Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Exotic1
I shouldn't have phrased my comment to the way I did. I meant to give backdrop to what you were saying but I do not agree with your premise.
|
Okay. The reason why I say Best Bets are so crucial is because most people automatically assume that you can't win if you bet every race. However, one thing is for sure, if anyone
can show a flat bet profit on picks, the more picks, the better. In other words, say you have one handicapper who comes up with 10 picks a month and over the course of a year shows a flat bet $1.10 ROI based on $1 bets (10% profit per dollar wagered after 120 bets).
Another handicapper makes 100 picks a month with the same ROI, 10% profit per dollar wagered after 1200 bets. Both handicappers did extremely well, but the one who made 100 bets a month is better, and, indeed, would be considered a master handicapper.
Starting this week at Belmont on the free page of my website, I'm listing a set of alternative picks. These are not the horses that I actually selected to win on my service or on the sheet that we sell at Belmont. These are my alternative picks, which must no lower than 4-1 on the morning line. My win % therefore will be lower than my regular picks.
I started working on this concept last summer. I gave out two sets of alternative picks for Del Mar and Saratoga. Saratoga's alternative picks showed a flat bet profit, Del Mar didn't. However, I didn't use a wide criteria for the picks, I just looked at a computer printout from my Diamond System and quickly jotted down some picks. This time I'm using several sets of numbers.
My theory is that many handicappers (not sure of what percentage) can produce better (higher ROI) picks if they simply use their underneath picks more often. For instance, the horses that they don't think have the best chance of winning. I say many handicappers, not all handicappers, because it depends a lot on the type of handicapper you are. For instance, Steve Matthews in Newsday picks a lot of longshots on top, so he's already giving out alternative picks. I'm not sure this would work for him.
In my Power Pace Handicapping book I went into detail about being a public handicapper. The best way to produce a positive ROI on all of your picks is to pick a longshot in every single race. However, if you do that, you will have many terrible days when the chalk wins and you have Zero winners. People who follow the picks of a public handicapper are often fans who go to the track once in a while and they want winners. If they follow your picks and after, say, three trips to the track you only picked a total of 4 winners in 30 races, they'll think you suck, even though you may have picked two $30 horses on top and actually were the only public handicapper who showed a flat bet profit over the course of those three days. This is always the situation that professional handicappers are in. People want winners.
But, in terms of wagering, and for the typical bettor, learning how to think outside of the box is crucial. And a good way to force yourself to get into that way of thinking is to create a set of alternative picks, without any favorites.
I want $2 increments for everything. If someone can't do the math, they are in trouble 
