Winning Has Become More Difficult

[rayfox]

[b]Why Has Winning At The Races Become More Difficult?

Although a considerable number of thoroughbred racing fans haven't picked up on the primary reason, the answer is quite obvious to a seasoned handicapper; welcome parity in horse racing.

Back a few years, before computers became a common household amenity, handicapping was almost done exclusively through the Daily Racing Form. Races were wide open for the trainers and owners for entering their horses. In a $10K claiming race, for example, you could usually find three or four horses that were non-contenders thus eligible for elimination. Such horses were either out classed or very poor performers in similar races. So what happened? Oddly enough, the same change made that created parity in the NFL a few years ago has been made in horse racing. The NFL attempted to even the playing field as much as possible. In comparison, the same $10K claimer that existed years ago does not any longer.

Racing redefined the conditions for races. That once $10K open claimer was transformed into specific entry requirements. As an example races were restricted to non-winners of two races lifetime, non-winners of two races since a certain date, or non-winners of two races this year and so on. So when wagering on restricted races keep in mind that an even money favorite doesn't really have much better credentials than any of the others. Look for a nice priced horse as your win selection. Ray Fox's philosophy is; it's not how many tickets you cash, but for how much. Take your shot with a price horse in these evenly matched races.

[Gapfire]

I disagree. I have no problem weeding out non-contenders in most 10k claimers.
Also, it's always been about the price.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by rayfox

Why Has Winning At The Races Become More Difficult?

Although a considerable number of thoroughbred racing fans haven't picked up on the primary reason, the answer is quite obvious to a seasoned handicapper; welcome parity in horse racing.

Back a few years, before computers became a common household amenity, handicapping was almost done exclusively through the Daily Racing Form. Races were wide open for the trainers and owners for entering their horses. In a $10K claiming race, for example, you could usually find three or four horses that were non-contenders thus eligible for elimination. Such horses were either out classed or very poor performers in similar races. So what happened? Oddly enough, the same change made that created parity in the NFL a few years ago has been made in horse racing. The NFL attempted to even the playing field as much as possible. In comparison, the same $10K claimer that existed years ago does not any longer.

Racing redefined the conditions for races. That once $10K open claimer was transformed into specific entry requirements. As an example races were restricted to non-winners of two races lifetime, non-winners of two races since a certain date, or non-winners of two races this year and so on. So when wagering on restricted races keep in mind that an even money favorite doesn't really have much better credentials than any of the others. Look for a nice priced horse as your win selection. Ray Fox's philosophy is; it's not how many tickets you cash, but for how much. Take your shot with a price horse in these evenly matched races.

Winning HAS become more difficult...but this "parity" you speak of has more to do with the BETTORS than the horses.

The unsophisticated bettor is becoming extinct...and this game is fast becoming a battle between "sharks"...and "whales".

[calltopost]

Rayfox - I see your post was edited for unauthorized advertising. Are you here promoting some website or some service? You're a new user with some interesting thoughts, just wondering what the story is.

EDIT: Nevermind, I found your website. Keep contributing!

[JohnGalt1]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Winning HAS become more difficult...but this "parity" you speak of has more to do with the BETTORS than the horses.

The unsophisticated bettor is becoming extinct...and this game is fast becoming a battle between "sharks"...and "whales".

That's why I like Mid-size to smaller tracks like Canterbury, Prairie Meadows, Hawthorne, etc. because the sharpies mostly ignore them.

A 7-2 pays $9 every where -- at Podunk Dowms or Saratoga.

I still play big tracks, but I have more of an edge at smaller venues.

[mishka]

How would you reconcile this with the fact that the handicapper known as ThePublic still is winning at a 1/3 clip? I would think that over time ThePublic would lose more often with great parity. In fact, I think somebody with access to a huge database wrote in a thread (which of course I can't find) that ThePublic's winning percentage has gone from roughly 32% to about 38%.

[The Hawk]

Originally Posted by rayfox

Racing redefined the conditions for races. That once $10K open claimer was transformed into specific entry requirements. As an example races were restricted to non-winners of two races lifetime, non-winners of two races since a certain date, or non-winners of two races this year and so on.

