How much money do you make or lose each year on racing?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by Mike A

I've been biting my tongue here for a while....and no, I'm not going to bother giving this the full treatment. I'm just going to allow myself a slight venting.

I kind of feel bad for the extreme cynics. I feel that at the root of the cynicism, is lack of understanding of so many of the dynamics involved.

I'm not sure how many of the biggest winners here have actually voted, but what would surprise ME is if there were actually only ~12 players on this board who make more than 100k per annum. I'm pretty sure it's more than that...and probably at least a few who make over 300k.

The purpose of this little post is meant to be a positive one. Come on, guys...
if what you are doing isn't working....for God's sake stay determined, and at least try something else.

Given the size of the TOTAL membership here, which I believe is well into the thousands (Pace?), I can understand why you might be surprised by only 12 people making $100k or more. One small problem: thousands haven't voted. At one point last night, 12 out of 136 were making the $100k or more claim. That's the stat I don't believe.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

You honestly think a site like this represents the horse playing community as a whole? You don't think for a moment that this site might just be a little top heavy with winning players compared to the general horse playing population?There are guys out there clearing SEVEN FIGURES after rebates...why don't you think there wouldn't be a bunch of guys making a measly six figures?

I'm not saying I have full faith in the honesty of this particular poll, but no, it would not surprise me in the least if this board, which has been around over 11 years, has more than a few players making $100,000 or more per year.

For the most part, I think this site is fairly representative of the horse playing community (excluding the $2 players who use off-track betting parlors as social gathering places). Passion and interest may run higher here, but I don't think those two factors necessarily determine success.

How many guys in the country do you believe are clearing seven figures with rebates? My guess is that number is 5 to 10 at most, and I suspect maybe one or two post here (the gentleman who used to play in NY and then moved to Vegas when the takeout went up being one of them**). Again, these are guesses, so if you have better intell, please correct me. If 12 out 750 had claimed to be making $100k or more, the poll would be more plausible, imo.

**Ernie Dahlman is his name, I believe. I wish he'd chime in on this issue.

[bigmack]

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

**Ernie Dahlman is his name, I believe. I wish he'd chime in on this issue.

What would you like for him to chime?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by bigmack

What would you like for him to chime?

I was using the intransitive verb "chime in," as in "join the discussion." Why? Because I think he's got better perspective than most.

[Dave Schwartz]

I'm cynical, but not extremely. I think they're out there, those who make the big dollars playing this game, but I still don't know any of them. Those making the big dollars are still legend and myth to me, only spoken of by purveyors of product.

There are two that I know of on this board that have made more than $1m in a single year for multiple years. I doubt if either of them voted.

You know them as posters but do not know that they make that much. Neither are clients of mine.


Dave

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

He has much to learn about the science of polling(which I also happen to be an expert in).

Well, please Mr. Expert, dazzle us with your expertness in polling. Oh, don't forget where you are. This isn't a forum for dummies, as you will find out rather quickly, if you can't prove you're the expert you claim.

The poll does not require anyone to disclose how much they make, or who they are, or their secrets.

Using common sense will lead you to know that winning players are more likely to vote than losing players, especially on this forum.

[MPRanger]

Better to lose on paper than at the windows.
--------------------------------------------

But better to win at the windows than to win on paper.

[Dave Schwartz]

Well, please Mr. Expert, dazzle us with your expertness in polling.

Raybo,

I think he was kidding. (But I could be wrong.)


Dave

[speculus]

[QUOTE=Dave Schwartz]
......If we accept the notion that 2% to 3% of the wagering public is profitable, that would be between 377 and 566 profitable members.... [QUOTE]

Dave, I had many years ago read a credible article online (don't remember the source now) which presented data collected over several years (I think 8 years) that showed only 1 in 1200 players was a consistent winner, that's less than 0.1% (0.08%).

The consistent winner was defined as someone who showed profit for five straight years.

I have a feeling this figure could be more close to truth than the 1 or 2 % which majority believes.

P.S. Strangely, in an imperfect experiment I carried out (of course, over too short a sample to claim any value for the finding), the figure was 1 out of 1450.

[Dave Schwartz]

Spec,

Could you describe how your experiment worked?

Dave

[speculus]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

Spec,

Could you describe how your experiment worked?

Dave

In 2004, I was invited to join the Tote committee of the Royal Western India Turf Club (RWITC) and that gave me unlimited access to data (including archived data) of nearly 5,800 regular gamblers (people who almost bet daily on their races). As a novel experiment, the club had also introduced special cards (like credit/debit cards) using which the members could bet (the practice was later discontinued).

I remember having examined data of over 3-1/2 years, and had found that there were only 4 (four) gamblers who had shown profit.

[bettheoverlay]

Is it reasonable to assume that for those making 100K+ a year, all of their profit is coming from rebates?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by bettheoverlay

Is it reasonable to assume that for those making 100K+ a year, all of their profit is coming from rebates?

Wouldn't that mean that none of this game's best players are able to beat the game "straight up"?

[sjk]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Wouldn't that mean that none of this game's best players are able to beat the game "straight up"?

If it is true it would merely point out that if you are out to maximize your profit dollars you would be likely to reduce your ROI. What you are able to do may not be material to the strategy you choose to follow.

[Dave Schwartz]

Among some very large rebate operations, the belief is that if you are breaking even, you are not betting enough money. Bet more, and make it back on the rebate.