When do you handicap and how long does it take you?

[raybo]

Like Dave, my program gets me the win selections in a few seconds, then a couple of minutes to make sure I agree that there aren't any extenuating circumstances that the program doesn't look for, that light cause me to lower a horse's ranking or cause me to pass the race completely.

My superfecta play starts with the same win selection method, but then I use a combination of my several rankings methods in the program and some "old school" 'capping to get to other betting lines.

High class races (TC, BCC, etc) are similar to my superfecta process, even for the win line, because these race types are more rare.

[EMD4ME]

If you are not taking trip and horse notes on every horse at a certain circuit and you are not verifying the (beyer numbers, timeform numbers, actual PP running line) numbers attached to the pps and you are not in tune with the biases on each running line of the pps, my advice is don't play.

Pick a circuit, get an old fashioned paper notebook. List the entire day's races on 1 sheet, start looking at trends (which race had a fast pace, slow pace, how many speed horses won, what paths were they in etc.)

After a while you'll see WHY each horse won from a trip and bias perspective in conjunction with their pps.

The more prepared you are for 1 race, the more confidence you have. The more prepared you are, the more confidence you'll have in SKIPPING a race because it's unplayable.

If you like this game because of the mental challenge attached to it, follow what I tell you.

if you're looking for action, just play every race, lose your bankroll and work to support your action bets. Repeat, repeat, repeat.

[Dave Schwartz]

If you are not taking trip and horse notes on every horse at a certain circuit and you are not verifying the (beyer numbers, timeform numbers, actual PP running line) numbers attached to the pps and you are not in tune with the biases on each running line of the pps, my advice is don't play.

Ah yes... the "Only one way to play this game," belief. I have heard this one before. I've also heard about a dozen other versions, like make your own race figures, keeping track of key races, stable watching (which might make the most sense from a work standpoint but seriously cuts back on activity) or the junior version of that, only playing one or two trainers.

I especially detest the part about making trip notes on every horse. That ought to keep one busy for a few hours every day, even on days (or weeks) when one doesn't have time to play.

What you are describing, Mr. EMD4ME, is called a "j-j-job."


Personally, I would rather have done my work of creating my system of play way ahead of time, collect the data necessary today, spread the data out in front of me (figuratively or literally) and make my decisions. That way I get to actually enjoy the running of the races.

If one needs to dial that back a notch, to deciding creatively how to wager this particular race, it still begins with assessing the race through the data gathered.

My point is almost the opposite of what Mr. EMD4ME says: Use reports - including those created by you - and learn to analyze those reports. Develop systems and/or methods to sift through that data quagmire as quickly as possible.

It just so happens that in my own case, my "data sifting" is done just short of the speed of light.

[MJC922]

I have the computer doing a lot of the heavy lifting obviously as I have to provide my numbers to Trackmaster as a contractor. That's all automated. While the computer is generating those reports during the day it's collecting relevant data race by race and dumping it into excel. The excel sheet gets written into a comma delimited file which is automatically emailed to me as a scheduled task at around midnight. In the morning I grab the comma delimited file from webmail on my desktop PC and load it into access to run several queries against it. The queries are used to filter / flag specific races where the top ranked class horses meet specific criteria or certain races meet criteria with respect to race shapes etc... it's all still a work in progress, continuous improvement, I'm not saying I have the answers but I like the potential of this approach in today's game vs the old ways where I was locked into a track specific daily grind and winning but only through hard earned local knowledge.

[jahura2]

Originally Posted by Laminarman

Do you handicap the day before? The morning of? Place your horses in your order and then check for SCR an hour or two before post? Just curious. I'm starting out, and find I can't do this in ten minutes before post time. I need a half hour per race but I also am trying to learn the ropes. Also, do you HC a full card, or multiple tracks and do select races to HC? Perhaps only stakes or allowance or optional claiming, turf? Based on your "specialty?"

