Awesome E-Mail reply. Must read

[Tom]

Originally Posted by alexander99

Nice.

And now? Give me a list of the return you would get from these programs?

If you were to use all these programs over , lets say, a 2 year period....

would any show a significant profit???

The answer= YES

--->For the person selling them.

Opinions vary. Many here have the records to support thiers.....do you?

[shanta]

Originally Posted by DanG

I feel like I’m repeating myself, but the greatest horseplayer I personally know wouldn’t know which end of a horse to feed.

Frankly, if you’re above 30yo and still making absolute statements such as “you must do X & Y to beat this game” you don’t meet enough different people.

There are visual players, computer players, sheet players and yes even DRF players etc who are at least holding there own in this game. [It's late or I could list a hundred other methods]


Granted, you must put in the hours with any discipline. At least a somewhat contrarian approach has been a common thread in winners I’ve met…but…to say you have to do paddock inspections and / or drive to the track everyday is naïve to put it kindly.

Right on the money Dan

[PaceAdvantage]

You were merely expressing an opinion alexander99? Oh really? Does this also count as your opinion:

Originally Posted by alexander99

Nice.

And now? Give me a list of the return you would get from these programs?

If you were to use all these programs over , lets say, a 2 year period....

would any show a significant profit???

The answer= YES

--->For the person selling them.

Sounds to me like you're spouting FACTS here, as in, FACT: The only person who profits from handicapping software is the person selling said software.

That's what you just stated. Nowhere in there do I see the words "In my opinion"

What I see is close-mindedness and an agenda.

I know, I know, you'll come back at me with "So, I guess you don't have any PROOF." And to that I say, "What do I need proof for? You Alexander, already are obviously filled with FACTS, why in the world would you need need any proof I might be able to provide?"

See how worthless this discussion quickly becomes when someone is so close minded as yourself?

How about you show us some proof of your LONG TERM success and also some proof that you NEVER used a handicapping program to obtain any of this supposed success.

See, it's getting more worthless by the second....

[Turfday]

Having information (from whatever sources or whatever angles) you have confidence in is only part of the battle.

I learned my lessons from the late, great Hollywood motion picture producer/director Martin Ritt, who had a good size stable of horses with Bobby Frankel when Frankel first came to Los Angeles in the 1970's.

Marty was a good handicapper, but was an even sharper (shrewder?) BETTOR.

It wasn't so much that he would pick more winners than anyone else. It's just that he knew /had a knack for knowing where to place his money. Of course, the game was much simpler in those days and there were fewer exotics.

But a key lesson learned was that you can have all of the information you need at your fingertips...from figs to physicality to computer programs to trip notes, to inside information...but if you don't know how to BET the advantage you are supposed to have means nothing.

[alexander99]

LOL

Do I have to begin all my posts now with:

"In my opinion"....

This is a public forum.

If you don't agree with my comments,

I am open to some friendly debate.

[alexander99]

In most cases,

(in my opinion...sorry, almost forgot)

the person who earns the most money from these programs

is the person marketing them.

You deny this?

Any program that produces significant long-term results

would not be made available to the public.

This is obvious.

[alexander99]

But a key lesson learned was that you can have all of the information you need at your fingertips...from figs to physicality to computer programs to trip notes, to inside information...but if you don't know how to BET the advantage you are supposed to have means nothing.


---------->I agree. Well said.

[BillW]

Originally Posted by alexander99

In most cases,

(in my opinion...sorry, almost forgot)

the person who earns the most money from these programs

is the person marketing them.

You deny this?

Any program that produces significant long-term results

would not be made available to the public.

This is obvious.

Same is true of the DRF or the track charging you admission. What is your point?

[alexander99]

My point is-

I know what i am getting when i pick up an issue of DRF.

I know what i'm getting when i pay admission to the track.

These programs?

What exactly are you getting?

What kind of returns- results do they offer?

Is there any proof?

There have been so many programs, systems on the market...

You think they help the game?

In many ways, they are a very negative influence.

People are brain-washed into believing they just have to buy them...punch in the numbers..and presto- get an instant winner.


What ever happened to learning the game..from the basics?

Relying on sound judgement, sound handicapping?

In this computer age....How much time are people spending to learn this game?

It took me 1000's of hours- studying, reading charts, books, etc.

I now have a much greater understanding & appreciation of this game.

Computer programs?

I'd rather form my own opinion.

Sure, you can say...they assist handicappers.

But? at what cost?

Everything is relative. Everyone has their own preference.

Personally, i have never relied on a program for help...

In the end, all you are buying is someone's notion of which variables should take precedence, and which should be ignored.

I'd rather go with my own judgement.

