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: 8 votes, 3.00 average.
Old 01-18-2016, 01:34 PM   #16
v j stauffer
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,284
People that can win at betting on horses need to tell only one person what they know.

A mutual clerk.

The rest are seeking attention for whatever reason.

Doesn't make them bad.

But they're certainly not real.
__________________
"Just because she's a hitter and a thief doesn't mean she's not a good woman in all the other places" Mayrose Prizzi
v j stauffer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 01:37 PM   #17
Capper Al
Registered User
 
Capper Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MI
Posts: 6,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by raybo
Are you trying to "teach" here Al? Please don't, that's what the "Trifecta Mike" reference was about earlier in the thread. If you have something to contribute, then contribute it. Simple!

Why make it one of those "I have the answer, can you guess it" things. Most of us don't like silly games and ego displays.
Thanks Raybo.
__________________


"The Law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich, as well as the poor, to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

Anatole France


Capper Al is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 01:54 PM   #18
v j stauffer
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,284
I wonder how it would play out if track simply didn't publish a morning line?

I expect people with real opinions wouldn't care much since a faulty line can only hinder them.

Of course some would be frozen from playing because there would be no way of knowing when a horse was an over/underlay.

__________________
"Just because she's a hitter and a thief doesn't mean she's not a good woman in all the other places" Mayrose Prizzi
v j stauffer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 01:57 PM   #19
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,470
What a great ambassador for the game you would make.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 02:46 PM   #20
v j stauffer
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom
What a great ambassador for the game you would make.
Thanks.

Many think I already am one.

I don't expect the fun barbs I exchange with a very few people on here would change that much.

I'm more confident my 40 years of promoting, participating and caring about our great sport might carry the day.

But you could be right.
__________________
"Just because she's a hitter and a thief doesn't mean she's not a good woman in all the other places" Mayrose Prizzi
v j stauffer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 03:50 PM   #21
hopbet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 151
MY TWO CENTS

VIC,
I believe 99.9% of the people who post or read your (post), WITHOUT question acknowledge you care about horse racing. I personally feel, that I'm being SHORTCHANGED (again 99.9% of the people who post or read AGREE)> The years and different positions you have held, and INSIGHT (knowledge) especially on the handicapping(betting) you have and have obtained would benefit ALL. I fully understand providing information would cause your ROI to DECLINE. Sharing and or providing information ultimately is your choice/decision. Thanks HOPBET
hopbet is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 03:52 PM   #22
whodoyoulike
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capper Al
Sorry for the omission. Usually, 3 or 4 contenders. Sometimes 5 especially in larger fields of 10 or more horses. But it's okay to say anyone could win this race and skip it also.
I misunderstood your OP. If you're considering up to half the field as possible contenders then even 80% may be too low. You may need 100% to be successful and only if they are all price horses because there would be too many permutations involved to make it worthwhile which means I can't see you making very many wagers.

My response was thinking you were narrowing your contenders to 1 or 2.
whodoyoulike is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 04:03 PM   #23
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by whodoyoulike
I misunderstood your OP. If you're considering up to half the field as possible contenders then even 80% may be too low. You may need 100% to be successful and only if they are all price horses because there would be too many permutations involved to make it worthwhile which means I can't see you making very many wagers.

My response was thinking you were narrowing your contenders to 1 or 2.

If somebody can pick 80% of the winners using only half the field they are well ahead of your average Joe.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 04:40 PM   #24
whodoyoulike
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
If somebody can pick 80% of the winners using only half the field they are well ahead of your average Joe.
But, how would you structure your wagers?

You've already acknowledged that 20% of the winners could or would come from your non-contenders which is the reason I think they would all have to be price horses. Now, there are races where the top 4 horses are long shots, so it's possible just not very often. I just don't like using half the field as contenders as in his example of a 10 horse field. I usually pass the race because there is another one. JMO, you need to narrow it further.

Last edited by whodoyoulike; 01-18-2016 at 04:41 PM.
whodoyoulike is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 05:59 PM   #25
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by whodoyoulike
But, how would you structure your wagers?

You've already acknowledged that 20% of the winners could or would come from your non-contenders which is the reason I think they would all have to be price horses. Now, there are races where the top 4 horses are long shots, so it's possible just not very often. I just don't like using half the field as contenders as in his example of a 10 horse field. I usually pass the race because there is another one. JMO, you need to narrow it further.
I was just pointing out that picking 80% winners using only half the field is difficult. My personal way is to set a line on the horses I think are contenders and bet the overlays. I don't have a set number. What I won't do is bet a horse I think is a contender but then has a line > the size of the field.

