Recommendations for modern books/academic papers for mathematical handicapping?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

I've actually considered writing a horse racing book myself, with the title---->"The Shark"...

The title seems vaguely familiar...are you sure it isn't copyrighted?

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by cj

He lays out his entire approach to races, step by step, both handicapping and betting alike. There is nothing left to guess work. He also talks about how the game has changed and doesn't sugar coat things.

Is this his "Betting with an Edge" book?

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

I've actually considered writing a horse racing book myself, with the title---->"The Shark"...

Would definitely be interested.

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I will read it with full diligence. I've been on the lookout for a handicapping book that doesn't belong in the fiction section of the bookstore...but they are so hard to come by.

The reviews for the MM book sound good. Some complaints that he goes into too much focus and it requires too much work - which I would think are compliments.

I haven't personally read his book.

Kind of set in my ways, a 'know it all' that worries about how "those who know so very much know but very little"...

[highnote]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Serious answer. I would have liked to have read only one book in my entire handicapping life...and that book is Cary Fotias's book Blinkers Off. All the other handicapping books that I have read have been a gigantic waste of time... the cost of which unfortunately took me about 35 years to realize.

"Blinkers Off -- New Frontiers in Form Cycle Analysis" is one of the most beautifully written investment books I have ever read. It is every bit as good as Ed Thorp's "Beat the Market" when it comes to clarity and literacy.

Mark Cramer says "his analysis of the skill of handicapping in the 21st century is perceptive and on a cutting edge. And his writing style is pleasant, often entertaining, and consistently literate. The author knows how to turn a phrase, and with the clarity and precision necessary to follow his arguments with ease."

James Quinn called "Blinkers Off" "revolutionary".

Even the skeptical Barry Meadow spoke well of the ideas in Fotias' book saying, "there is enough solid handicapping advice to make the book worthwhile even if you never buy a single one of his sheets."

I had the privilege of being a friend of Cary Fotias. He was the most passionate horseplayer I have ever met and he poured that passion into his book and his figures. You're right about his book -- it did sound like a commercial for his product, but his product was incredible. His pace and speed figures were second to none. They were velocity based. Even though the concepts can be used with other speed figures you may or may not get the same results. He did large scale statistical analysis to test patterns in his figures. He gave the patterns names like -- Turf Decline Line, New Pace Top, Cyclical Top, Turnback, Plungeline, and Reversal, etc. The patterns were new and unique so he trademarked them. "Bounce" was a Ragozin or Thorograph concept, but I've heard bounce mentioned by Hong Kong racing commentators! Unfortunately, Fotias' pattern names will probably never make it into the every day racing lexicon and for that reason they still have valuable pari-mutuel value.

Sadly, Cary died young. His company was sold. His figures will never be duplicated to the same degree because they contained two secret ingredients that only he could provide -- passion and love.

[highnote]

CORRECTION:

I am not sure it was James Quinn who called Fotias' book revolutionary. I thought it was him or Mark Cramer, but I can't find the quote now. So let me call the book revolutionary.

Quinn did write in chapter 45 of his book "The Best of Thoroughbred Handicapping" these comments about Cary Fotias' book called "Blinkers Off" and his product called "The XTras":

His contribution is both contemporary, one might even say
postmodern, and significant.

As must be true of the important advances in handicapping theory and practice,The Xtras not only extend our understanding of the game as a whole, i.e. how energy-distribution patterns can reflect improving form, but also broaden, strengthen, and alter our comprehension of the interrelationships among the several handicapping factors, in this book among form, pace and final time.

A new and important author and book that can enhance handicapping proficiency is always cause for celebration. This one is cause for jubilation.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by highnote

CORRECTION:

I am not sure it was James Quinn who called Fotias' book revolutionary. I thought it was him or Mark Cramer, but I can't find the quote now. So let me call the book revolutionary.

Quinn did write in chapter 45 of his book "The Best of Thoroughbred Handicapping" these comments about Cary Fotias' book called "Blinkers Off" and his product called "The XTras":

Unfortunately, by mentioning only his own speed/pace figures as the necessary handicapping tools on literally every page of the book, Fotias's book comes off as just a self-serving advertisement for his handicapping services...and the reader loses interest in the book long before he gets to the real meat of the topic. If he had stated that the other speed/pace figures could also be used in the implementation of his handicapping ideas...then the book would have been much more popular among the general gambling public, IMO.

[highnote]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Unfortunately, by mentioning only his own speed/pace figures as the necessary handicapping tools on literally every page of the book, Fotias's book comes off as just a self-serving advertisement for his handicapping services...and the reader loses interest in the book long before he gets to the real meat of the topic. If he had stated that the other speed/pace figures could also be used in the implementation of his handicapping ideas...then the book would have been much more popular among the general gambling public, IMO.

Yes. Anyone who reads the book needs to be patient while they read the book. It is filled with gems.

I've always said if you can get one really good idea from a book that is worth $50. Fotias' book is filled really good ideas.

As far as the book being more popular with the public; I believe his goal was to sell his figures to serious horseplayers, not sell a million copies of his book. He was a horseplayer first. He used the figures himself. If too many people used his ideas then it would impact the prices he got from betting. Also, since his numbers were proprietary and velocity based they weren't meant to be used with other's figures.

