HANDICAPPING IS RANDOM

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Overlay

It's not just defining better or lesser horses that complicates the task, but successfully exploiting varying degrees of error in the public's perception of those designations, while also overcoming the unpredictable random events that don't go your way (although that randomness should theoretically "even out" over time).

Well, of course! But, one must first designate the win contenders first. Value assessment comes after that, at least it does for me. The probability of winning versus the price one will/should receive, is the whole equation, not just price, and not just probability, but one must start somewhere and the logical starting point would be with the probabilities. Randomness is an integral part of the price portion.

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by PIC6SIX

I have come to the conclusion that picking winners is random. There are too many NW-2/3 LT, ST BREDS, MCs, MSW, Cheap Claimers and racing variables that work against the handicapper. You can read all the books on handicapping and know trainer angles, body language, pace and speed figures but all is just theory. If picking winners is an art and science that can be mastered then why did BEL have a pick-6 carryover of $321,000 C/O today, why don't the same cappers always win the daily online contests and why do they falter even when they play multiple entries, and why don't hcp software developers win consistently and YADDAYADDAYADDA???? Any takers for this thread and I don/t need to hear "You have to pick your spots".

So, you've read all these books etc. and you understood the principles behind each of them and because the races are not playing out as you've handicapped, you've concluded that picking winners must be random.

Or, just maybe you didn't really understand what you read.

Btw, you think picking winners is random but, you play the Pick6.

How many races do you single in your Pick6 selections?

[pondman]

Originally Posted by PIC6SIX

If picking winners is an art and science that can be mastered then why did BEL have a pick-6 carryover of $321,000 C/O today, .

The track was off and varied from muddy to good. There are many people on this site who probably could prove that a fast track significantly become less random as it dries and is maintained as fast. I'm not going to be specific about Belmont but most tracks once they are maintained at fast take on a non-random characteristics. They are easier to rule out non-contenders. For example a Fast track might be highly significant to those strong closer, or becomes a speed heaven, if it's maintained at Fast. I would argue that you got a $300,000 carryover because of the weather.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Fingal

And does one really want everything to follow the rules of "logic" ? Then everything would pay $4 or less, that would be a waste of time.

This isn't really true. Poker completely follows the rules of logic and strict probability, and yet it is entirely beatable due to bad opponents.

Because most human beings are illogical creatures, especially gamblers, the issue of logic doesn't really enter into whether a game is beatable.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Don't most players "pick their spots"? How does picking your spot differ from regular play?

Most bettors I know bet every race, or almost every race, once they decide to bet a race card, and also bet every "big" race (such as the TC, Breeders' Cup, etc.). (Indeed, most sports bettors I know bet every NFL game, and most poker players I play against play way too many hands and don't fold enough. It's basically the most common leak in gambling. Our brains are wired to like action.)

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Most bettors I know bet every race, or almost every race, once they decide to bet a race card, and also bet every "big" race (such as the TC, Breeders' Cup, etc.). (Indeed, most sports bettors I know bet every NFL game, and most poker players I play against play way too many hands and don't fold enough. It's basically the most common leak in gambling. Our brains are wired to like action.)

True for most players. The problem is that most players don't know a good spot from a bad spot. If they did they would all be winners.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Most bettors I know bet every race, or almost every race, once they decide to bet a race card, and also bet every "big" race (such as the TC, Breeders' Cup, etc.). (Indeed, most sports bettors I know bet every NFL game, and most poker players I play against play way too many hands and don't fold enough. It's basically the most common leak in gambling. Our brains are wired to like action.)

Most horseplayers I know do bet almost every race that they handicap, but the better bettors vary their wagers by whether or not a race is a "spot", or just an "action" play.

Most sports bettors I know do NOT bet every game, as when eight or nine games are going on simultaneously, it's tough to keep up with all of it. Many of the degenerate sports bettors I do know will bet all the "timeslots", which in the NFL are the early games, the late games, and the Sunday and Monday (and Thursday) night games.

I can't speak as much to poker, but it does follow the poor players to play too many hands. I know I don't have the patience for it.

Yes, we like action.

