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 Rate Thread
Old 06-07-2016, 06:29 PM   #16
mickey_arnold
Registered User
 
mickey_arnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 66
Public Handicapper Specialties

Steve Matthews for Newsday was already cited...The NY Post had a selector who specialized in longshots...Can't recall who.. Maybe Matthews worked for the Post at one time..

Was always puzzled with the number of points assigned to each of the choices, i.e 6 for 1st, 3 for 2nd, 1 for 3rd or 6,2,1 for each of the ranks.

If they were trying to mimic the % of winners in over the long run by finish position or ant other factor(s), there is a world of difference between a 6,3,1 scale versus a 6,2,1 scale.

I think Sports Eye used to go 4 positions deep for each selector.

I think I used a 10 handicapper consensus to widen the possible "contenders". This is where the scalar differences could be problematic so I would stick to newspapers or publications with the same point scale. get consensus total for each horse , adjust for scratches, get a simple average for each horse, go 1 or two decimals deep in the scores, square the scores, derive each horses share of the grand total of points to use as a probability of winning, cutoff point for final contenders and look for overlays among them.

If found that over about the long run, between using 6 or 10 handicappers there was little difference in the final probabilities of winning for each horse or the profitability.

Could using a little more sophisticated analysis of race type, scoring system and final selection of contenders have helped, who knows?

Over the long run, my method was better than picking random, produced a better net return compared to the average of all handicappers or any individual handicappers. But of course still less than profitable and too much manual work for too little return... With computerization and today's rebates, still anybody's guess.
__________________
"I fool with the horses on a regular basis and they do the same to me..…with better results."

mickey_arnold is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-07-2016, 06:42 PM   #17
mickey_arnold
Registered User
 
mickey_arnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 66
I think I did a 500 race look at Russ Harris broken out by Sprint versus Route and Claiming versus Allowance, separately... Since it was all manual work couldn't do a wide matrix with meaning and more race characteristics, like field size ..Too small a sample size anyway...

I remember when Harris was 9 for 9 on one particular day. The Daily News did just about everything but get him the Medal of Honor and a tickertape parade. Greatest achievement of all time stuff. They forget to mention that the average price was about $3.60 :>)
__________________
"I fool with the horses on a regular basis and they do the same to me..…with better results."

mickey_arnold is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-07-2016, 10:29 PM   #18
TheOracle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by pandy
I do believe that the public handicappers have strengths. You would have to follow them and check them yourself to figure out who is good at what. Another thing, some handicappers may actually have better results with the horses they pick second or third. Years ago I met a guy who kept precise stats on my harness picks for a period of seven years, and he had my picks broken down into various categories, such as cold exactas, boxed exactas, top pick win % and ROI, best bet win % and ROI, and he compared me against every other public handicapper in NY, including all newspaper handicappers and some of the tip sheet handicappers. I had profits in several categories including huge profits on my Best Bets and I was the only handicapper who had profits. He did it all on paper. I think he was an accountant, but he was very precise and neat. I met him a couple of times, very nice guy.
Thanks pandy

The reason for my question was due to what I have been seeing on the Turf at Belmont, so far this year.

It seems the oddsmaker has had the hot hand with Morning Lines ending with 5 on the Turf.





As of May 22nd, Morning Lines ending with 5 on the Turf won 12 out of 19 races my data shows 20 races due to the coupled entry on May 20th.

The cost is really $38 and not $40 with a $7.10 return but I haven't quite figured out how to handle a coupled entry with the data.

In any event, it seemed as though his strength had been on the Turf, Morning Lines ending with 5 were actually giving a profit.

However, after May 22nd, the 5ers won only 3 of the last 8 races on the Turf. Even with this decline in profits he still managed to pick 3 winners in a row.



When I look at Turf races less than 1 Mile the 5ers won 6 out of 9 races so half of the 12 wins came in races less than 1 Mile.




Unfortunately they don't run too many races less than 1 Mile on the Turf.