45 year weekend player here. I usually take 3-4 hours to handicap a whole card the night before with a pretty organized process.I will scan the whole card for angles first, then start the laborious process of looking at every horse. The thing is I LOVE the process of handicapping and that is the main reason I have done this for so long. My handicapping year runs like a circuit. I bet Gulfstream, Tampa, or FG beginning in January depending on the card, move to Keeneland in the spring(Home track) then to Belmont until the actual Belmont runs. Then a short break until Saratoga opens, Belmont in September then Keeneland until the Breeders Cup runs and then another break. Been doing this pattern for years and it works for me. I am not as serious as most on here but I do love the sport and the process, and usually cash enough tickets to keep me playing and thats all I need .

[Laminarman]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

Based on what your saying, you are still in the beginning of your handicapping career and even more you view it as an intellectual challenge rather than an serious activity. Having said this, you cannot expect to have the same approach as somebody who is doing this for all of his adult life.

If you want my opinion, if you want to accelerate your learning curve and improve your understanding of the game, you should start building your databases, data mine them and learn how to create figures. Any other approach will be proven an extremely lengthy and frustrating journey..

I've started (for now) with a simple notebook with the track, condition, my quickly written analysis of why I chose which horse(s) and how I think the race will unfold and then whether I won or lost. I haven't started putting things in a spreadsheet or database yet as I'm not sure what exactly to track. I'm at the stage where figuring out pace and who might win is a challenge.

[Laminarman]

Originally Posted by jahura2

45 year weekend player here. I usually take 3-4 hours to handicap a whole card the night before with a pretty organized process.I will scan the whole card for angles first, then start the laborious process of looking at every horse. The thing is I LOVE the process of handicapping and that is the main reason I have done this for so long. My handicapping year runs like a circuit. I bet Gulfstream, Tampa, or FG beginning in January depending on the card, move to Keeneland in the spring(Home track) then to Belmont until the actual Belmont runs. Then a short break until Saratoga opens, Belmont in September then Keeneland until the Breeders Cup runs and then another break. Been doing this pattern for years and it works for me. I am not as serious as most on here but I do love the sport and the process, and usually cash enough tickets to keep me playing and thats all I need .

This is kind of how I see myself evolving as a player. I don't need the income, I sure like winning money but will not do this as a job but more as a passion for the process. It's a kick in the ass when I'm (rarely) right and the horses run close to the way I think they will.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by Laminarman

I've started (for now) with a simple notebook with the track, condition, my quickly written analysis of why I chose which horse(s) and how I think the race will unfold and then whether I won or lost. I haven't started putting things in a spreadsheet or database yet as I'm not sure what exactly to track. I'm at the stage where figuring out pace and who might win is a challenge.

Looks good for now, but as you go on you will need a better approach than one that can be based on spreadsheets alone.. Try mysql, which is a high end open source data base that will allow you to anything you need.

[Robert Fischer]

Today is my Friday, but I'll go ahead and answer the question...

I use a latticework of tools that find where the public is likely to have made mistakes regarding the value of a favorite or several contenders. These tools are often very different from one another.

I am generally running those tools (in the evening) after a day's races, or any time I have a desire to take an action toward working at it.
An hour is usually enough time to find some of the inefficiencies.

I then enter notes for each tool and each horse that comes up in my watch-list.

In the mornings I check my watch list, as well as browse over some of the entries for other instant angles (field size, suspect favorite, bias, etc..).
I then look at the watch-list horses and determine if any of them have a chance to offer real value. This process should take me 30min-45min.

[flatstats]

One problem with long time handicapping is that you will convince yourself that what you have already handicapped is the definitive outcome. Everything else you do from then on will just be confirming that outcome and that is the wrong thing to do.

Here's how it goes:

For whatever reason you fancy Lucky Joe in the first race. It may have good speed figures, trainer stats, jockey switch - whatever. You would have made your opinion on this horse in 15 or so seconds.

For the next 15 minutes you will do all you can to justify your initial assessment.

* You will see a worthy favourite but find a weak stat to discount it because Lucky Joe is the winner.
* You will talk yourself out of an outsider because Lucky Joe is the winner.
* You will look at Lucky Joe 5 times, spot 5 negatives but discount them because Lucky Joe is the winner.

You have already made up your mind but you spend 15 wasted minutes just justifying that selection.