This is a good point. Those two races consisting of 24 horses, the 12-horse fields of $10K and $15,000 open claimers of yesteryear, are now four six-horse fields: a non-winners of three lifetime, a non-winners of two races in six months, and two open $10K claimers. Not only do the short fields ruin value but the horses are more evenly matched because of the groupings, leading to a plethora of 2-1 winners.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Originally Posted by mishka

How would you reconcile this with the fact that the handicapper known as ThePublic still is winning at a 1/3 clip? I would think that over time ThePublic would lose more often with great parity. In fact, I think somebody with access to a huge database wrote in a thread (which of course I can't find) that ThePublic's winning percentage has gone from roughly 32% to about 38%.

Winning favorites percentages will go up the shorter the fields. The percentages have no meaning unless you show the average payout price as well.
Bottom line, there is a lot less dummy money in the pool compared to 20 or 30 or 40 years ago because competition (slots and lotteries mainly) took the dummy away. It is pretty evident that happened and what that means is that there are a lot less overlays these days than ever before.
A 7-2 shot 30 years ago, is most likely 3-1 or even 5-2 these days all things being equal.

[mishka]

Originally Posted by Horseplayersbet.com

Winning favorites percentages will go up the shorter the fields. The percentages have no meaning unless you show the average payout price as well.
Bottom line, there is a lot less dummy money in the pool compared to 20 or 30 or 40 years ago because competition (slots and lotteries mainly) took the dummy away. It is pretty evident that happened and what that means is that there are a lot less overlays these days than ever before.
A 7-2 shot 30 years ago, is most likely 3-1 or even 5-2 these days all things being equal.

Thanks, makes sense. So the actual winning percentages remain the same as before, but the profits are much harder to come by. And I told my wife horse racing was better than using a a nice day to clean out the garage.

[Si2see]

Originally Posted by The Hawk

This is a good point. Those two races consisting of 24 horses, the 12-horse fields of $10K and $15,000 open claimers of yesteryear, are now four six-horse fields: a non-winners of three lifetime, a non-winners of two races in six months, and two open $10K claimers. Not only do the short fields ruin value but the horses are more evenly matched because of the groupings, leading to a plethora of 2-1 winners.

Gulfstream has full fields in almost every 10k open claimer so far, and yet this is the track I see tons of posts where people are having the most trouble winning races. There have been several posts like this one in the last month

[The Hawk]

Originally Posted by Si2see

Gulfstream has full fields in almost every 10k open claimer so far, and yet this is the track I see tons of posts where people are having the most trouble winning races. There have been several posts like this one in the last month

1) There are exceptions, notably Gulfstream, Saratoga and Keeneland.

2) People SHOULD have trouble winning races. Card after card of short-priced winners and/or outlandish form reversals are what players find unappealing. Gulfstream is challenging, but you can smoke out a 12-1 shot by doing some legwork. That's not true every track day in and day out, but it's what makes the game great.

[Dark Horse]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

The unsophisticated bettor is becoming extinct...and this game is fast becoming a battle between "sharks"...and "whales".

I believe that's accurate. The same thing happened in sports betting after the internet legislation. Much of the general public left, leaving the sharper players to battle against each other.

[cosmicway]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

The unsophisticated bettor is becoming extinct...and this game is fast becoming a battle between "sharks"...and "whales".

Years ago I went shopping to the "Minion".
Thaskalos knows this. It's gone now.
After payment they were allowing you to enter a small contest. It was June, soccer world cup. So I marked Scotland v. Costa Rika as a draw. Came true, I won a bike as a result.
But why ? There were so many shoppers.
The answer is this. All the housewives respected Scotland and thought of Costa Rika as a non-entity in football.
The same hour as I entered the competition, two blocks away, in the football betting shops area I made an enquiry and everyone there agreed it was not easy for Scotland ...

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by cosmicway

Years ago I went shopping to the "Minion".
Thaskalos knows this. It's gone now.
After payment they were allowing you to enter a small contest. It was June, soccer world cup. So I marked Scotland v. Costa Rika as a draw. Came true, I won a bike as a result.
But why ? There were so many shoppers.
The answer is this. All the housewives respected Scotland and thought of Costa Rika as a non-entity in football.
The same hour as I entered the competition, two blocks away, in the football betting shops area I made an enquiry and everyone there agreed it was not easy for Scotland ...

Are you suggesting that we get more housewives to the track?

[cosmicway]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Are you suggesting that we get more housewives to the track?

The other time in the "Lambropoulos" shops I managed a small miracle:

Italy through against Brazil, final between Italy and Germany, score of final 3-1 for Italy.

Just the way it happened in 1982 (no betting those days).

To my surprise the winner was a mrs Lossada, same name as the Argentinian right winger of Olympiakos Piraeus of old.
The prize was a Fiat car.