I have system I use also that is part of the line making. If I think only three horses are contenders in a 10 horse field, I average that (30%) with 100% and set my line as if I'll have the winner in those three 65% of the time. If I have 4 of 6 as contenders, I use 83.333%, and so on. I then divvy up the percentage among the horses I have as contenders. It works for me, been doing it a long time now.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 06:26 PM   #26
Capper Al
Registered User
 
Capper Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MI
Posts: 6,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by whodoyoulike
I misunderstood your OP. If you're considering up to half the field as possible contenders then even 80% may be too low. You may need 100% to be successful and only if they are all price horses because there would be too many permutations involved to make it worthwhile which means I can't see you making very many wagers.

My response was thinking you were narrowing your contenders to 1 or 2.

Do a personal study. Find out how many horses don't come from your top half. In cases of odd field sizes like 9 horses put the 5th horse in the top half. This has little to do with contenders, but it takes the hassle out of figuring contenders and makes your study objective. You might find that 20% come out of the bottom half. Most of these horses can't be picked after the race.
__________________


"The Law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich, as well as the poor, to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

Anatole France


Capper Al is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 06:30 PM   #27
Capper Al
Registered User
 
Capper Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MI
Posts: 6,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by whodoyoulike
But, how would you structure your wagers?

You've already acknowledged that 20% of the winners could or would come from your non-contenders which is the reason I think they would all have to be price horses. Now, there are races where the top 4 horses are long shots, so it's possible just not very often. I just don't like using half the field as contenders as in his example of a 10 horse field. I usually pass the race because there is another one. JMO, you need to narrow it further.
My studies agree.
__________________


"The Law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich, as well as the poor, to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

Anatole France


Capper Al is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 06:49 PM   #28
MJC922
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,506
If your process is adding value then I suspect the value is intrinsic, meaning you should not care what the odds are. When you break it down by odds ranges you will see differences in ROI but they do not hold up long-term, i.e. the next forward test you do will show another subset odds range with better profits and the previous best ROI starts to tank or even lose. I see this time and again in my studies.

So this presumption we have (myself included) that the odds are showing us the crowd hasn't 'caught on' (so to speak) in a specific race to what you're seeing on paper is really without any basis when you think about it. If what you're using, specific tools, process or whatever is leading toward profit then it would seem far better to distill what it is you do that's actually adding value to the point where you can safely ignore odds. FWIW.
__________________
North American Class Rankings
MJC922 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 06:51 PM   #29
NorCalGreg
Authorized Advertiser
 
NorCalGreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Oakland, Ca
Posts: 7,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by hopbet
VIC,
I believe 99.9% of the people who post or read your (post), WITHOUT question acknowledge you care about horse racing. I personally feel, that I'm being SHORTCHANGED (again 99.9% of the people who post or read AGREE)> The years and different positions you have held, and INSIGHT (knowledge) especially on the handicapping(betting) you have and have obtained would benefit ALL. I fully understand providing information would cause your ROI to DECLINE. Sharing and or providing information ultimately is your choice/decision. Thanks HOPBET


Thanks

NorCalGreg
NorCalGreg is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-18-2016, 07:13 PM   #30
Capper Al
Registered User
 
Capper Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MI
Posts: 6,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJC922
If your process is adding value then I suspect the value is intrinsic, meaning you should not care what the odds are. When you break it down by odds ranges you will see differences in ROI but they do not hold up long-term, i.e. the next forward test you do will show another subset odds range with better profits and the previous best ROI starts to tank or even lose. I see this time and again in my studies.

So this presumption we have (myself included) that the odds are showing us the crowd hasn't 'caught on' (so to speak) in a specific race to what you're seeing on paper is really without any basis when you think about it. If what you're using, specific tools, process or whatever is leading toward profit then it would seem far better to distill what it is you do that's actually adding value to the point where you can safely ignore odds. FWIW.
Quirin proved that over the long run the public does a descent job at setting odds. Some handicappers like ranking their horses based on their own odds line.
__________________


"The Law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich, as well as the poor, to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

Anatole France


Capper Al 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 01:13 AM.


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.