Would Buffet's advice work in horse betting?

[Stillriledup]

Buffet told everyone how to win (in investing) 30 years ago, and people didn't listen. ( see atricle link at bottom)

Is there someone in horse racing that has told us how to beat the races a few decades ago and yet, we haven't listened?

Is it possible someone has given us the "winning formula" and we've just glossed over it and lumped it with all the other "formulas" that we have heard over the years?

Who's the "buffet of horse racing" that has dispensed such valuable advice on how to successfully invest?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/30-yea...130500288.html

[Some_One]

How have people like Buffet done over the last 10-15 years? From my knowledge, no where close to the numbers previous to that time. Sounds a lot like how profitable speed figures were when they first came out in the 70s (or whenever) and today. Buffet (and Beyer) had huge infomational advantages then which no longer apply and hence why I say they can not possibly achieve the results that they used to in the 70's as the infomational edge they have is gone with modern technologies.

[raybo]

If you know individual horses and their trainers and jockeys as intimately and thoroughly as Buffet knows companies and the people who run them, accurately assessing their "true" worth, and you keep "value" at the forefront of your investments, there is no reason why you couldn't be successful in racing. But, that is a daunting task indeed.

[Stillriledup]

Good posts guys, agree with both of you.

I think it comes down to "intimate knowledge" . Also, another key would be you can't bet on horses who cant run a lick. This is why i'm very leery of first time starters because i know that a certain percentage of them aren't ready or have no talent, that would weigh down my ROI. I need to be on runners, horses who i'm pretty sure have talent and aren't 'over the top' in some fashion.

The key to great horsebetting isn't sniffing out horses with talent because i think great horse bettors can sniff out plenty of strong performers, rather, its the ability to not be on these talented horses when their "bad race" is about to happen.

Losing money on talented horses when its "not their day" is probably what separates very good from great in the handicapping arena.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Good posts guys, agree with both of you.

I think it comes down to "intimate knowledge" . Also, another key would be you can't bet on horses who cant run a lick. This is why i'm very leery of first time starters because i know that a certain percentage of them aren't ready or have no talent, that would weigh down my ROI. I need to be on runners, horses who i'm pretty sure have talent and aren't 'over the top' in some fashion.

The key to great horsebetting isn't sniffing out horses with talent because i think great horse bettors can sniff out plenty of strong performers, rather, its the ability to not be on these talented horses when their "bad race" is about to happen.

Losing money on talented horses when its "not their day" is probably what separates very good from great in the handicapping arena.

Agree, and when you relate back to Buffet, the "timing" of investing in the good company (good horse) is just as important as recognizing the good company/horse in the first place, and Buffet, from the beginning, understood that "intimately".

[thaskalos]

Buffett likes to portray himself as this folksy, no-frills, buy-and-hold/type investor...who never seems to sell a stock. "Don't sell your stocks"...the Oracle of Omaha likes to tell the frenzied reporters who hang on his every word.

The truth is that Buffett isn't your typical "buy-and-hold" investor. Yes, he will hold a stock for many years...but that's only when he buys entire companies. When he buys common shares like everyone else...then Buffett knows better than to buy-and-hold. Do you suppose he is still holding on to his shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

Buffett isn't sharing any secrets of investing...he is just providing a few timely soundbites, just so he doesn't appear to be as closed-mouthed about investing as he really is. Proper "Value Investing" isn't as simple as he makes it sound...nor is Benjamin Graham as ignored an author as Buffett portrays him to be. There have been MANY "Value Investment" disciples...and MILLIONS of investors have read the books of Benjamin Graham.

And yet...there is only one Warren Buffett.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Buffet told everyone how to win (in investing) 30 years ago, and people didn't listen. ( see atricle link at bottom)

Is there someone in horse racing that has told us how to beat the races a few decades ago and yet, we haven't listened?

I think there is, SRU...and there has been mention made of this before on this very board. Predictably...it was largely ignored then too.

I bought a book many years ago...written by a guy who said that he had been a blacksmith at the track for 30 years. It took him that long to figure out what it took to win at the races...he says in the book...but he also claims that what he eventually discovered enabled him to experience early retirement...something that he never thought he'd see.

When I first read this, I thought it was the typical junk that I would often see passing itself off as legitimate handicapping literature at that time...and I put the book on the shelf after only giving it a brief glance...and it stayed there for at least 15 years. I picked the book up again in 2006...at a time when I was at the lowest psychological point of my life. My wife had died two years prior after a lengthy battle with a horrible illness, and I was raising a 6-year old on my own. A psychologist friend of mine was scaring me to death with stories about the perils of child abandonment...and what would probably happen to my young son if I opted to go back to work too soon, leaving him without a mom and in the hands of strangers. For over two years, I hadn't worked at all...and I had worked sparingly during the prior 3.5 years...because of my wife's grave condition (she was given 6 months to live when she was first diagnosed). My money was running out, and so was my sanity...and well-wishing friends and relatives were bombarding me with all sorts of contradictory advice.

