The Logical Choice -- Tote Board Handicapping made easy

[Capper Al]

The Logical Choice -- Tote Board Handicapping Made Easy by G. W. Cohail

Has anyone read this book?

[Harmonicaslim]

Yeah, I have it. Mostly about betting horses going off above their ML.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

Kind of an odd book. The author is all over the place talking about value, variants, due-column betting, etc. Steps through a "workout" of his approach with races at Santa Anita, betting $5 to win, $20 to place.

Pros: some good nuggets of info, examples, and provides a basis for "tote board system", if that's your goal.

Cons: not well organized, short chapters and skips around a bit.

Overall, worth the money if you're wanting a few ideas on how to look at racing in a bit different way.

[Capper Al]

Thanks guys. I bought the book. I will post my opinion too after reading it.

[timtam]

I bought this book when it came out last April 2013 but I think it was an addendum because the book goes over a style of play recording dates in 2006 where he was looking for value in his Quickcapper picks which I guess at the time he was selling.
The last chapter is strictly for play tote board values only and dismisses the drop down with a week at Santa Anita in 2013. Some of his examples are vague because he uses certain horses with the same odds rises and other times he lets out a horse he otherwise should be playing and never gives an explanation.
Never tells you how much your "bank" should be in reserve but in a readers
review in Amazon ( where I bought the book ) the outlay would have been quite a bit between hits. Anyway it's food for thought but pretty hard to just use this
as a method of making enough money to ' lock his office door and play the horses' unless his office is in his home.

[thaskalos]

This book isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

I was going to say this at the beginning of this thread...but I was embarrassed to admit that I paid money to get it.

Just terrible.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

After Thask's post, I had to go back and reread the book. If you're looking for insight on how the author thinks to about determining his selections, then yes it's a disappointment.

I believe I initially liked it due to the numerous examples provided, though I must admit the selection process "made easy" is not always clear.

Upon rereading it though, I did get a bit more insight on his approach to wagering off the tote, which in my mind is similar to technical analysis in stocks. The system he employs could have probably summed up in a single page of "rules", and I got a chuckle how several times he mentions how his wagers broke his rules. One major flaw in his approach, IMHO, is the reliance on an accurate morning line.

I can't write very well, there's not much literature in tote board analysis, and I'm inclined to give most authors the benefit of the doubt. I have books that are a lot worse. I hope Capper Al doesn't think I gave him a bum steer....

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by Hoofless_Wonder

After Thask's post, I had to go back and reread the book. If you're looking for insight on how the author thinks to about determining his selections, then yes it's a disappointment.

I believe I initially liked it due to the numerous examples provided, though I must admit the selection process "made easy" is not always clear.

Upon rereading it though, I did get a bit more insight on his approach to wagering off the tote, which in my mind is similar to technical analysis in stocks. The system he employs could have probably summed up in a single page of "rules", and I got a chuckle how several times he mentions how his wagers broke his rules. One major flaw in his approach, IMHO, is the reliance on an accurate morning line.

I can't write very well, there's not much literature in tote board analysis, and I'm inclined to give most authors the benefit of the doubt. I have books that are a lot worse. I hope Capper Al doesn't think I gave him a bum steer....

I bought the book and read it. I whole heartily agree with your analysis. I wouldn't dismiss him as totally worthless. His tote-boards moves are important, but one might want to reinterpret how to play them.

[Inglewood Flamingo]

http://amgona.wordpress.com/the-loical-choice/

If you read his last post it appears the author is in poor health. I communicated with him a few times and summed up his approach up as just looking for overlays off the ML. IMO, a better odds line would greatly improve the approach.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by Inglewood Flamingo

http://amgona.wordpress.com/the-loical-choice/

If you read his last post it appears the author is in poor health. I communicated with him a few times and summed up his approach up as just looking for overlays off the ML. IMO, a better odds line would greatly improve the approach.

Thanks. The tote-board play is part of the equation to profit.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

Originally Posted by Inglewood Flamingo

http://amgona.wordpress.com/the-loical-choice/

If you read his last post it appears the author is in poor health. I communicated with him a few times and summed up his approach up as just looking for overlays off the ML. IMO, a better odds line would greatly improve the approach.

Tough break to hear about the author's health.

I agree that a decent odds line would probably outperform the morning line at many tracks, and certainly would help zero in on the better plays. I'm a bit skeptical over his $5 win, $20 place wagering strategy, but didn't back and rechurn the numbers to see how he would have done with straight $25 win bets. This approach does remind me of a place bettor I met in Vegas one time, who said after 30 years of playing he found the only profitable approach for him were place bets on what determined were overlays.

The tote, in theory, contains all the known info related to a race, and monitoring the patterns in wagering can certainly lead to picking winners - excepting of course the late "steam" coming in from insiders. I believe the book only had one example for odds tracking, and all the others were just final odds versus M/L.

[Inglewood Flamingo]

If you go to his website and read his archived posts, not only do they make for some good reading but he also tells the week long story about how he learned this method by stalking another bettor. Not sure if it's true or not but good reading nonetheless.

[timtam]

This is my second post on this book and I didn't even know about the website

and the archives section which I immediately read. So after all the replys from

other readers does anyone in the forum find his method in Logical Approach a

satisfactory and successful method by the way the author explains it?

I did some paper tests and had mixed results so is there something he explains

in his archives or emails to other members that clarifies any of his " rules"

that would make his approach successful? It's an easy method to follow in

between races but he violates the 9/1 odds rule at BC&D tracks that I don't

know if he wins or loses. Any body make any clarity from the additional info or

is still mishmash and bend the rules to hit a winner? Also sorry about his

health and wish him well.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by timtam

This is my second post on this book and I didn't even know about the website

and the archives section which I immediately read. So after all the replys from

other readers does anyone in the forum find his method in Logical Approach a

satisfactory and successful method by the way the author explains it?

I did some paper tests and had mixed results so is there something he explains

in his archives or emails to other members that clarifies any of his " rules"

that would make his approach successful? It's an easy method to follow in

between races but he violates the 9/1 odds rule at BC&D tracks that I don't

know if he wins or loses. Any body make any clarity from the additional info or

is still mishmash and bend the rules to hit a winner? Also sorry about his

health and wish him well.

No one is all right or all wrong in their handicapping. His tote-board method has some merit in my testing, but I haven't been able to make a profit by it. His method will lead us to which horses are getting action and which horses are being neglected by public. This itself is enough to incorporate into your handicapping or wagering.

[barn32]

If we could look at the tote board manipulations to determine profitability, this would imply there are those who know the outcome of races before they are run. Assuming these people exist we must further assume they are leaving elephant tracks across the tote.

Come on people it just doesn't work that way.

[If I owned or trained a horse I was certain would win at around 17 to one, I would make damn sure he stayed at or near 17 to one.]

Tote board manipulations are just that--the workings of the betting public as they heave to and fro trying to decide which way to go.

If there was anything to the up, down and sideways of the tote, Anderon and his brother would be rich by now, and we all know how they end up doing--five horse exacta boxes to try and get even.