Moral Of The Story
If you spend 15 seconds finding a selection you are too confident and will fail.
If you spend 15 minutes justifying a selection you are too weak and will fail.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by flatstats

One problem with long time handicapping is that you will convince yourself that what you have already handicapped is the definitive outcome. Everything else you do from then on will just be confirming that outcome and that is the wrong thing to do.

Here's how it goes:

For whatever reason you fancy Lucky Joe in the first race. It may have good speed figures, trainer stats, jockey switch - whatever. You would have made your opinion on this horse in 15 or so seconds.

For the next 15 minutes you will do all you can to justify your initial assessment.

* You will see a worthy favourite but find a weak stat to discount it because Lucky Joe is the winner.
* You will talk yourself out of an outsider because Lucky Joe is the winner.
* You will look at Lucky Joe 5 times, spot 5 negatives but discount them because Lucky Joe is the winner.

You have already made up your mind but you spend 15 wasted minutes just justifying that selection.

Moral Of The Story
If you spend 15 seconds finding a selection you are too confident and will fail.
If you spend 15 minutes justifying a selection you are too weak and will fail.

Thanks for your mildly entertaining opinion......

[Laminarman]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

Thanks for your mildly entertaining opinion......

Unfortunately he just described me : ( Honestly, that's me. I'm the OP too and a loser but I'm learning. Holy crap I "fit a mold."

[therussmeister]

Originally Posted by EMD4ME

If you are not taking trip and horse notes on every horse at a certain circuit and you are not verifying the (beyer numbers, timeform numbers, actual PP running line) numbers attached to the pps and you are not in tune with the biases on each running line of the pps, my advice is don't play.

If I followed your advice I would be a lot poorer than I am now.

Originally Posted by flatstats

One problem with long time handicapping is that you will convince yourself that what you have already handicapped is the definitive outcome. Everything else you do from then on will just be confirming that outcome and that is the wrong thing to do.

Here's how it goes:

For whatever reason you fancy Lucky Joe in the first race. It may have good speed figures, trainer stats, jockey switch - whatever. You would have made your opinion on this horse in 15 or so seconds.

For the next 15 minutes you will do all you can to justify your initial assessment.

* You will see a worthy favourite but find a weak stat to discount it because Lucky Joe is the winner.
* You will talk yourself out of an outsider because Lucky Joe is the winner.
* You will look at Lucky Joe 5 times, spot 5 negatives but discount them because Lucky Joe is the winner.

You have already made up your mind but you spend 15 wasted minutes just justifying that selection.

Moral Of The Story
If you spend 15 seconds finding a selection you are too confident and will fail.
If you spend 15 minutes justifying a selection you are too weak and will fail.

If I followed your advice I would be a lot poorer than I am now.

[Helles]

I use the same software as Dave Schwartz. It takes me about 20 seconds to handicap a race and make my initial decision whether the race is a pass or play. I usually bet just one horse to win.

After I have my selection, I just have to watch the odds and pass if the odds go down into unprofitable (for me) territory.

It takes me 20 seconds now, but that is because of the thousands of hours spent getting to this point. And I DO mean thousands.

[romankoz]

I too love the process.
Here in Oz I download the form for the required races from racenet.com.au and then create my racemap. They have one too but it is automated and although that's a start it's not always the true picture.

I then sift through the obvious chances that seem to have some sort of form at this level in the last three or so runs and list my top five or six depending on field size. Then I have plus and minus factors to sift through as I juggle positions for each horse.

Eventually I have an order 1 2 3 4 5.

I have enormous respect for our pre post oddsmakers via the corporate bookmakers (I think USA bettors get a fair bit of this from somewhere in Las Vegas??) and I check my top few versus their top 7 or 8. If they have something listed at say 12/1 or less and I don't have it I double check the horse/s credentials to make sure I am ok with dropping it. Naturally I am wrong x number of times when they get up and beat me (that's from their 6 7 8) but that's racing.

After that I wait until raceday for track conditions and scratchings and from there concentrate on my top two selections seeking value either for the win or place (123 in Oz) but if contention is close a bet on my fourth is not out of the question. If I do a race thoroughly I have an idea of what I think is a fair price.

From there I bet and pray they jump as hoped for via my race map. Naturally, the staking becomes another facet but thats my form process.