As for "Handicapping is Random", I would argue my handicapping is fairly consistent - it's the results which can seem random, but which of course are not. The distribution of "random" or difficult-to-explain winners falls within some sort of statistical description - I would call it "normal" with a relatively high standard deviation.....and can be described as:

"Some days you are the bug, and some days you are the windshield...."

[green80]

Originally Posted by EMD4ME

Agree, stuff happens.

Just a random question...Was your horse a "6" horse who won at Louisiana who paid $36 bucks or so against a former David Jacobsen NYRA shipper in a Maiden Claimer in the last race of the day?

You know your horses.

[Luckycreed]

I really wish horse racing was random,then all I would need to do is back every horse at longer odds than the size of the field and start counting money.Given how many horse races there are run around the globe every day I would be filthy rich in a couple of weeks.

Sadly horse racing is not random the betting market is extremely efficient and money wagered is the best guide there is to the probability of a horse winning,it trumps every other variable long term.The other interesting fact is the further from the races the less efficient the market becomes, the prices two minutes before jump are not as good as starting price.because they don't have as much information at their disposal for eg how the horses load.

That is the key information,having access to something important no one else has.When I was working for a bookmaker down here in Australia the people we feared were certain trainers, they were the people who could and did beat us long term because they knew important stuff that we didn't and couldn't and they would bet with military precision hitting multiple bookies at once getting friends and staff to put the bets on.

They would get 7-1 and the horse would start 2-1 and if you bet their horses at 2-1 following the money you would lose like betting any other 2-1 shot because they didn't always win.I can honestly say a couple of trainers back in the late eighties and early nineties are the only people I know who have won long term win betting.

Betting markets are not quite as efficient at more complex calculations such as picking the probability of each of the 2184 possible trifecta combinations in a field of fourteen or the first three across the line in three consecutive races, these are the type of bets where you have a chance of winning long term.

[Light]

Horse racing is random. So is everything else. Those who boast here that you "pick your spots" are only partially right. I also pick my spots. But there is randomness in your "spots" as well. "Randomness" is why Casino's are "Empires".

People have said its not random because there is "order" between the favorite's win percentage being the greatest down to the longest shot on the board being the lowest. That is true but nobody is getting rich from that data. They are still all broke and still work for a living.

I'll give you better odds than the favorites. I'll give you 50% winners and you still won't be in the black because of randomness. Flip a coin. You have a 50% chance of winning each toss of the coin but due to randomness, you will lose. You will "guess" wrong. Because you cannot predict the "random patterns" of heads and tails even though you have a 50% chance of winning each flip. And that is what is "random": The "patterns".

In horse racing it is even worse.You have way more than 2 possible outcomes and each of those possibilities of winning is way less than 50%. You cannot overcome the negative effect of "randomness" on the outcome. You can minimize it. And if you want to overcome it, that is a different story.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Light

Horse racing is random. So is everything else. Those who boast here that you "pick your spots" are only partially right. I also pick my spots. But there is randomness in your "spots" as well. "Randomness" is why Casino's are "Empires".

People have said its not random because there is "order" between the favorite's win percentage being the greatest down to the longest shot on the board being the lowest. That is true but nobody is getting rich from that data. They are still all broke and still work for a living.

I'll give you better odds than the favorites. I'll give you 50% winners and you still won't be in the black because of randomness. Flip a coin. You have a 50% chance of winning each toss of the coin but due to randomness, you will lose. You will "guess" wrong. Because you cannot predict the "random patterns" of heads and tails even though you have a 50% chance of winning each flip. And that is what is "random": The "patterns".

In horse racing it is even worse.You have way more than 2 possible outcomes and each of those possibilities of winning is way less than 50%. You cannot overcome the negative effect of "randomness" on the outcome. You can minimize it. And if you want to overcome it, that is a different story.

Wouldn't someone get a positive effect of randomness as well? Someone predicting the outcome of a coin flip will not change the probability of the outcome. The results in the short run may not mirror the probability of the outcome resulting in either more wins or less wins than expected. To say that randomness is always negative is incorrect.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Light

Horse racing is random. So is everything else. Those who boast here that you "pick your spots" are only partially right. I also pick my spots. But there is randomness in your "spots" as well. "Randomness" is why Casino's are "Empires".

