Making A Living betting Horses (My Opinion Of What It May Involve And Imply)

[Partsnut]

For those that have an interest.
Please click on the following link to view my post:
http://wp.me/ppTmJ-1p

A happy and safe labor day to all.

[PaceAdvantage]

Any reason why you couldn't just post that here?

[Imriledup]

Respectfully disagree. I think you need that monster pick 6 or pick 4 score in order to survive as a pro. 200 bucks to win on 5-1 shots isn't going to pay the bills.


This is the way i look at things. Lets take a typical 10 horse field at Del Mar. In that race there is WPS, Exa, Tri and Super wagering. Lets also say there are a couple longshots you like in the race. In order to win, you are going to have to have a differing opinion from the general public. You are going to have to be 'right' while they are 'wrong'. Now, if you are right about this particular race, you need to get paid substantially. Lets say you like a longshot and dislike the favorite, do you want to just bet your 20-1 shot to WIN? No, you want to take advantage of your edge on the race. You want to try and make a score. Tris and supers can pay thousands or tens of thousands of dollars, why not take advantage of your 'edge' on a race and try and clean out the pool?

To each his own. If you can make a living betting Win only than i really admire that and you shouldn't change for anything.

BUT, if you have enough of an edge to make profits betting WIN, why not branch out and try and exploit that edge in the exotics pools? This is the question you have to ask. To be a great pro bettor, i'm not sure you want to play it safe all the time, you need to go for the gold imo.

[bisket]

the most intelligent thing to do is play for fun.

[ryesteve]

There's a lot in here that I disagree with:

1- The anti-software bias, and speaking in terms of what programs "yield", as if they're black boxes that spit out selections.

2- The implication that 10% is an insufficient ROI from which you can earn a living. Hell, the people making the most money are probably operating at a 0% ROI, and making it all via rebates.

3- The implication that handicapping 50-60 races per week is somehow burdensome. I "handicapped" 70 races just yesterday alone, and it wasn't a problem. Would've been a lot more, except I only played the early east coast tracks.

4- The idea that betting to win is the only way to be successful. Sorry, but this is just complete and utter nonsense. The vast majority of winning players are profitable because of exotics. Your belief that exotics will "cause one to fail in the long run" is mind-blowing. You really need to search the discussions around here about compounding one's edge via exotics.

[Space Monkey]

PA, I think he just wants to bring attention to his blog.

Partsnut, you state that all exotics have a takeout of 24-27%. You couldn't be more wrong. Go to HANA's website and learn. Please. The takeout at MTH on Pik4's is just 15%. Most exactas and doubles are 18-20%. Kentucky and Cal have an across the board 19-20% on all exotics. I could go on, but please just go to the site.

Riled, I agree with what you say, except leave out the pik6. Pik4 payoffs are good enough. Trying to hit that "monster" pik 6 will break you.

Ryesteve you touch on something that baffles me. How do you "fully" handicap 70 races in a day? I use a pace program and the BRIS Ultimates. I make my own decisions. I don't use a computer program to pick horses for me. It takes awhile. How do you do it?

[Ian Meyers]

Originally Posted by ryesteve

There's a lot in here that I disagree with

2- The implication that 10% is an insufficient ROI from which you can earn a living. Hell, the people making the most money are probably operating at a 0% ROI, and making it all via rebates.

I find it really hard to believe that very few playing for a living have a positive ROI pre-rebate. I know some of the best in the U.S. and we speak in awe about guys that win on the up.

Most pros are about 5-10% post-rebate, FWIW.

[ryesteve]

Originally Posted by Space Monkey

I don't use a computer program to pick horses for me. It takes awhile. How do you do it?

Via software. I do spend a lot of time on R&D outside of "handicapping"... but for raceday decision-making, I've coded what I want to be looking for, so the actual "handicapping" process is automatic.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I think if anybody is not a professional player,they should pipe down.The topic should be addressed by those who do it.Every time this subject is brought up here there is a contingent of naysayers that dominate the subject.My guess is that they are the same losers you see at the track that cannot beat the game but show up every day.

Let's leave this to the winners that do play everyday.Speak up boys and girls!

[Jeff P]

Interesting topic.

