Pandy's New Book

[pandy]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

IMO...you can't be a winning horseplayer if you are not a good "loser". If losing bothers you, then you have no shot in this game...because "losing" is EXACTLY what you are going to do the vast majority of the time. What we call "discipline" is sometimes nothing more than behaving like mature players when we are LOSING.

I read comments on these pages of players who say they they "won't tolerate" losing. I say good luck to them...because they'll need it. Having a strong desire to "win" doesn't mean not tolerating losing. It means persevering THROUGH the unavoidable losing streaks, while keeping the end result in mind.

I've written about this in my column a few times, that is, you have to be a good loser to be a winner. Some of the pros I've known seem to have that cockiness about them. But, let's be honest, it has a lot of do with the amount of money you have. It's a lot easier to shrug off a few losing days if you have a lot of money.

[pandy]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I do not think that a good handicapper is necessary a winner in this game. As an example you can use the crowd's consensus which composes the best possible handicapper but still manages to have a very negative expectation. Although they might overlap to some extend, still I view handicapping and betting expertises as distinct to each other..

Delta, just for clarification, can you explain what you mean by crowd's consensus?

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by pandy

Delta, just for clarification, can you explain what you mean by crowd's consensus?

The ranking as it is dictated by the odds

[pandy]

That's what I thought you meant. But how do you know what's a good bet off that?

[headhawg]

I started to write replies to some posts made here and then realized that I would just be contributing to the problem. Why does it seem that an inordinate amount of threads get taken way off topic lately with posts that are either inane or pseudointellectual?

Anyway, thanks for shipping out my order so quickly Pandy. The information in your books always add to my handicapping knowledge.

[pandy]

Thank you!

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by pandy

That's what I thought you meant. But how do you know what's a good bet off that?

I do not imply that the ranking can reveal a good bet. Just that it makes it obvious to see where the value can be coming from and what kind of factors might be miscalculated in the specific race

[upthecreek]

Method #1 had a 8-1 winner(top pick)
Method #2 had a 6-1 winner- Method 2 there is only a single qualifier
So far results have been promising I noticed Im seeing the races/contenders more clearly

[Boulder]

what two races at AQU did this work?

[Fingal]

Originally Posted by headhawg

I started to write replies to some posts made here and then realized that I would just be contributing to the problem. Why does it seem that an inordinate amount of threads get taken way off topic lately with posts that are either inane or pseudointellectual?

Anyway, thanks for shipping out my order so quickly Pandy. The information in your books always add to my handicapping knowledge.

Because of reading the pages here & then the info on Pandy's website, I ordered the book & have been going over it since earlier this month. I've been working with his method, it's is very easy to follow & has resulted in some hmm..... moments.

I'm purposely being vague because since it's his idea he can choose to do with it what he will, it's not for anyone else to decide or give out any info on it. But I will say with the nominal charge it's what I call a worthy price of admission to see an idea one might be able to expand upon.

[pandy]

As some of you know, in the book I use the Bris Race Summary, and I explain how you could adapt the methods to other past performances, such as the Daily Racing Form's. This week I looked at the Timeform US condensed pps sheet and realized this it is very good to use with my book.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by headhawg

I started to write replies to some posts made here and then realized that I would just be contributing to the problem. Why does it seem that an inordinate amount of threads get taken way off topic lately with posts that are either inane or pseudointellectual?

Not interested in yet another group therapy session on the Psychology and Philosophy of Handicapping?

Some appear to be using this as a spot play system, but I have found it to be a useful addition to my general handicapping methods. I don't use spot plays as a rule, but this method has been a good tool to identify a contender that I might have overlooked or to eliminate border line contenders. It has also helped me to identify an occasional false favorite.

[jimmac]

Pandy:

Purchased your book - good read.

??? Wouldn't it be quicker to chart a race if use R1 before calculating speed
since one eliminates horses if R1 is too low - but could have good speed.
Comments.

Thank you.

[pandy]

Thank you. You could do that. If you've found a way to streamline it, that works. I will occasionally bend the R1 rule a bit if the odds are right, especially if I'm just looking for good priced contenders to use in multiple race exotics. I do like looking over the speed figures first to make sure I have a good feel for the race from that perspective, but obviously you can tweak it to your own personal preferences.

[biggestal99]

I did the deed and bought the book for christmas.

I use both bris and drf pp's.

I always read a new handicapping book with an open mind

Here's to your new book,

Allan