Anyway...THIS was the psychological state that I was in when I absentmindedly reached and picked up that long-forgotten handicapping book from 15 years prior. And, having nothing else to do at that time...I read and I read. And I became mesmerized. "Velocity Fitness Ratings"..."Velocity Form Ratings"..."Velocity Class Ratings"..."Physical Form Angles"...the book was packed with things that I'd never HEARD before. And I had been reading everything handicapping-related since the time of AINSLE! This was a book unlike any that I had ever seen...and it reshaped my thinking in ways that I can't begin to describe. It taught me that there were TWO comparisons that needed to be made when handicapping a race: How a horse measured up against the competition...and how it measured up against its better SELF. The book actually offered concrete ways with which to measure a horse's own DEVELOPMENT as it progressed, or regressed, from one race to another.

Alas...the book also had a couple of negatives, dealing entirely with the author's manner of delivering the information. The constant flash-back scenes from the author's life, and the many colorful stories that he shares with the reader, take one's attention away from the message offered in the book...and that's probably at least partially responsible for the completely forgotten status that this book currently enjoys. In fact, I consulted Google before typing this post...and nary a mention of this work was there to be found. But I can guarantee you that there is at least one guy in the Chicago suburbs who will be forever grateful to this long-forgotten author. He really made a big difference in my life...at a time when I really needed a boost.

Now...I want you to know that I sit here slightly embarrassed as I am about to submit this posting -- because it makes me sound a little like Dave Powers. As I said before, I have no affiliation whatsoever with this author...nor do I know anything about him. The name of the book, and the author, have been mentioned here before...and something tells me that I should keep this information to myself this time. After all...we are all competing against EACH OTHER out there.

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Buffet told everyone how to win (in investing) 30 years ago, and people didn't listen. ( see atricle link at bottom)

Is there someone in horse racing that has told us how to beat the races a few decades ago and yet, we haven't listened?

Is it possible someone has given us the "winning formula" and we've just glossed over it and lumped it with all the other "formulas" that we have heard over the years?

Who's the "buffet of horse racing" that has dispensed such valuable advice on how to successfully invest?
Y
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/30-yea...130500288.html

I don't know who is the "Buffet" in horseracing, but me and my associates followed Buffet's advice somewhat by not buying a " horse", but buying a trainer. For example we "bought" a trainer at Belmont's Summer Meet and received our required 3-1 average winning odds on $160k wagered during the meet.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Cratos

I don't know who is the "Buffet" in horseracing, but me and my associates followed Buffet's advice somewhat by not buying a " horse", but buying a trainer. For example we "bought" a trainer at Belmont's Summer Meet and received our required 3-1 average winning odds on $160k wagered during the meet.

"3-1 average winning odds" becomes significant only in light of the trainer's winning percentage. It's quite possible to lose money...even if your "average winning odds" are 3-1.

[Tom]

I think handicapping with a Margarita could be a good idea.

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Is there someone in horse racing that has told us how to beat the races a few decades ago and yet, we haven't listened?

Is it possible someone has given us the "winning formula" and we've just glossed over it and lumped it with all the other "formulas" that we have heard over the years?

Less than 2% of the total PA membership has purchased my handicapping titles.

[Sapio]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

It taught me that there were TWO comparisons that needed to be made when handicapping a race: How a horse measured up against the competition...and how it measured up against its better SELF. The book actually offered concrete ways with which to measure a horse's own DEVELOPMENT as it progressed, or regressed, from one race to another.

Hi thaskalos,

You and TM have much in common.

A systematic way to accomplish the above is with the application of Heirarchical Bayesian Models.

Thomas Sapio

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

"3-1 average winning odds" becomes significant only in light of the trainer's winning percentage. It's quite possible to lose money...even if your "average winning odds" are 3-1.

You missed the point; the 3-1 odds winning average had nothing to do with the trainer's winnings percentage.
For instance, if we won 2 of 10 of the wagers we placed on a given trainer and each winner paid 20-1 odds we should achieve our 3-1 winning average odds.
But your post implies both cynicism and disbelief which I can not help you with. Also I am good in math.
Also this is why I don't post personal winning/ losing statistics on the Forum.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Cratos

You missed the point; the 3-1 odds winning average had nothing to do with the trainer's winnings percentage.
For instance, if we won 2 of 10 of the wagers we placed on a given trainer and each winner paid 20-1 odds we should achieve our 3-1 winning average odds.
But your post implies both cynicism and disbelief which I can not help you with. Also I am good in math.
Also this is why I don't post personal winning/ losing statistics on the Forum.

You ARE good in math...but you are not as good as you think you are in structuring sentences. When you say "average winning odds", people are likely to think that you mean the average price that each horse has paid.

Any cynicism or disbelief that you see in my reply to you is only imagined...it doesn't really exist. You have me beat in the math department, but, believe me...I could teach you a thing or two about "writing". And maybe even about horse playing...

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

You ARE good in math...but you are not as good as you think you are in structuring sentences. When you say "average winning odds", people are likely to think that you mean the average price that each horse has paid.

Any cynicism or disbelief that you see in my reply to you is only imagined...it doesn't really exist. You have me beat in the math department, but, believe me...I could teach you a thing or two about "writing".

Please don't go off on a tangent, I wrote my Masters thesis and it was approved.

You might very well be a better writer than me and there are some others on the Forum who are better writers than .me, but so what?

Einstein was terrible in English and Hemingway couldn't spell, but they both were very successful.

Again, let's not go off on a tangent about English composition