Can you quickly describe how you handicap?

[plainolebill]

Dirt, sprints then routes
claiming nw2l, alw nw2l, starter nw2l. Some MCL and MSW.
Those are the races I concentrate on.

[Robert Fischer]

Look for my models in the film and data in all of the races at all of the significant meets and in certain race-types of smaller meets. These form opinions.

Later, when an opinion is re-entered on a day and it creates a significant value, I take a fresh look at my models in the film and data. If there is something of value, I also then look to branch out into possible multi-race wagers from that race, by handicapping the surrounding races.

I'll also screen each day for field size, and anything that especially interests me. So, if there are large fields or there is a big event like the B.C. I'll look into attractive races and sequences as well.

[Parkview_Pirate]

I consider myself a comprehensive handicapper, not so much in trying to evaluate all the data - but changing the "weight" to just a factor or two in some races. Horse's appearance, tote action, and changes in spotting the horse (the trainer's window) is crucial.

Value is tough to quantify and no way can I model it like the big guys.

Thask put together a nice list on his post. I start with his #3, and would use more on his list if I was half as wise as him.

[crestridge]

I use the print out of my computer program:

1. Check to make sure the filter is for at least 10 horses in the race, before
scratches.

2. Note the time, track, of the races that fit 10 horses.

3. Then eliminate sprints, use only routes, no maidens (my records show poor
results there) and only turf.

4. My contenders are arranged according to the highest to lowest of Power
Consensus ranking/numbers (this consists of: A. Early B. Form C. Figs
D. Late E. Class, (multiple parameters in each of these indexes).

5. I have mainly five areas of interest to make an assessment: A. Trainer win
% B. Power Consensus C. Another Power # D. Late E. Early

6. All these elements are arranged according to rank: A. First I note how
many of these 5 elements are ranked 1 to 4. Then I assign points for the
rankings: #1=4 points, #2=3 points, #3=2 points #4=1 point

7. Then I make a notation of how many elements of the five elements are in each
contender, and how many points each contenders has.

8. I can then quickly eliminate those of low elements/points.

9. Usually five to three contenders are left: look at current odds, compare
to M/L and make a decision, at 0 minutes, hopefully I don't get locked out.

[Sparky13]

I pick my 5 top contenders using the average of the top 2 Byers of the last 3 races. Then of those 5, I use a hand held device by COMPUABET. Then I use the TOP 3 for win bets and exactas.

[Jake]

Originally Posted by crestridge

I use the print out of my computer program:

1. Check to make sure the filter is for at least 10 horses in the race, before
scratches.

2. Note the time, track, of the races that fit 10 horses.

3. Then eliminate sprints, use only routes, no maidens (my records show poor
results there) and only turf.

4. My contenders are arranged according to the highest to lowest of Power
Consensus ranking/numbers (this consists of: A. Early B. Form C. Figs
D. Late E. Class, (multiple parameters in each of these indexes).

5. I have mainly five areas of interest to make an assessment: A. Trainer win
% B. Power Consensus C. Another Power # D. Late E. Early

6. All these elements are arranged according to rank: A. First I note how
many of these 5 elements are ranked 1 to 4. Then I assign points for the
rankings: #1=4 points, #2=3 points, #3=2 points #4=1 point

7. Then I make a notation of how many elements of the five elements are in each
contender, and how many points each contenders has.

8. I can then quickly eliminate those of low elements/points.

9. Usually five to three contenders are left: look at current odds, compare
to M/L and make a decision, at 0 minutes, hopefully I don't get locked out.

You play only turf routes? How are you doing with that specialty, that can
be tough this time of year.

Jake

[crestridge]

Actually today would have been a horrible day, but because of family, home duties, I missed most of the races I planned to check out. But it turned out ok, because at RPX, R-10, I hit the #9 horse, which made my day ok. There's good days, bad days, but why I pick turf, is because it is tough, but usually the prices are better, more entrants in the race. Which means favorites must have a good trip, if not there's other entrants usually who can "fly" at the end of the race. Usually better trainers. And I have done better in routes, more past races run.