People have said its not random because there is "order" between the favorite's win percentage being the greatest down to the longest shot on the board being the lowest. That is true but nobody is getting rich from that data. They are still all broke and still work for a living.

I'll give you better odds than the favorites. I'll give you 50% winners and you still won't be in the black because of randomness. Flip a coin. You have a 50% chance of winning each toss of the coin but due to randomness, you will lose. You will "guess" wrong. Because you cannot predict the "random patterns" of heads and tails even though you have a 50% chance of winning each flip. And that is what is "random": The "patterns".

In horse racing it is even worse.You have way more than 2 possible outcomes and each of those possibilities of winning is way less than 50%. You cannot overcome the negative effect of "randomness" on the outcome. You can minimize it. And if you want to overcome it, that is a different story.

When you say that "horse racing is random", or that "you cannot overcome the negative effect of 'randomness' on the outcome"...aren't you implying that the game is unbeatable through methodical, systematic means?

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Light

Horse racing is random. So is everything else. Those who boast here that you "pick your spots" are only partially right. I also pick my spots. But there is randomness in your "spots" as well. "Randomness" is why Casino's are "Empires".

People have said its not random because there is "order" between the favorite's win percentage being the greatest down to the longest shot on the board being the lowest. That is true but nobody is getting rich from that data. They are still all broke and still work for a living.

I'll give you better odds than the favorites. I'll give you 50% winners and you still won't be in the black because of randomness. Flip a coin. You have a 50% chance of winning each toss of the coin but due to randomness, you will lose. You will "guess" wrong. Because you cannot predict the "random patterns" of heads and tails even though you have a 50% chance of winning each flip. And that is what is "random": The "patterns".

In horse racing it is even worse.You have way more than 2 possible outcomes and each of those possibilities of winning is way less than 50%. You cannot overcome the negative effect of "randomness" on the outcome. You can minimize it. And if you want to overcome it, that is a different story.

If "horse racing is random", then why do better players hit more winners than lesser players? How is it that a good handicapper can have the winner in his top 4 ranked horses over 80% of the time? Once again, Light, you're not making much sense in your first sentence at all. Horse racing is NOT random, it includes randomness that can be overcome over time, if the player is good enough..

Yes, there is a degree of randomness in horse racing, how could there not be, they are horses, living, breathing organisms with flesh and bones, internal organs, muscles and tendons, and brains and emotions that sometimes are in good shape and other times are not. Jockeys are human beings, with strengths and weaknesses also. So, yes, there will be a degree of randomness regarding individual race results. But, over time, the good player can still predict enough winners, at high enough prices, to make a profit. Exotics make it even easier to make long term profit because of the higher inefficiency of the public in those wager types, and the very real chance of hitting extremely large payouts.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by raybo

If "horse racing is random", then why do better players hit more winners than lesser players?

Exactly because the winning frequency is not correlated with the quality of a player. Increasing the number of winners this is clearly NOT the objective of the game and the same can be said for ROI figures as well

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by raybo

If "horse racing is random", then why do better players hit more winners than lesser players? How is it that a good handicapper can have the winner in his top 4 ranked horses over 80% of the time? Once again, Light, you're not making much sense in your first sentence at all. Horse racing is NOT random, it includes randomness that can be overcome over time, if the player is good enough..

Yes, there is a degree of randomness in horse racing, how could there not be, they are horses, living, breathing organisms with flesh and bones, internal organs, muscles and tendons, and brains and emotions that sometimes are in good shape and other times are not. Jockeys are human beings, with strengths and weaknesses also. So, yes, there will be a degree of randomness regarding individual race results. But, over time, the good player can still predict enough winners, at high enough prices, to make a profit. Exotics make it even easier to make long term profit because of the higher inefficiency of the public in those wager types, and the very real chance of hitting extremely large payouts.

It seems that we have BOTH extreme views voiced on this board. Some believe that horse racing is nothing but a physics problem waiting to be solved...while others think that the game is random, and its "randomness" cannot be overcome. And then there are the rest of us...who believe that BOTH these opinions are wrong.

I'm glad that I'm not some confused newcomer...who is coming to this site seeking some sort of direction in this game. Whom does the newcomer believe?