The Handicapper's Cafe

[bob60566]

Originally Posted by Maximillion

One specific thing i learned about myself, (or my play),and it took maybe 20 years to figure this out(why so long I cant say),is that playing only one circuit-

I would often find a good bet or two on a card (often quickly), and then try to "handicap the hell out of" the other races on the card, and often times the "handicapped to hell" races, that I spent a large amount of time going back and forth on were far less fruitful for me than the ones that seemed to appear relatively early in the process.

Now this is what you have to learn in this game and not take twenty years as the above post and myself have done

Mac

[bob60566]

Originally Posted by jdhanover

A few (I am sure I will think of many, many more) topics/questions that I would be very interested in Gus' (and others') perspectives:

1) Money management - specifically ho you determine the size of the bet in a given race/situation
2) Exotics - I know you are a big superfecta bettor - how do you structure those bets? How do you determine that you have enough value in the the race to bet it? Bet size also comes into play here. And any thoughts on 0ther exotics (horizontal or vertical)
3) Track specific adjustment to your play (if any) - what are they, how did you determine this and why?
4) Layoffs - how do you evaluate them?
5) Trainer and/or jockey impact on your evaluation of a horse
6) Factors that make the last race(s) 'throw outs' versus signs of declining form
7) Turf racing approach vs poly approach vs dirt approach.

Thx for considering any of these

If anyone was wagering with all of the above seven questions maybe time to get some outside advice or spend some money on one of the adverisers figures to give you a base.
Mac

[Robert Goren]

I am hoping that you will get around to how to handle trainers thread sooner later. What do you think of top speed rated horses with bad trainers? What do you think of logical horses with bad trainers? What about long shots with high % trainers?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

I am hoping that you will get around to how to handle trainers thread sooner later. What do you think of top speed rated horses with bad trainers? What do you think of logical horses with bad trainers? What about long shots with high % trainers?

What does the term "bad trainer" mean to you?

Is a 12-15% winning trainer a "bad trainer"?

[Greyfox]

Guys. You have zillions of questions.
But I don't think that we've scratched the mental side of winning or losing that deeply yet.

Thaskalos has addressed the question of losing streaks well.

I think in playing the races the mind-set that the player has when he enters the track or betting competition via his computer at home,
having "self-confidence" in YOUR PICKS AND HOW YOU WILL BET THEM IS A MUST.

When I go to the track/O.T.B. I see too many people asking one another:
"What do you think of this one?" or "What do you like here?"

The average player is likely to get three or four opinions from four or five different people. Whereas his first intuitive hunch was to play the #5 horse that wins, he ends up on some other nag that someone has mentioned to him. Then of course, he's looked at the tote board and figures that his analysis at home must have been faulty as the #5 has 8-1 odds or higher.
In effect, his ears and the eyes on the toteboard have guided him away from what would have been a good score.

Unless you see something horrific about your selection in the Post Parade,
stick with your initial picks. If you are going to lose money, at least let it be on your selections, not someone else's poor picks.
If you plan on winning money, pre-study of the races is Mandatory.
Having put in that energy at home, why veer away from your picks because of what others think?? In other words, show more belief in the idea that you are a winner and will win. If you can't do that, then maybe you should go knit mitts or something.

[bob60566]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

I am hoping that you will get around to how to handle trainers thread sooner later. What do you think of top speed rated horses with bad trainers? What do you think of logical horses with bad trainers? What about long shots with high % trainers?

The questions leave a lot to be desired, What track, Turf, and all of the above.

Mac

[bob60566]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

Guys. You have zillions of questions.
But I don't think that we've scratched the mental side of winning or losing that deeply yet.

Thaskalos has addressed the question of losing streaks well.

I think in playing the races the mind-set that the player has when he enters the track or betting competition via his computer at home,
having "self-confidence" in YOUR PICKS AND HOW YOU WILL BET THEM IS A MUST.