Thanks for asking...

[romankoz]

One: list the horses at 4/1 or less in races where the class of race is good (subjective but experience sorts this out quite quickly most times)
Two: delete the get back early types unless they are top class
Three: must have distance AND track conditions ability as close to this class as possible.
Four: must be either trained by a competent trainer (I have a list) OR be ridden by a top class jockey (another list).
Five: delete horses who have had too many career starts (subjective number but mid 30's is about the number)
Six: delete horses with low strike rates in sprint races (subjective) and in distance races go through their career and find the distance runs and judge from there re low strike rate
Seven: judge value of available odds

I have a list of viable contenders in almost no time that are favs or 2nd favs

If fav or 2nd fav look suspect based on One to Five above look at outsiders (some races 10/1 12/1: others want 20/1 plus). I look for characteristics I have noted have helped roughies win in the past.

[Jake]

Originally Posted by crestridge

Actually today would have been a horrible day, but because of family, home duties, I missed most of the races I planned to check out. But it turned out ok, because at RPX, R-10, I hit the #9 horse, which made my day ok. There's good days, bad days, but why I pick turf, is because it is tough, but usually the prices are better, more entrants in the race. Which means favorites must have a good trip, if not there's other entrants usually who can "fly" at the end of the race. Usually better trainers. And I have done better in routes, more past races run.

Thanks for asking...

I think turf races are great legs in both doubles and PK3 /PK4 races, the more difficult the handicap the better, and the number of entrants certainly make the payoff odds usually worth the ticket cost. I love a single leg or 2X2 with a turf leg somewhere with 3 or 4 furtive legitimate long odds contenders. Cheap ticket with great leverage. This time of year, though, the weather becomes a key factor, and off the turf changes arise more often. Thus my question to you, since turf routes are your primary wagers. Thanks!

Jake

[crestridge]

Yes, you are correct, but by using the filter on my computer of 10 horses in the race even after scratches, there are more entrants still left over, more than these 5, 6 horses on dirt. The number of horses in the race ultimately, will decide comprehensively either a lower or higher price. Maybe not acutely, but long term. And of course it usually results in turf races, because most seem to offer more entrants.

But still, the CAW's dominate, and whether this process is ultimately worth it, only time will give the answer. Not necessarily a lot of hope, but I still enjoy the process. To me the process is the fun, the actual execution, I don't really like, it's time consuming, to sit and watch until 0 minutes, then execute, but unfortunately necessary...but what's cool about H. racing, the answer is quick. Unlike stock market, maybe waiting long periods of time before getting the answer. Enjoy!!!

[IamNewt]

1- Always bet horse if last race comment was "Eased, vanned off"

2-NY Bred MSW to claimer if total starts is 3 or less. Don't care if lost by 50.

3- Class

[Saratoga]

Originally Posted by IamNewt

1- Always bet horse if last race comment was "Eased, vanned off"

2-NY Bred MSW to claimer if total starts is 3 or less. Don't care if lost by 50.

3- Class

Funny that you said "comments"

A friend of mine said what out for "Fractious"

[Trackyourplays]

Martingale Ryan Moore...

[Jake]

I saw the coffee emoji above.

I have a Pearls Before Swine framed cartoon cutout,
that reads this way across the panels:

"Things I thought I needed when I was young:
Fame. Riches. Glory.

Things I now need:
Bed. Coffee. Pizza.

I wasted so many years!"


Now, if I could just figure out the proper order of those three things....


Jake

[Overlay]

To me, the thing to avoid is totally eliminating any horse from consideration before the handicapping process even starts. I try to assign a fair-odds figure to each horse (no matter how long those fair odds may be) by using a small (but comprehensive) number of proven probabilities, and then looking for overlays (as my user name implies ).