How would you reconcile your picks with the tote-board?

[Capper Al]

Let's say your top 4 picks are A-B-C-D and watching the tote-board you note the action is B-E-A-F. How would you reconcile this difference and make a wager? Your A-B are in but you are not seeing E-F as contenders.

[Tom]

They were made contenders before I looked at the board.
That they are not in the top 4 is good news. A and B are out, E and F are now elevated.

[classhandicapper]

I think about odds 2 ways.

1. What do I think the odds will be? (like my own morning line)

2. What do I think the fair odds are?

If the actual odds disagree with my predicted odds significantly, then I think there's always possibility that I am missing something or someone knows something I don't. So I might double check those horses (trainer pattern, trip, etc..that I missed)

If the odds look around where I expected them to be, then the only thing that matters to me is #2.

[traynor]

Depends on the track, depends on the accuracy of the morning line at that track, depends on whether "public selectors" have selected a different rank order, and depends on the result of some serious correlation between order of finish, morning line, and odds at that specific track--preferably on that specific distance/class/condition race.

Unless I had clear, compelling evidence that either the morning line is a more accurate predictor of the order of finish than I am, or the final odds are more accurate predictors of the order of finish than I am (neither of which I have found to be true), I would ignore both and go with my selections.

[whodoyoulike]

Why wouldn't you continue to evaluate A, B, C and D's chances? Is your wager to include all 4?

[DJofSD]

You're not seeing E-F as contenders -- for what, the win?

How about hitting the board?

Too many variables to discuss but I might bet A-B/E-F as an exacta/Q.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

Let's say your top 4 picks are A-B-C-D and watching the tote-board you note the action is B-E-A-F. How would you reconcile this difference and make a wager? Your A-B are in but you are not seeing E-F as contenders.

Is the E horse the type of horse that the crowd would be attracted to? If it is...then I would toss it. Overbet horses with obvious attributes do not scare me. But if this E horse gets heavy betting action while looking nondescript on paper...then this is something that I cannot ignore.

But I would toss the F horse in all cases.

[Overlay]

Since my evaluation of a race field reflects a composite of weighted ratings from multiple fundamental handicapping categories for each horse, I can then nearly always account with confidence for differences between my opinion and the public's -- generally because the public is either overlooking/undervaluing or actually negatively viewing one or more factors that I know to be positive aspects of a horse's record (which makes the horse in question an overlay), or else overbetting one or more factors that may indeed be positive indicators, but not to the extent that the public believes in that particular race (which produces underlays). Under those circumstances, I would not allow the toteboard to change my opinion of a horse's or combination's chances. The only question would be whether the odds or probable payoff would compensate me for the risk of wagering on it.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Overlay

Since my evaluation of a race field reflects a composite of weighted ratings from multiple fundamental handicapping categories for each horse, I can then nearly always account with confidence for differences between my opinion and the public's -- generally because the public is either overlooking/undervaluing or actually negatively viewing one or more factors that I know to be positive aspects of a horse's record (which makes the horse in question an overlay), or else overbetting one or more factors that may indeed be positive indicators, but not to the extent that the public believes in that particular race (which produces underlays). Under those circumstances, I would not allow the toteboard to change my opinion of a horse's or combination's chances. The only question would be whether the odds or probable payoff would compensate me for the risk of wagering on it.

What do you do when a horse that doesn't figure on paper gets suspicious, heavy play on the board?

[Moto Pete]

This happens a lot in cheap races with dirty trainers. I pass. When it happens in a Maiden Special at a big track I take notice but since I don't play chalk on top I'll usually pass on those races too.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Overlay

Since my evaluation of a race field reflects a composite of weighted ratings from multiple fundamental handicapping categories for each horse, I can then nearly always account with confidence for differences between my opinion and the public's -- generally because the public is either overlooking/undervaluing or actually negatively viewing one or more factors that I know to be positive aspects of a horse's record (which makes the horse in question an overlay), or else overbetting one or more factors that may indeed be positive indicators, but not to the extent that the public believes in that particular race (which produces underlays). Under those circumstances, I would not allow the toteboard to change my opinion of a horse's or combination's chances. The only question would be whether the odds or probable payoff would compensate me for the risk of wagering on it.

I agree. Changing one's opinion in response to tote action is fine, provided one has clear and compelling evidence that what one perceives as "insider action" validates a), that one's perceptions are accurate and b) that such action accurately predicts the race finish more often than not.

It is well to remember that people have tender, fragile egos that lead them to remember selectively. Detailed records help.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by Tom

They were made contenders before I looked at the board.
That they are not in the top 4 is good news. A and B are out, E and F are now elevated.

Tom,

Are you saying that you stick with your picks, or go with the tote-board?

My picks were A-B-C-D in that order

The tote-board has B-E-A-F in that order.

We agree on the A and B horse but not in that order.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I think about odds 2 ways.

1. What do I think the odds will be? (like my own morning line)

2. What do I think the fair odds are?

If the actual odds disagree with my predicted odds significantly, then I think there's always possibility that I am missing something or someone knows something I don't. So I might double check those horses (trainer pattern, trip, etc..that I missed)

If the odds look around where I expected them to be, then the only thing that matters to me is #2.

Class,

You sound the most like me. I accept that there is a lot going on that I don't know or that can't be found in print. Recently, I have changed to be more accepting of the tote-board.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by Overlay

Since my evaluation of a race field reflects a composite of weighted ratings from multiple fundamental handicapping categories for each horse, I can then nearly always account with confidence for differences between my opinion and the public's -- generally because the public is either overlooking/undervaluing or actually negatively viewing one or more factors that I know to be positive aspects of a horse's record (which makes the horse in question an overlay), or else overbetting one or more factors that may indeed be positive indicators, but not to the extent that the public believes in that particular race (which produces underlays). Under those circumstances, I would not allow the toteboard to change my opinion of a horse's or combination's chances. The only question would be whether the odds or probable payoff would compensate me for the risk of wagering on it.

Overlay,

Are you saying that you stay with your picks period and wait for value only?

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

What do you do when a horse that doesn't figure on paper gets suspicious, heavy play on the board?

That's my question too.