When I go to the track/O.T.B. I see too many people asking one another:
"What do you think of this one?" or "What do you like here?"

The average player is likely to get three or four opinions from four or five different people. Whereas his first intuitive hunch was to play the #5 horse that wins, he ends up on some other nag that someone has mentioned to him. Then of course, he's looked at the tote board and figures that his analysis at home must have been faulty as the #5 has 8-1 odds or higher.
In effect, his ears and the eyes on the toteboard have guided him away from what would have been a good score.

Unless you see something horrific about your selection in the Post Parade,
stick with your initial picks. If you are going to lose money, at least let it be on your selections, not someone else's poor picks.
If you plan on winning money, pre-study of the races is Mandatory.
Having put in that energy at home, why veer away from your picks because of what others think?? In other words, show more belief in the idea that you are a winner and will win. If you can't do that, then maybe you should go knit mitts or something.

With some of the questions maybe hard to acheive

Mac

[turninforhome10]

Two things that helped me alot to finally start believing in my handicapping skills
http://www.sartinmethodology.com/pub...inningPMTR.pdf
http://www.scribd.com/doc/51568974/S...ng-On-Yourself
Great reads about the underappreciated psychology of winning

[Kevroc]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

stick with your initial picks.

Reminds me of my days hanging out at the OTB.

I'd routinely buy tickets from people who were headed to the window to cancel. (within reason)

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by bob60566

The questions leave a lot to be desired, What track, Turf, and all of the above.

Mac

Generally dirt sprints, although I doubt the track matters much, but lets say NYRA. With shorter fields being the norm the these days I consider bad trainers to be anyone with less than a 10 win percentage and good trainers to have a 20%+ . It looks like with the exception of a very few "name "trainers , that trainers do not effect the odds much. I don't have data base, so I rely on observations that I notice. One of the things I think I have noticed is that really bad trainers(0-5%) only win at a price(10/1+). On the rare occasions that one those trainer that logically figure to be a contender like running IM with close to the highest SR in its last race, they fail miserably. What do you think of a 30% trainer with a 8/1 + shot. Since 30% trainers do get a bet a little, is it a bad sign.

[KingChas]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

A gambler's life is full of peaks and valleys, and there is nothing any of us can do about it...because it is out of our control.

The only thing we CAN control, is our REACTION to these violent swings of fate.

The best players are not perturbed by them...and they thrive.

Lesser players are tormented by them...and they perish.

And it's only fair, because how you handle adversity is the true measure of a gambler...and of a man, in general...

Great comments,
Something I had learned early on in my handicapping endevours over the years and my first advice to those new to the game........."Before you learn how to win you must first learn how to lose.".........Tough game.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by jdhanover

A few (I am sure I will think of many, many more) topics/questions that I would be very interested in Gus' (and others') perspectives:


2) Exotics - I know you are a big superfecta bettor - how do you structure those bets? How do you determine that you have enough value in the the race to bet it? Bet size also comes into play here. And any thoughts on 0ther exotics (horizontal or vertical)


Thx for considering any of these

Since I specialize in superfectas, I'll mention a couple of things that some people might not know, regarding finding value in a proposed superfecta wager.

Most people who venture into superfecta play think that value comes from the odds on the board. Remember, the odds on the board are not superfecta odds, they are win odds.

Having 3/1, 5/1, 6/1, and 8/1 odds on your ticket may look like value to some, and it might be, if the favorite is less than 2/1. But, generally speaking, value in superfectas comes from, not the odds themselves, but the rankings of the odds. Having the top 3 or 4 odds horses on your ticket decreases the value in that wager, because many players will box the top 4 or 5 odds horses on their ticket(s), meaning if those horses finish on the ticket, many players will have that winning combination and will split the net pool. Being able to rule out 2 or more, of those top 4 or 5 odds horses, increases the value of that wager, because not as many players have the guts to leave lower priced horses off their ticket, and don't have the guts to include the horses that will offer value to the wager.

