Why Horseplayers Continue to Struggle

[DeanT]

Originally Posted by xfile

It's not a game of picking winners (Although there is a simple criteria used to find potential bets). Gambling involves odds. When odds are in your favor to a large degree, like I said, you will have a low win % but high profit with a successful strategy/process. A problem here is that psychologically a player can't handle the losing streaks. I'm talking about something like no winners for 10 days betting $100 win bets (several a day) and STILL ending the same month with over $8k net profit. Very few can handle that pressure. But these guys have been doing it so long they know what works and they don't freak out during a losing streak. Most players betting $100 win tickets who didn't cash for 10 days would be looking for a bridge to jump off of.

Well of course; that is rudimentary. But you are making it sound easy. If I am making $8k a month and have a losing three days, I could not care less. The problem is: It is hard to make $8000 a month to get into that position in the first place.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

The game is negative expectation game. If 1 billion is bet, at least 150 has to be lost by players. And most players these days know how to read a form and pretty much know as much as the next player.
Dumb money has pretty much gone away.
So to think this game is easy is to fool yourself.

[xfile]

Originally Posted by DeanT

Well of course; that is rudimentary. But you are making it sound easy. If I am making $8k a month and have a losing three days, I could not care less. The problem is: It is hard to make $8000 a month to get into that position in the first place.

That would be 10 straight losing days (in once instance) of $100 win bets (several a day) and sill making that profit at the end of the month (minimum accept odds of 12-1 on selected overlays - average MEDIAN about 20-1 on the winners - had an 80-1 the other day). When figuring average we throw out those 80-1 (or other huge odds a few a month) winners as to not skew the average. Once again low win% but high return. Win % means absolutely nothing. This is a numbers game. Like Barry Meadow wrote about many years ago. I mentioned in another post that he is still ahead of his time (subject=overlays). So few of us are actaully doing what he said could be done over a decade ago. I have only known less than a handful of players who can mentally withstand the losing streaks it requires for this ultimately successful strategy.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by xfile

That would be 10 straight losing days (in once instance) of $100 win bets (several a day) and sill making that profit at the end of the month (minimum accept odds of 12-1 on selected overlays - average MEDIAN about 20-1 on the winners - had an 80-1 the other day). When figuring average we throw out those 80-1 (or other huge odds a few a month) winners as to not skew the average. Once again low win% but high return. Win % means absolutely nothing. This is a numbers game. Like Barry Meadow wrote about many years ago. I mentioned in another post that he is still ahead of his time (subject=overlays). So few of us are actaully doing what he said could be done over a decade ago. I have only known less than a handful of players who can mentally withstand the losing streaks it requires for this ultimately successful strategy.

Xfile...forgive me for being skeptical, but what you are saying is hard to believe.

Average odds 20-1, long losing streaks, but never any losing months?

Six digits a year with $100 win bets?

You mentioned that your "friend" bets off-shore. If the depressed odds are not a concern...why does he limit himself to $100 win bets? If I was as sharp and as consistent as your friend, I would be looking to bet as much as I could get away with...

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by Horseplayersbet.com

The game is negative expectation game. If 1 billion is bet, at least 150 has to be lost by players. And most players these days know how to read a form and pretty much know as much as the next player.
Dumb money has pretty much gone away.
So to think this game is easy is to fool yourself.

I agree entirely about the high rate of takeout compared with other wagering games, as well as the toughness of the competition. I also understand the point that you're trying to convey with your comment about betting on races being a negative-expectation game, in the sense of the take plus breakage being skimmed off the top in every race before the first penny is paid out to winning bettors.

I don't mean to split semantic hairs, or minimize the difficulty of the task confronting the horseplayer, but if handicapping were in fact a true negative-expectation game (in the same sense that casino games of pure chance are), I'd quit playing today, since any short-term winnings would be totally dependent on blind luck, and consistent long-term success would be a complete impossibility. More than ever, the player's hope rests in being able to recognize and capitalize on betting value, wherever in a field or wager type it may occur.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Overlay

I agree entirely about the high rate of takeout compared with other wagering games, as well as the toughness of the competition. I also understand the point that you're trying to convey with your comment about betting on races being a negative-expectation game, in the sense of the take plus breakage being skimmed off the top in every race before the first penny is paid out to winning bettors.

I don't mean to split semantic hairs, or minimize the difficulty of the task confronting the horseplayer, but if handicapping were in fact a true negative-expectation game (in the same sense that casino games of pure chance are), I'd quit playing today, since any short-term winings would be totally dependent on random chance, and consistent long-term success would be a complete impossibility. The player's hope lies in being able to recognize and capitalize on betting value, wherever in a field or wager type it may occur.

I agree with you...the game cannot be called a negative-expectation game...because if it were, there would be no possibility of winning in the long run.

But what is your opinion about these outrageous claims we sometimes read on this board?

