What's your plan to win?

[Capper Al]

Would, as mentioned in a previous post, a low roller losing a little within their comfort zone be worth a chance of hitting a big pick 6? I know with the lotto i rarely hit 3 numbers. I can hit 3 in a pick 6 and, if I wheeled the right races, I might win. In other words, what's the significance of winning or losing small amounts each weekend compared to a chance for a life changing hit?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

Would, as mentioned in a previous post, a low roller losing a little within their comfort zone be worth a chance of hitting a big pick 6? I know with the lotto i rarely hit 3 numbers. I can hit 3 in a pick 6 and, if I wheeled the right races, I might win. In other words, what's the significance of winning or losing small amounts each weekend compared to a chance for a life changing hit?

Does this low-roller that you speak of possess a bankroll?

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by Tom

The Beyers WERE the way, the truth, the light until they became widely available. I made a flat bet profit betting the top Beyer, no other handicapping for along time.

I have to agree that Beyers were one of the most significant innovations in handicapping. Today though, we can come up with much better approaches to express the same measurement. IMHO Beyer's approach about speed handicapping is conceptually still applicable although a completely different methodology is needed today.. Developing custom and ultra optimized metrics to express the final time continues to a central piece for the serious handicapper while the related algorithms are way more complicated and demanding..

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Does this low-roller that you speak of possess a bankroll?

When I start being profitable again, I will. Still doing the rewrite thing.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I have to agree that Beyers were one of the most significant innovations in handicapping. Today though, we can come up with much better approaches to express the same measurement. IMHO Beyer's approach about speed handicapping is conceptually still applicable although a completely different methodology is needed today.. Developing custom and ultra optimized metrics to express the final time continues to a central piece for the serious handicapper while the related algorithms are way more complicated and demanding..

I use both BRIS and my own speed figs. Testing is under way to see if my new speed figs work. All part of the rewrite.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I have spent a life around tables where cards granted and took away fortunes...and all the participants had no problem describing themselves as "players". But a horseplayer wagers a little money on a horse, usually from the comfort of his own home...and he calls it "WAR"?

You lose irreplaceable LIMBS, when you fight a war...

So have I. I ascribe to the Damon Runyon theory that there is no such thing as a friendly game of poker (or anything else) when money is involved. What one calls one's self is not the issue. The issue is whether that "self-description" is really such, or a simple ploy to make others lower their defenses.

Because a major part of my life has been primarily in the company of other gamblers, I have met and known an unusually large number of hustlers and cheats. The one thing they all had in common was the tendency to "re-frame" wagering as something done for enjoyment. Frequent citations of that "best thing in life is betting and winning" nonsense. When the marks had been stripped, they were consoled with comments about how one "life-changing score" would set everything right, recover all their losses, AND provide them a great deal of pleasure in the process.

Losing is losing. Calling it "playing" does nothing at all to change that. "Writing off losses as entertainment" does nothing at all to change that.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by traynor

So have I. I ascribe to the Damon Runyon theory that there is no such thing as a friendly game of poker (or anything else) when money is involved. What one calls one's self is not the issue. The issue is whether that "self-description" is really such, or a simple ploy to make others lower their defenses.

Because a major part of my life has been primarily in the company of other gamblers, I have met and known an unusually large number of hustlers and cheats. The one thing they all had in common was the tendency to "re-frame" wagering as something done for enjoyment. Frequent citations of that "best thing in life is betting and winning" nonsense. When the marks had been stripped, they were consoled with comments about how one "life-changing score" would set everything right, recover all their losses, AND provide them a great deal of pleasure in the process.

Losing is losing. Calling it "playing" does nothing at all to change that. "Writing off losses as entertainment" does nothing at all to change that.

I call what I do "playing", because I break up in laughter whenever I use stuffy words like "investing" to describe it. But no matter what I call myself...there is no frivolity in what I do.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I call what I do "playing", because I break up in laughter whenever I use stuffy words like "investing" to describe it. But no matter what I call myself...there is no frivolity in what I do.

Exactly. And my comments should not be taken personally, because they are not intended as such. In general, I have very little patience with, or respect for, techniques with the primary effect of encouraging people to do things that are harmful to them.

[crestridge]

A few years ago, authors Frank Scatoni/Peter Fornatale did extensive
interviews with "gamblers", the book was, "Six Secrets Of Successful
Betters". The consensus conclusions were: 1). They're really not
gamblers; they're entrepreneurs whose BUSINESS is betting.
2). They made the best use of available resources and process
INFORMATION IN AN ELEGANT WAY. 3). They only bet when they
have an edge. 4). They manage their money to maximize their
advantage. 5). They know how to handicap themselves. 6). They
know how to handle their emotions as well as their money.

Maybe some truth in these conclusions.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by crestridge

A few years ago, authors Frank Scatoni/Peter Fornatale did extensive
interviews with "gamblers", the book was, "Six Secrets Of Successful
Betters". The consensus conclusions were: 1). They're really not
gamblers; they're entrepreneurs whose BUSINESS is betting.
2). They made the best use of available resources and process
INFORMATION IN AN ELEGANT WAY. 3). They only bet when they
have an edge. 4). They manage their money to maximize their
advantage. 5). They know how to handicap themselves. 6). They
know how to handle their emotions as well as their money.

Maybe some truth in these conclusions.

Isn't everyone like that?

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by traynor

Isn't everyone like that?

Yes, to the best of their ability given the time and resources that they use. I do believe we are more alike than we want to admit to being.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by traynor

Isn't everyone like that?

NO!!

[crestridge]

Raybo is probably correct. Those of us who are less successful probably are
weak in one or more of those areas mentioned. Probably many don't view this as a business. When you're business minded, you're very careful how
you plan and execute your affairs. One plans and executes with wisdom.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by crestridge

Raybo is probably correct. Those of us who are less successful probably are
weak in one or more of those areas mentioned. Probably many don't view this as a business. When you're business minded, you're very careful how
you plan and execute your affairs. One plans and executes with wisdom.

It goes with the territory. If one's primary interest is profit, that makes earning that profit a whole lot easier. That is not "greed and avarice in exchange for enjoyment." I like to win. I really, really hate to lose. I win more (and enjoy it more) by regarding wagering as being just like any other business.

[pondman]

I definetly believe that the more data you've accumulated the narrower your focus becomes. You might have an extremely secure method. And you might be profitable. But if you are playing horses you'll completely miss the most profitable plAys in racing. Because those horses wil have a high risk and level of volitility. I have my secrets that go against convention. When I hit, I'm called crazy, or lucky, because it goes against the easy, big data. If I lose, I'm told I have a problem because that's not the beliefs of the old guys boxing speed ratings.