Thanks

[Greyfox]

First of all, let me say that I've learned a heck of a lot from Joe Takach's ideas on Physicality. His articles on his website are excellent. I haven't seen his video, but saw one similar from Bonnie Ledbetter(sp.?).

That he does a lot of work to make his money at this game is worthy of note.
I suspect too many people know him for him to be making that up.

But having said that, is he prone to slightly embellishing his stories?

I found the following from the e mail somewhat hard to swallow.

"I put in at least 100 hours a week at this and my 5 staff members all work at least 70 hour weeks."

First of all, I checked the Minimum hourly wages across several states.
They vary from lows around $ 2.65 to $ 7.50 or (perhaps higher).
They can be found at the U.S. Department of Labor by clicking on the following site:
http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm

So just for the heck of it let's say, that Joe is paying his 5 employees a minimum wage of say $ 3.00 per hour.
They each doing at least 70 hours a week.
That would mean that each one would be paid $ 210 per week.
As there are 5 of them their salary's would be $ 1,050 per week.

But even at this low end Joe has to clear via his wagering and maybe consulting, $ 1,050 per week just to pay these 5 employees.
You'd have to lay down some pretty good bets and have some pretty consistent payoffs in order to make that at the track each and every week.

Now I'd think it would take a rare idiot to work 70 hours per week for anyone else for only $ 210 per week. Don't you agree? Where do you find that kind of help? Would you even get anyone to work for a higher end minimum wage of
$ 7.60 for 70 hours per week.

Are you starting to get the picture?
I'm not questoning that Joe has 5 employees. I'm not questioning that he pays them.
But at the low end how many gamblers do you know that make $ 1,050 per week consistently week in and week out at the windows. At a higher minimum wage he'd have to make over $ 3,000 per week at the windows, before he could pay himself.

So if Joe is actually able to do this he must be an awfully good handicapper and a very good gambler.

But to be honest about it, when I first read the story, I said to myself,
"maybe this guy owns a taxi company too?"
After all, he never did say that his source of income was wagering. Maybe he does consulting too.

Yet I'm pretty thankful to Joe for his website and his ideas.
But I wouldn't work for those wages per hour. Would you?

So gang, my bottom line here is the math just doesn't add up.
(Unless your running a cab company or escort service . )

[46zilzal]

Many computer programs, once mastered, allow the user a much deeper insight into factors (once defined as relevant), than ANY subjective evaluation by a user, no matter how good they are....

[thelyingthief]

mr takach feels the need to devote his every waking hour to horse racing and does so. good for him.

to assume this preoccupation (not occupation) is enjoined on all mistakes one man's methods with anothers.

excellent book: enhancing trading profits. chapter two discusses four traders, each profitable, each approaching the markets in different ways. one of them assigns evening hours only to the process.

what works for me may not work for you. what works for mr. takach may not work for me. in fact, it simply would not. don't believe this crap about hours upon hours every day: often, these overly anal efforts to acquire ever greater knowledge with negligible, indeed, often deleterious returns, merely hides a player's discomfort with speculation. expertise can be gained in a number of ways, and a player HAS to find the one that reflects his talents and requirements best.

seems to me.

[cj]

I find one thing very odd. You write to ask a guy his opinion on how hard it is to make a living betting horses. Then, you go on a crusade about guys using computer programs, and say the ones selling them are the only ones making money.

However, the very guy you wrote to for advice, while not selling a computer program, is certainly hawking his share of horse racing items, i.e. selling, for profit. If his information is so valuable, why is it for sale?

 Daily SCHTW 100 Day Subscription (25) free
  OR Daily SCHTW FULL CARD Analysis $1,500.00

[point given]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

So gang, my bottom line here is the math just doesn't add up.
(Unless your running a cab company or escort service . )

Escort service ? My dear, the man has a family. Heck , Rumor has it that he is part of the Equicisor cartel with Chantel and Mike ! http://www.equicizer.com/images/equi...=1&newsId=1027

[DirtTrack]

Originally Posted by 46zilzal

Many computer programs, once mastered, allow the user a much deeper insight into factors (once defined as relevant), than ANY subjective evaluation by a user, no matter how good they are....

Have yet to see a computer program pick out a Maiden 1st time starter based on appearance or any horse that is feeling good enough to run above its average performance.
Have yet to see a program that can take into account the track bias for a particular day as well.

Yes, some programs will help and produce some winning tickets for their users at times but so will the morning line, a decent tip sheet or playing the same numbers every race

Nothing against computers as I am a network admin that does plenty of programming but it takes years of learning different angles, tracks and general racing BS to have consistant success at the track and computers are not able to factor in general logic (or lack of logic - this is horse racing...) for consistant profitable success.

If there was one great program that worked all the time everyone would use it and payoffs would be extremely low or the writer would not release the goose that laid the golden egg for public consumtion