't want to. Every one of us is exactly who and where we have chosen to be. I could become extremely careful, diligent...grind out a profit. But I'm positive I would hate it---hate it like I hate doing income taxes.

*ps--when I say "we" ..I mean the average horseplayer on this board--fair to very good, but certainly not a "pro".

-NCG

chart from http://turfanalyst.com

[CincyHorseplayer]

Losing streaks sound about right. Mine usually aren't 0-fers but plenty of 2 for 25 and 3 for 30 types. To me this is solved by bankroll size and bet proportion. That right now is thee obstacle I can't overcome. You have to have a large enough bankroll to make a real income. But your bet size has to be 1% or less IMO. You go on an 0-34 run making 2-3% bets and you are done. Plus if you are making .5% bets and 10 a day or just simply put you are putting in 5% of your bank in play a day. You cycle your whole bankroll per month(5 days-4weeks). It has to be well planned.

This is why I have so much respect for the guys that have done it and done it for years. I know I need brief breaks but not a ton. I think my max goal would be 150 days betting. I still like to have other things I like to do that generate income that require no one else's help but a few occasional sub outs. Probably take me 10 more years to get to there. But I'd be happy with this vision. Work 100 days a year and bet 150! Answer to nobody. Getting there!

[MonmouthParkJoe]

Considering how I have been doing since BC weekend, I am much better off being a barista at starbucks.

[traynor]

I tracked missouts for years, mainly because it only takes a line or two of code to automate the process. I found it much more useful to track ROI. Meaning, "if I do this over 1000 races, what will my returns look like (in graphic format)". Big ups and downs usually indicate chasing rainbows--the return in a small sample used for "creating the strategy" is often misleading, with the (apparent, but only apparent) ROI the result of a few anomalies. Those anomalies are the source of the problem because they rarely repeat in subsequent samples.

That seems to be the major reason the rainbow chasers (and others seeking "life-changing scores") seem to do so poorly in the real world. Their strategies are based primarily on anomalies.

Rather than missouts and possible losing streaks, it might be more illuminating to track fluctuations in ROI over the course of many, many races. As CincyHorseplayer pointed out, a modest win every 5 or 10 races can create the illusion of a "sure thing". Winning races break the missout pattern, even if the win(s) continue(s) the (actual) losing streak. Monitoring fluctuations in (actual) returns can paint a way different picture than monitoring the number of sequential races lost.

[AltonKelsey]

Figured out the losing streak thing long ago.

Also figured out that a lower roi but better churn rate (higher win %) will probable make you more money with less angst in the long run.

This is part of what the computer boys do. Make a tiny amount regularly, and not worry about making scores.

[thaskalos]

The more often we play this game, the faster we get to really "know ourselves" as players...and the easier it becomes to realize if we are really "made" for this game.

The truth is that, although this game provides thrills and entertainment for many...it can provide consistent profits for only the tiny few who can effectively deal with its many "traps". Play the game infrequently...and you may never really get to know what these "traps" are.

[classhandicapper]

I deal with losing streaks by also betting to place when there is value in that pool and by betting two horses to win when there is value on more than one horse. IMO, greater mental stability is worth the cost of feeling like a hero a little more often.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

The more often we play this game, the faster we get to really "know ourselves" as players...and the easier it becomes to realize if we are really "made" for this game.

The truth is that, although this game provides thrills and entertainment for many...it can provide consistent profits for only the tiny few who can effectively deal with its many "traps". Play the game infrequently...and you may never really get to know what these "traps" are.

Like in the days of the California gold rush, many sought the Big Score in vain...turns out the real fortunes lay in selling pick and shovels and various sundries to the armies of those laboring for the gold....I wonder what the equivalent of those "suppliers of various sundries" are in this horse racing game...all borne on the backs of the regular bettor....? Any clues as to whom is making the real dough? I assume the 3% of the top trainers, jockeys, owners...then whom?

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I deal with losing streaks by also betting to place when there is value in that pool and by betting two horses to win when there is value on more than one horse. IMO, greater mental stability is worth the cost of feeling like a hero a little more often.

It all boils down to reducing variance, while at the same time, showing long-term profits without placing bets too high for pool size, thus suppressing one's own payouts....can't get too greedy when having an edge, no matter the endeavor.

[MONEY]

Thankfully for me, I do not now nor did I ever want to be a professional gambler.

As a matter of fact, I haven't made a bet in a few months and I still enjoy handicapping and watching races every day.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

It all boils down to reducing variance, while at the same time, showing long-term profits without placing bets too high for pool size, thus suppressing one's own payouts....can't get too greedy when having an edge, no matter the endeavor.

Variance is important to me because I don't make a lot of wagers.

[pondman]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

The more often we play this game, the faster we get to really "know ourselves" as players...and the easier it becomes to realize if we are really "made" for this game.

The truth is that, although this game provides thrills and entertainment for many...it can provide consistent profits for only the tiny few who can effectively deal with its many "traps". Play the game infrequently...and you may never really get to know what these "traps" are.

How many player have actually done any comprehensive work on their own play? And know whether they have an edge in a pool? Or know they should take up another hobby? Most play as they are told to play.The question should be: how long does it take to discover if your way is profitable? And what is it going to cost you in time and money to make that conclusion?

[pondman]

Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey

Like in the days of the California gold rush, many sought the Big Score in vain...turns out the real fortunes lay in selling pick and shovels and various sundries to the armies of those laboring for the gold....I wonder what the equivalent of those "suppliers of various sundries" are in this horse racing game...all borne on the backs of the regular bettor....? Any clues as to whom is making the real dough? I assume the 3% of the top trainers, jockeys, owners...then whom?

A: People who have taken on the more complex problems with larger payouts. They have precise methods that distribute well, and make expectations reasonable.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by pondman

How many player have actually done any comprehensive work on their own play? And know whether they have an edge in a pool? Or know they should take up another hobby? Most play as they are told to play.The question should be: how long does it take to discover if your way is profitable? And what is it going to cost you in time and money to make that conclusion?

I'm going to guess that 95% of everyone that plays the game seriously (let alone because they like gambling) has no idea. They have "opinions" based on years of experience and what they've read or heard from other serious players in books etc.. but have never tested any of it as factual or in terms of value. They tend to just stick with what seems to be working and keep going all while accumulating some false insights and making some bad bets even if they get good enough to win on a net basis.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by pondman

The question should be: how long does it take to discover if your way is profitable?

IMO, it takes 1500 plays for a sample size, over the course of 3 years per circuit/track....