Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > Handicapper's Corner


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 4 votes, 5.00 average.
Old 07-23-2014, 12:34 PM   #61
traynor
Registered User
 
traynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaLover
I completely agree and even push your statement a little higher.

As a gambler, one of your worst attitudes is to be result oriented. The outcome of a specific event or even a (relatively short) sequence of them is completely a matter of luck and there is nothing you can do to predict it.

The best you can do, is to try to detect favorable betting situations knowing that you are actually making money while you are placing your bets and not when you are cashing out!

Horse bettors who still think of the pools as some form of an ATM, that can be used for regular daily withdraws, is a very amusing situation. People do not seem to realize that, despite the fact that without a doubt, horse racing is highly predictable, it is still gambling with the fullest meaning of the world!
Complete agreement.

Last edited by traynor; 07-23-2014 at 12:36 PM.
traynor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 12:41 PM   #62
traynor
Registered User
 
traynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capper Al
This doesn't work here in most cases, and you are not the only one doing it. What I am talking about is the false favorite. Most false favorites should figure into your top four selections. A typical false favorite will have some good numbers in it's past performance like a high speed figure or dropping in class. We just can't assume the best handicapper, the public, doesn't know what they are doing everytime this scenario comes up.
Is that meant to be serious?
traynor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 12:44 PM   #63
DeltaLover
Registered user
 
DeltaLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: FALIRIKON DELTA
Posts: 4,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by traynor
Is that meant to be serious?
If not the best handicapper, certainly very close.

In my mind though, what is way more important, has to do with the best bettor as opposed to best handicapper and this is exactly where the public comes short
__________________
whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent
Ludwig Wittgenstein
DeltaLover is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 01:09 PM   #64
Robert Fischer
clean money
 
Robert Fischer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 23,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capper Al
This might uncover a hidden reason when to play value horses. If the tote-board selections are understandable and we get our value is the only time to play. If we don't understand the tote-board then even with high odds, our horse probably doesn't have any real value.
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
__________________
Preparation. Discipline. Patience. Decisiveness.
Robert Fischer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 01:12 PM   #65
traynor
Registered User
 
traynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaLover
If not the best handicapper, certainly very close.

In my mind though, what is way more important, has to do with the best bettor as opposed to best handicapper and this is exactly where the public comes short
"Best handicapper" may be misleading if generic results (every race, every track, every day) are applied to specifics (this race, this track, today). There is considerable variation in the accuracy of crowd predictions.
traynor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 02:36 PM   #66
imofe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capper Al
This doesn't work here in most cases, and you are not the only one doing it. What I am talking about is the false favorite. Most false favorites should figure into your top four selections. A typical false favorite will have some good numbers in it's past performance like a high speed figure or dropping in class. We just can't assume the best handicapper, the public, doesn't know what they are doing everytime this scenario comes up.
Most of the time the horse in question is the 2nd or 3rd favorite. Make your contender list. Break down as simple as you can WHY the horse is a contender. Chart the contenders that lose. I was shocked at some of the myths and long time supposed truths that I was using as contenders. If horse E in your example is one of those horses, you might have a great betting race. I have charted a two 10% winning situations over the last few years that are generally one of the first four favorites on the board.

Last edited by imofe; 07-23-2014 at 02:37 PM.
imofe is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 07:01 PM   #67
Capper Al
Registered User
 
Capper Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MI
Posts: 6,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Fischer
example 1
My morning-line = B-E-A-C-D-F-G-H
My top-4-picks = A-B-C-D-E-G-F-H
I notice the tote action is = B-E-A-F-D-C-G-H

Next I compare My morning line (B-E-A-C) to the Tote Action (B-E-A-F).
The public is betting "C" as the sixth choice, instead of the fourth choice, and is betting "F" as the fourth choice instead of the sixth choice.
I did not anticipate this!
Since "E" is a big underlay here, I'm going to make money over the long-term with "A" and "B" in this race. If I want to use vertical exotics as well, I will use "F" along with "C" and "D".



example 2
My morning-line = B-C-A-D-E-F-G-H
My top-4-picks = A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H
I notice the tote action is = B-E-A-F-C-D-G-H

Next I compare My morning line (B-C-A-D) to the Tote Action (B-E-A-F).
The public is betting "E" as a top contender, and "C" is ice-cold on the board.
I did not anticipate this!
I don't know why the public is behaving in this fashion. I will pass this race entirely except when linking to a high-value multi race series, where I will now be forced to include the "E" (A-B-E-C).
Complex, but I think you have worked out a sensible plan. I had to keep rereading to finally get it. Basically it's an ebb and flow. The value flows upstream in scenario A where you wager, and the values goes down stream in scenario B making it a race to skip.
Capper Al is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 07:15 PM   #68
Capper Al
Registered User
 
Capper Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MI
Posts: 6,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by traynor
The point is, that is not true. It ONLY appears so when one is looking at the world of racing as a one-time event, with no connection to anything that has gone before. In reality, the behavior of the betting public is as predictable as any other factor.

It isn't complex, complicated, unknowable, or hidden in any way. It just requires a bit more astute analysis of the available information than knee-jerk response to tote board movement. Specifically, it is useful to know when the tote board indicators usually associated with "insider betting" are based on insider betting and when they are based on (usually skewed and unrealistic) public opinion regarding some factor or combination of factors.

