Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Handicapping Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 02-27-2018, 04:02 PM   #16
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,828
Rep Power: 10 AndyC has a spectacular aura aboutAndyC has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer View Post
Aren't we beyond strategy but all about making the money?.......
I am confused. How is a proper strategy not the essence of making money?
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-27-2018, 04:19 PM   #17
CincyHorseplayer
Registered User
 
CincyHorseplayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cincinnati,Ohio
Posts: 5,289
Rep Power: 19 CincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
I am confused. How is a proper strategy not the essence of making money?
It sounds vague without specificity. In all the examples there is no mention of expectation return per bet. It's a neat and tidy intellectual exercise without addressing the real goal. I learned it by being pissed off by actual returns. I got greedy and realized the theory flow is bullshit.
CincyHorseplayer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-27-2018, 04:28 PM   #18
CincyHorseplayer
Registered User
 
CincyHorseplayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cincinnati,Ohio
Posts: 5,289
Rep Power: 19 CincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage View Post
Well, let's see...he's 61...had a heart attack a few years ago that landed him in the hospital for two weeks according to press reports...

That could be a reason for him scaling back...but you're probably right...he probably just upped and "deserted the sport he lived off of"

Does everyone owe you a living, or just people in racing?
Yeah that is some serious crap attitude. I'm all for putting on a pedestal icons and influences in our beloved game. Not toppling them.

Last edited by CincyHorseplayer; 02-27-2018 at 04:29 PM.
CincyHorseplayer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-27-2018, 05:05 PM   #19
GMB@BP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 3,160
Rep Power: 21 GMB@BP is a jewel in the roughGMB@BP is a jewel in the roughGMB@BP is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denny View Post
What happened to Crist?

Took his Eclipse award and went home - deserting the sport he lived off?
Your narrative could not be more wrong, but even if it was, that dude did as much or more for this sport than just about anyone in this industry.
GMB@BP is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-27-2018, 05:13 PM   #20
Redboard
$2 Showbettor
 
Redboard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: The Villages
Posts: 1,480
Rep Power: 6 Redboard is on a distinguished road
In one of his books Steven Crist wrote that fav over the second betting favorite is frequently an overlay, because bettors more often use value plays under the favorite. I'd imagine an examination of the will-pays would confirm this although I never seriously went down this road.
Redboard is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-27-2018, 05:32 PM   #21
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,828
Rep Power: 10 AndyC has a spectacular aura aboutAndyC has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer View Post
It sounds vague without specificity. In all the examples there is no mention of expectation return per bet. It's a neat and tidy intellectual exercise without addressing the real goal. I learned it by being pissed off by actual returns. I got greedy and realized the theory flow is bullshit.
So betting positive EV horses on top in exactas is vague? Boxing multiple positive EV horses is vague? Not reversing a top horse because of unknown EV in the second spot of an exacta is vague? The only theory involved is whether or not a bettor can identify positive EV horses. But that would apply to any bet that is made.
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-27-2018, 05:46 PM   #22
Robert Fischer
clean money
 
Robert Fischer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 17,510
Rep Power: 31 Robert Fischer will become famous soon enoughRobert Fischer will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redboard View Post
In one of his books Steven Crist wrote that fav over the second betting favorite is frequently an overlay, because bettors more often use value plays under the favorite. I'd imagine an examination of the will-pays would confirm this although I never seriously went down this road.
That makes sense.

Or at least if not a +overlay, a better value relative to other combinations involving the favorite first and involving the 2nd choice on top of the favorite.

There's the public boxing 2 or 3 horses rather than betting straight...

There's the public using the favorite on top and trying to make a value play...

Also the tendency to include more horses 2nd than first (123/1234 etc..). While this is less pronounced than say a superfecta, a minor effect is possible.

I don't notice it at a glance, and I'm not sure it is significant. Sometimes the hierarchy, including 1-2 is so obvious that it seems the worst value is the 1-2 punch (justifying those value hunters). Then you've sometimes got the whales smoothing (batch-betting) 'inefficient' combos. Then you've got takeout.

I'd be interested in seeing ROI stats on exacta combos.
__________________
Preparation. Discipline. Patience. Decisiveness.

Last edited by Robert Fischer; 02-27-2018 at 05:49 PM.
Robert Fischer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-27-2018, 11:50 PM   #23
CincyHorseplayer
Registered User
 
CincyHorseplayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cincinnati,Ohio
Posts: 5,289
Rep Power: 19 CincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
So betting positive EV horses on top in exactas is vague? Boxing multiple positive EV horses is vague? Not reversing a top horse because of unknown EV in the second spot of an exacta is vague? The only theory involved is whether or not a bettor can identify positive EV horses. But that would apply to any bet that is made.
Yes. You are still talking handicapping principles deciding bets. Not payoffs deciding bets. Handicapping is involved in both but they are two very distinctly different realities. That's why when I hear the handicapping book generic quote/talk I just tune out. Yes we are talking about two different things.
CincyHorseplayer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-28-2018, 12:07 AM   #24
CincyHorseplayer
Registered User
 
CincyHorseplayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cincinnati,Ohio
Posts: 5,289
Rep Power: 19 CincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Fischer View Post
That makes sense.