[dnlgfnk]

I can't bring myself to accept form cycle analysis as the foundational variable in race outcomes. In my methodology, pattern-like figures are the products of inner race dynamics that don't necessarily reflect cyclical form, but rather stand-alone, isolated results of specifically optimal or impossible (but more likely between) race dynamics (i.e., "trips").

Rightly or wrongly, I formed that opinion from Beyer's introduction of trip handicapping, and its personification in the character of "Charlie" (My 50k Year..., The Winning Horseplayer).

For a long time, the contrarian philosophy tended toward fairly improbable longer odds types, who succeeded enough to maintain its explanatory power for most outcomes of races. Taking up a lengthy manual study of the odds to finish results, I formed an early mental "database" of information on reasons for low odds horses to be outperformed by their higher odds opponents, largely regarding the inherent but very subtle application of outside/straightaway vs. inside/turns influences. Later I came upon a table from 2002 posted by Dave Schwartz, displaying the astounding accuracy of a final odds/finish correlation, down to the smallest increments (5/2, 3-1, 7/2, etc.) This aided me in refining the inner dynamic approach, by prompting me to assign higher weights to public odds (after Benter), and re-introduced selective conventional factors, while somewhat lessening the weighting of subjective interpretations of a horses' past/potential trip.

A final refinement to date, is the chosen philosophy of interpreting every horse negatively, since most horses have a less than 50% chance of winning per final odds. The factors that contribute to a negative view are then weighted, and beginning with the highest odds horse and processing downward, positive factors are evaluated for potential overlays.

So, an overarching principle; Beyer, though ironically not essentially speed handicapping.
Help with percentages of winning (and losing); nuggets from Dave & Benter.

[cj]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Unfortunately, by mentioning only his own speed/pace figures as the necessary handicapping tools on literally every page of the book, Fotias's book comes off as just a self-serving advertisement for his handicapping services...and the reader loses interest in the book long before he gets to the real meat of the topic. If he had stated that the other speed/pace figures could also be used in the implementation of his handicapping ideas...then the book would have been much more popular among the general gambling public, IMO.

Wasn't this made freely available with a PDF version? I could swear I remember that and I actually have a copy. Happy to post but want to get confirmation first.

[highnote]

Originally Posted by dnlgfnk

I can't bring myself to accept form cycle analysis as the foundational variable in race outcomes. In my methodology, pattern-like figures are the products of inner race dynamics that don't necessarily reflect cyclical form, but rather stand-alone, isolated results of specifically optimal or impossible (but more likely between) race dynamics (i.e., "trips").

Rightly or wrongly, I formed that opinion from Beyer's introduction of trip handicapping, and its personification in the character of "Charlie" (My 50k Year..., The Winning Horseplayer).

For a long time, the contrarian philosophy tended toward fairly improbable longer odds types, who succeeded enough to maintain its explanatory power for most outcomes of races. Taking up a lengthy manual study of the odds to finish results, I formed an early mental "database" of information on reasons for low odds horses to be outperformed by their higher odds opponents, largely regarding the inherent but very subtle application of outside/straightaway vs. inside/turns influences. Later I came upon a table from 2002 posted by Dave Schwartz, displaying the astounding accuracy of a final odds/finish correlation, down to the smallest increments (5/2, 3-1, 7/2, etc.) This aided me in refining the inner dynamic approach, by prompting me to assign higher weights to public odds (after Benter), and re-introduced selective conventional factors, while somewhat lessening the weighting of subjective interpretations of a horses' past/potential trip.

A final refinement to date, is the chosen philosophy of interpreting every horse negatively, since most horses have a less than 50% chance of winning per final odds. The factors that contribute to a negative view are then weighted, and beginning with the highest odds horse and processing downward, positive factors are evaluated for potential overlays.

So, an overarching principle; Beyer, though ironically not essentially speed handicapping.
Help with percentages of winning (and losing); nuggets from Dave & Benter.

Good thoughts. Nick Mordin also had some interesting ideas about certain horses needing to be on the rail and others needing to be off the rail. Some like to break from inside posts, some like to break from outside posts. So you're right that form cycle might not be the place to start. However, an out of shape horse is not going to win its fair share of races. There is a lot to consider. Then throw in the jockey and trainer. Tough game, but maybe because you have to hold so many factors in your head at one time when handicapping it is the supreme intellectual challenge.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by cj

Wasn't this made freely available with a PDF version? I could swear I remember that and I actually have a copy. Happy to post but want to get confirmation first.

Yes, it was posted here a while ago as a free PDF version...but I didn't mention it because I didn't remember the thread that it was in.

[lansdale]

Originally Posted by Magister Ludi

https://scholar.google.com/

Thanks for the heads-up -- should have thought of this valuable resource. Hope all going well with your syndicate.

[xtb]

I think this is the complete book, I believe it is out of print.

http://www.predicteform.com/Blinkers-Off/Book-Review

[cj]

Originally Posted by xtb

I think this is the complete book, I believe it is out of print.

http://www.predicteform.com/Blinkers-Off/Book-Review

Yep, that is the one, thanks. It does appear to require registration so I'll leave it at that and people can visit the link if they like to get the book.

[cj]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Yes, it was posted here a while ago as a free PDF version...but I didn't mention it because I didn't remember the thread that it was in.

That is what happens at our age!

[Red Knave]

Originally Posted by cj

That is what happens at our age!

Youth is wasted on the young.