Also, pool size and field sizes have a large impact on the value of superfecta wagers, larger pools offer a larger "split", when several players hit the wager, and larger field sizes spread out the choices of horses on tickets, disqualifying all those tickets that have not chosen a particular horse or 2, due to the time and effort involved in analyzing so many horses in one race.

Superfecta payouts, when value is found, are well worth the extra study and preparation.

[bob60566]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

Generally dirt sprints, although I doubt the track matters much, but lets say NYRA. With shorter fields being the norm the these days I consider bad trainers to be anyone with less than a 10 win percentage and good trainers to have a 20%+ . It looks like with the exception of a very few "name "trainers , that trainers do not effect the odds much. I don't have data base, so I rely on observations that I notice. One of the things I think I have noticed is that really bad trainers(0-5%) only win at a price(10/1+). On the rare occasions that one those trainer that logically figure to be a contender like running IM with close to the highest SR in its last race, they fail miserably. What do you think of a 30% trainer with a 8/1 + shot. Since 30% trainers do get a bet a little, is it a bad sign.

.


In handicapping and have never played NYRA they are right up there on the top so should i use the same methods in this post Suffolk or BEU.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I appreciate the kind words...

My own gambling journey has been a painful one, and, in retrospect, I realized that much of this pain could have been avoided...had I followed some of the advice I received along the way.

But whom do you listen to...and how can you tell the good advice from the bad?

I keep on remembering an old-time gambler...who told me once:

"Gambling wisdom can be learned...but it cannot be taught."

I found that this is very true; ultimately, all winning gamblers are "self-taught"...but a true mentor or two, coming at the right time, can make a world of difference -- if the player is paying attention.

I want to be that sort of mentor to all those who would care to listen...because this game doesn't need any more "victims" than it currently has.

If I can help even ONE player avoid some of the pain that I have gone through...then I will consider my efforts here to be worthwhile.

I'm pretty burned out by a great Opening Day here in Cincinnati,and I plan on adding more to your excellent post earlier,but this line really grabbed me.I think the wisdom I glean from this is that it definitely is our personal odyssey and evolution that is the most instructive.I think one of my strengths is that I've always trusted my opinion.Even if it contradicted something I read by an author I trusted,or just the toteboard itself.I've always naturally trusted my opinion.At least when I had "The feeling".Like anybody though it can lead down blind alleys or us losing our way in overthought or distraction.This IMO is what mentors are for.It keeps you fresh to talk to somebody who has been there.I think this latest losing streak was caused by hasty beliefs.I had such a good year and "now it was my time" to do it big.I felt it was "time to will myself of age" as a player.Plus maybe a little frustration that it had been a while since I had one of those ridiculous 133% ROI streaks that last over 10 or even 20 days(two of my longest runs).

I did find that I had the ability to step back and relax and put in the work to analyze myself,and break down just the betting and thinking aspect.It's not easy for this type of thing.A lot of ways to look at this.I am willing to do what it takes.I think that diligence will get me where I want.And it has to a decent degree.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by iceknight

I am very interested in learning more about figuring out chances of closers vs leaders/off the pace stalkers - under various track conditions. And also about turf races - I still cannot wrap my head around any turf race yet and definitely none of the downhill turfs they do in So Cal circuits.

In the next few days, I plan on introducing a new thread on pace...in which I will thoroughly address the pace matchups that you mention. I have been putting it off because my version of pace handicapping differs from the norm...and I am afraid that my views will lead to wide disagreements.

For now, let me say that, IMO, the pace leader vs closer/stalker matchup is a little more complicated than most people think.

I am not too quick to write-off the front runners in an expected speed duel...nor do I believe that fast last quarters are necessarily the best indicators of the race's best closers.

I am also a little slow in accepting that the last fractions are as significant as some people think, when it comes to handicapping turf races.

Please be a little patient, and I promise to revisit this topic in a few days...when I feel a little more courageous.