60% - 100% ROI after years of play...Six-figure annual incomes with $100 win bets...never any losing months...could all this be true, Overlay?

Where have all the rest of us gone wrong?

[DeanT]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I agree with you...the game cannot be called a negative-expectation game...because if it were, there would be no possibility of winning in the long run.

But what is your opinion about these outrageous claims we sometimes read on this board?

60% - 100% ROI after years of play...Six-figure annual incomes with $100 win bets...never any losing months...could all this be true, Overlay?

Where have all the rest of us gone wrong?

If you are betting horses that are 20-1, and hitting them at a monster 8% hit rate, you are probably going to have a losing streak of 65 as a regular occurrence. If you bet two horses a day, start with a 10k bankroll, where you bet 1%, you are probably going to have a random month where you are down $6000+ or so for the month.

[lansdale]

For all those who have enjoyed this thread I got some nice Florida swampland waiting for you.

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I agree with you...the game cannot be called a negative-expectation game...because if it were, there would be no possibility of winning in the long run.

But what is your opinion about these outrageous claims we sometimes read on this board?

60% - 100% ROI after years of play...Six-figure annual incomes with $100 win bets...never any losing months...could all this be true, Overlay?

Where have all the rest of us gone wrong?

I don't judge them. If any information is provided indicating that there might be something behind the claims that would be useful for me to know, I might explore further and gather what value I can. The question that I always want the answer to is: whether these claims may be (or have been) true or not, what will keep the method or selection service that generated those winnings from becoming unprofitable/obsolete in the future as more people find out about it, and start using it?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by lansdale

For all those who have enjoyed this thread I got some nice Florida swampland waiting for you.

WHERE...and how much?

[xfile]

You guys have fun and keep on struggling.....peace.....cheers and best of luck with all your wagers. In the words of Rex Ryan "If you want to be a Jet then play like a f***ing Jet!"....So much for that as they are 0-1....well long season it is....lol. I've been a Jet fan since the days of Joe Namath who, by the way, has an interesting radio show on NFL radio sirius/xm. Check it out, Those guys on NFL radio are sharp. They were picking the KC Chiefs Monday night upset in week 1. And I listened to a show that had me loving the Steelers in week 1 as underdog moneyline bet which I sank a small off-shore boat with on Sunday.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by xfile

What does this tell us? Struggle is unnatural. Why sentence ourselves to a life of struggle when it is clearly unnatural? In short, struggle is a "learned response" ..........................Focus your attention on this; NOTHING YOU WANT IS UPSTREAM! Everything you want is DOWNSTREAM. "

"Poppycock." Lewis and Clark and anyone else who made breakthroughs knew the value of struggle. Yes, there is value in the Flow Experience. But there is also value in the Struggle Experience. You need both to integrate meaningful constructs in your understanding of virtually anything.

[Stillriledup]

People have a general tendency to gravitate towards 'the smart money'. If you bet an even money shot, you have lots of people who agree with you, that feels good to a horseplayer who knows nothing.

You gotta go against the crowd to have any shot at success.

[jamey1977]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

People have a general tendency to gravitate towards 'the smart money'. If you bet an even money shot, you have lots of people who agree with you, that feels good to a horseplayer who knows nothing.

You gotta go against the crowd to have any shot at success.

Going against the crowd. What do you mean? Betting overlays that go from 3 to 1 official morning line to 7 to 1 off ? . Or doing entirely different things? All I know is this can be effective. But losing streaks are just awful? Can lose 17 in a row, betting these overlays. But which books tell us how to bet smart overlays. ? No one has ever said how they do what they do and provide examples and data. No one says nothing. Joe Takach would pick his spots and get half winners at about 6 to 8 dollars. He would bet 200 dollars to a thousand to Win sometimes. Does he still do this? Wouldn't it be easier waiting for our spots and winning half ? We just have to be patient and bet those live second picks that always come up. every day. Can't we win half. Say play 3 tracks a day. 80 plays for the 3 tracks a month and win about half at 6 dollars. Why can't we do what Joe did for 30 years. He would just use the Southern Cal. circuit, now we could use multi-circuits. Heck with a 7 dollar average or even a 6 dollar average. We would just need 40 percent winners to profit. It seems that everyone is doing different things. One guy makes a living betting odds-on horses. Damn hard but it works for him. These circuits are hard and the damn crowd is smart. They do screw up, they screw up all the time. Any good books that talk about overlays and shows us how, with examples and samples ? It seems that no one wants to actually show us how they do it. They just beat around the bush. Hiding what they think is some sort of a secret.

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by jamey1977

No one has ever said how they do what they do and provide examples and data. No one says nothing....Any good books that talk about overlays and shows us how, with examples and samples ? It seems that no one wants to actually show us how they do it. They just beat around the bush. Hiding what they think is some sort of a secret.

Ahem.