A simplistic example--speed on the rail wins three in a row. E and F--in your scenario--have inner posts and a bit of early speed. D and C are outside, and slow starters. What a myopic view might conclude was "insider betting" is perfectly normal under the circumstances. While the reasons for the tote action may not be as blatant (and noticeable to the uncritical observer) as that indicated above, in most cases they are both knowable and apparent. If one is using appropriately sophisticated computer models.
okay traynor, it would be good to try to categorize dysfunctional tote-board patterns. Maybe this is possible. I still believe these anomalies would be too difficult too categorize. It would be just easier to give into that there is something happening that we don't understand.
Capper Al is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 07:17 PM   #69
Capper Al
Registered User
 
Capper Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MI
Posts: 6,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by traynor
I have a real problem with the notion of analyzing a race, making my choices, then looking for external validation of those choices on the tote board before wagering. It seems that would virtually guarantee wagers restricted to crowd favorites, while passing races in which one's selections were actually overlays.
The tote-board is just another source of information to be used.
Capper Al is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 07:22 PM   #70
Capper Al
Registered User
 
Capper Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MI
Posts: 6,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaLover
The problem is that in the vast majority of the races, the calculated probabilities of each profile (as you put it very accurately and correctly) will be aligned with crowd's selection. Sure, there might be some discrepancies but the huge takeout is enough to convert them to losing propositions.

What is needed, is a way to estimate not only the win probability of each horse but the probability of the crowd committing an error of a specific magnitude in its final decision, regardless of the odds of each individual starter.


I think that the key to understand what I am trying to say here, is the expression specific magnitude and refers to the probability of the crowd to commit a very large error when forming its opinion..

The question that needs to be addresses here is the following:

Given a race profile (encapsulating of all publicly known data, including past performances, recent connection behavior, well known names etc) what is the probability that the crowd will commit a LARGE ERROR in its final assessment?


Of course I need to define what I mean by LARGE ERROR, which is probably not the main topic in this thread. From a high level, we can consider a LARGE ERROR cases where for example a 10-1 is expected to run as a 2-1 shot..

BUT this is not exactly what I mean here...

Instead of a specific horse that might be misjudged by the crowd, I am referring to the WHOLE RACE as an entity.


Let's say that we use some measurement to express the accuracy of the crowd (it can be R^2 or any other similar metric)... Following what I have just described, our objective becomes to detect if we can find a cluster of races similar to the current one, where the accuracy of the crowd is systematically less than the rest of the racing universe...

If we are able to accurately detect this kind of clusterization, out betting strategy becomes much simpler as we now in advance what races we should be playing and the next question we should answer has to do with the profile of the horse to bet, which can be again discovered by analyzing where the crowd's error is coming from.
What makes the tote-board wrong? This keeps coming up as good handicappers should know better when a lot of these horses win and win big.
Capper Al is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 07:27 PM   #71
traynor
Registered User
 
traynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capper Al
okay traynor, it would be good to try to categorize dysfunctional tote-board patterns. Maybe this is possible. I still believe these anomalies would be too difficult too categorize. It would be just easier to give into that there is something happening that we don't understand.
Not really. If you realize that they are little more than confounding variables, and rate them the same way you would rate any other factor (pace for example), it comes down to simple number crunching.

"Easy" does not often equate to "profitable." Everyone else likes to take the easy way, shuffling around a few numbers and calling it "handicapping." Tote analysis (in conjunction with analysis of morning line/odds patterns) is quite likely one of the most profitable areas for non-whales-according-to-Dave's-criteria bettors to make a big leap forward in profitability.

In the scenario you presented initially, the existence or non-existence of certain clusters of (otherwise confounding, but now categorized and monitored) variables would enable you to distinguish "smart money" (horse more likely to win/place) from "chump money" (somebody imagined they saw something, bet a few bucks early, and everyone else jumped on it, creating a false favorite/false favorites).

This is not rocket science. No PhD required. Basic programming, or database, or spreadsheet skills are more than enough.
traynor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 07:30 PM   #72
traynor
Registered User
 
traynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capper Al
The tote-board is just another source of information to be used.
I agree. The question is, is it being used appropriately, or is it being used as if it meant something that it (almost always) does not?
traynor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 07:33 PM   #73
Capper Al
Registered User
 
Capper Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MI
Posts: 6,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by whodoyoulike
I haven't really thought this through but isn't a false favorite from a handicapper's or your perspective a favorite which is not your selection?

And, why do you consider the public is the "best handicapper"? Is it because they are consistently able to identify the winners 33% +/- of the time?
Hot handicappers come and hot handicappers go, but the public is always there on top of their game. To me a good handicapper can see why a horse is favorite but might prefer another, but never underestimates the public in doing so. Handicapping authors might have over used the term false favorite to the point that any favorite that doesn't win was false.
Capper Al is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 07:36 PM   #74
Capper Al
Registered User
 
Capper Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MI
Posts: 6,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by traynor
Is that meant to be serious?
Most false favorites might be overstated, but a lot should show up in our top four.
Capper Al is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 07-23-2014, 07:38 PM   #75
traynor
Registered User
 
traynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capper Al
What makes the tote-board wrong? This keeps coming up as good handicappers should know better when a lot of these horses win and win big.
What makes the tote board wrong is when wagers are made according to scenarios/patterns with a seriously negative expectation, as in false favorites. False favorites do not magically appear--the crowd chooses the wrong set of values or is impressed with attributes that are negatively associated with good performance. Most of what seems to be "smart money" is the complete opposite.

If it was really "smart money" you certainly wouldn't be able to see it by casual observation of the tote board. The wagering would be so diffused that the only ones who noticed would be the conditional bettors looking for "value" who avoid betting--enabling the "smart money" bettors to get more down on what they consider a lock.
traynor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.