Or at least if not a +overlay, a better value relative to other combinations involving the favorite first and involving the 2nd choice on top of the favorite.

There's the public boxing 2 or 3 horses rather than betting straight...

There's the public using the favorite on top and trying to make a value play...

Also the tendency to include more horses 2nd than first (123/1234 etc..). While this is less pronounced than say a superfecta, a minor effect is possible.

I don't notice it at a glance, and I'm not sure it is significant. Sometimes the hierarchy, including 1-2 is so obvious that it seems the worst value is the 1-2 punch (justifying those value hunters). Then you've sometimes got the whales smoothing (batch-betting) 'inefficient' combos. Then you've got takeout.

I'd be interested in seeing ROI stats on exacta combos.
No problem.

60 total races

46 played

21 cashes(46%)

13 Prime(28%)

Prime Returns-3,289.50

Total Returns-3,497.50

+2,021.50=137% ROI

AVG Bet=32.08

AVG Return=253.03

7.89-1 AVG Return

That's my last 60 I made my own version of lines and grids from. I'm not a big bettor obviously so I hope that inspires some bettors that don't think their bankroll is an entitlement to get away from trying to straight up earn.

Robert known you a long time. I know we are good.
CincyHorseplayer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-28-2018, 12:22 PM   #25
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,828
Rep Power: 10 AndyC has a spectacular aura aboutAndyC has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer View Post
Yes. You are still talking handicapping principles deciding bets. Not payoffs deciding bets. Handicapping is involved in both but they are two very distinctly different realities. That's why when I hear the handicapping book generic quote/talk I just tune out. Yes we are talking about two different things.
What you call handicapping principles I call mathematics. Payoffs are merely a factor in the equation.
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-28-2018, 01:41 PM   #26
CincyHorseplayer
Registered User
 
CincyHorseplayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cincinnati,Ohio
Posts: 5,289
Rep Power: 19 CincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the roughCincyHorseplayer is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
What you call handicapping principles I call mathematics. Payoffs are merely a factor in the equation.
Andy I respect all you are saying. Just that an exact or philosophical yardstick implied about return on bet is never mentioned. After 20 years of playing the term strategy just sounds vague to me. Not trying to irritate anybody just being honest.
CincyHorseplayer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-28-2018, 02:57 PM   #27
Valuist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: East Bay
Posts: 16,125
Rep Power: 33 Valuist will become famous soon enoughValuist will become famous soon enough
I like horses at least 15-1 in the underneath spot. Preferably an off the pace type, maybe looks decent in the warmup, then use under the most likely winner(s).
Valuist is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-28-2018, 04:16 PM   #28
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,828
Rep Power: 10 AndyC has a spectacular aura aboutAndyC has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer View Post
Andy I respect all you are saying. Just that an exact or philosophical yardstick implied about return on bet is never mentioned. After 20 years of playing the term strategy just sounds vague to me. Not trying to irritate anybody just being honest.
I never find it irritating when someone engages in a discussion. I expect differences in process, strategy, and philosophy. If there was universal agreement on everything there would be no reason to have a forum.
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-28-2018, 05:55 PM   #29
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 14,035
Rep Power: 29 classhandicapper will become famous soon enoughclasshandicapper will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
In my view there are 2 times to make an exacta bet. One is to leverage an overlay I see in the win pool and two is to bet when I believe a low priced horse will be out of the top 2. In the first instance, I have found that overlays in the win pool carryover to overlays in the exacta pool. I did not find that the overlay carried over to playing the win overlay in the 2nd spot of the exacta. Hence, I see no reason to reverse the exacta bet made with my win pool overlay. When I feel a low-priced horse will run out of the top 2 boxing contenders is the preferred play.

I have rarely found a situation where an underlay in the win pool could be turned into an overlay in the exacta pools. It usually creates negative leverage.
That is my formula almost 100%.

I add one wrinkle. When I think the favorite is OK but I like 2 other horses more at better prices I sometimes bet both to win and do an exacta box. I know the favorite could bust up my exacta, but value to value in the exacta pool leverages to a ton of value. So I put a portion of the bet there.
__________________
"Money won is twice as sweet as money earned." Fast Eddie Felson
classhandicapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-09-2018, 07:49 PM   #30
cnollfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Posts: 1,280
Rep Power: 15 cnollfan is on a distinguished road
The heavy favorite finishing second tends to be an underbet exacta.
cnollfan is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
» Current Polls
Reason for drop off...
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2018 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved -- Best Viewed in a modern browser @ 1280x720 Resolution Or Higher
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.