Valid points Steve. IMHO right on the money.

At the risk of looking like I'm piling on (which I'm not) a while back I looked at my records from the past year and saw something that surprised me. Show wagers - in races where I was deliberately playing against bridge jumper horses that my program considered vulnerable - that single category had the highest pre-rebate roi of any wager category spanning the preceding 12 months...

Which brings me to a very important point. There are a lot of different ways to reach profitable play. For every blanket statement about things like wager type, handicapping methodology, computer program vs pencil and drf, class levels, track or venue, surface, distance, track condition, rider, trainer, workouts, medication, equipment changes, etc. there are bound to be exceptions. The minute somebody proclaims "THAT" can't possibly work - there's a pretty good chance somebody else is out there making some variation of "THAT" work (whatever "that" turns out to be.)

IMHO wager type isn't the difference maker. Positive expectancy of the individual wager is what's important. There's a concept that I call Strength of Play. In JCapper each potential win wager can be measured according to certain metrics. You have probability. You have payoff based on the odds after the pool reflects the amount of all bets including yours. From that you can calculate expected value. The higher the probability and the higher the expected value the higher the Strength of Play. The higher the Strength of Play the higher the percentage of bankroll you can safely bet... much like Kelly.

There are situations each and every day where Strength of Play is sufficiently strong (a positive expectancy exists) to justify wagering in many different pools... win, place, show, exacta, tri, super, double, pick3, pick4, pick5, pick6... did I leave anything out?

The important thing is the ability to analyze Strength of Play so that you can differentiate between good bets and bad bets. And then muster the discipline to make (predominantly) only good bets. Btw, that last part is harder than most would think.



The following areas are the critical elements to success - at least for me:

1. Selection Process

2. Play or Pass Decision Making

3. Bet Sizing

4. Ticket Structure/Backing Your Opinion

5. Carrying Your Edge Into the Long Run

6. Discipline

It's been my experience that far too many players spend far too much time and energy focusing on area #1. The more I play and the more experience I get under my belt the more convinced I become that areas 2-6 are far more important than area #1. (But that's just me.)

And sure as I type this out and hit the submit button there's bound to be somebody out there winning decent money (hell, MY money on some days) and their strong point is going to be in area #1 - and they probably have no idea whatsoever it is I'm talking about when they hear terms like Strength of Play or Play or Pass Decision Making. <G>


-jp

.

[Ian Meyers]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

I think if anybody is not a professional player,they should pipe down.The topic should be addressed by those who do it.Every time this subject is brought up here there is a contingent of naysayers that dominate the subject.My guess is that they are the same losers you see at the track that cannot beat the game but show up every day.

Let's leave this to the winners that do play everyday.Speak up boys and girls!

I am playing professionally, and have previously. The numbers I am quoting are from others that play professionally as well.

[Jeff P]

I'll vouch for what Ian says about post rebate numbers of most playing for a living. <G>

-jp

.

[misscashalot]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Any reason why you couldn't just post that here?

I'm clocking his site a short time. His method has several provisos based on post time odds. He shows promise, and his site is well worth following. I don't know the guy so I'm not shilling for him.

[Space Monkey]

Via software. I do spend a lot of time on R&D outside of "handicapping"... but for raceday decision-making, I've coded what I want to be looking for, so the actual "handicapping" process is automatic.

Your own software?

Jeff, 2-6 are all dependent on #1. Without selecting the right horse/horses, 2-6 don't mean a thing. What am I missing?

[classhandicapper]

The inter-relationship between ROI and volume has been discussed many times.

I think it's not extremely difficult to either win and show a high ROI if you are extremely selective. What's difficult is getting a lot of money through the windows and doing either.

IMHO, a lot of pros and very active players have a low ROI because they are playing a lot of unprofitable horses (without realizing it of course). If they became more selective they could raise their ROI. However, you don't want to get to the point where in an effort to raise your ROI you stop betting some marginally profitable horses. Making those fine line decisions in marginal situations is extremely difficult. Some people tend to opt for volume (perhaps because they like action) and others tend to opt for extreme selectivity (perhaps because they favor greater certainty of profit). I am in the latter camp trying to edge my way into greater volume over time.