It would truly be interesting to see if this is his strength but it doesn't look like there will be too many opportunities in this situation for the rest of the Belmont Season!!
TheOracle is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-08-2016, 07:00 AM   #19
burnsy
self medicated
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: toga
Posts: 3,077
My question is.........WHY?

Can someone that handicaps themselves explain this?

If one is a experienced handicapper. Who cares?

I've figured out my OWN strengths and weaknesses.

This is called "Handicappers Corner"......now what the touts say is part of handicapping? Ummm, OK, I guess.

Last edited by burnsy; 06-08-2016 at 07:05 AM.
burnsy is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-09-2016, 12:02 PM   #20
TheOracle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by burnsy
My question is.........WHY?

Can someone that handicaps themselves explain this?

If one is a experienced handicapper. Who cares?

I've figured out my OWN strengths and weaknesses.

This is called "Handicappers Corner"......now what the touts say is part of handicapping? Ummm, OK, I guess.
Hey Burns,

I don't handicap anymore it just doesn't seem to work for me. Speed ratings, early pace, late pace, etc.

I would put in many late nights pouring through scenarios only to come up short or scratching my head as to what happened.

So now I just try dig through the data and search for anomalies within the data that I find and sometimes I actually make money.

I caught this streak of J T Ryerson last year when his Maidens hit the board in 15 straight races. I saw it when he had 8 in a row. I didn't do the parlay but I was able to cash some tickets.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...hlight=Ryerson

It doesn't work all the time and when it doesn't I don't scratch my head about it because it's just a streak.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...ghlight=%40SAR

Then I started tracking the Morning Line Odds from the Oddsmaker and again I cash some tickets but still was way better than what I did handicapping especially when I drilled down as to my return per all the hours that I spent handicapping.

So for me, it just gives me some insight into things that others would probably not care to examine.
TheOracle is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-09-2016, 02:05 PM   #21
ultracapper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,943
Another thing that would have to be considered when referencing public handicappers work is the amount of time and effort put into each race. The public guys that are on the board could put some perspective into this, but, for example, it seems to me more effort is put into the stake races than the N2L claimers. The SoCal edition of the racing form doesn't even bother to do a "closer look" on the N2L claiming races. Make a quick line for race #3, a C$25K N2L, then move on to race #4 and put 45 minutes into that AlwN3X, for example.
ultracapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-09-2016, 10:42 PM   #22
castaway01
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,817
But setting the morning line is only "handicapping" in the sense of trying to predict what the crowd will make the final odds, not predicting a winner. Just because the ML maker decides to put a "5" at the end of the odds for the favorite is not "handicapping". I thought you were trying to make some point about public handicappers that might be useful. This is just a coincidence, and it's a coincidence involving low-odds horses. Betting on coincidences with low-odds horses is not a way to make money.
castaway01 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-10-2016, 10:55 AM   #23
RaceBookJoe
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ocala Mike
I specialize in maiden races, especially second-time starters coming off nondescript (bad paper, I call it) first tries. I have no data on this, but I believe tlg (Andy Serling) is strong on these kind of horses. If I see something at long morning-line odds, and Andy has it mentioned or on top, I know it's going to be live.
There used to be an old-school spot play I would use from time to time based around this. Basically what you would do is look to see if any of the entrants were either favorite last out or at least bet down, and then in today's race they are going much higher odds. The thinking was that the public wouldn't bet heavily on a FTS, so it had to be "smart money"..and maybe had a slow start/rough trip etc. It's not exactly the spot-play but close enough from memory. I would tighten it up using my own handicapping/maneuvers etc.
__________________
Those with the best knowledge have the best luck !!!
RaceBookJoe is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-10-2016, 11:05 AM   #24
pandy
Registered User
 
pandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA.
Posts: 7,464
My first big longshot winner at the track, when I was still a teenager, was at Aqueduct. I wish I could remember the name of the horse, but it was a second time starter by Bold Ruler, who was a top sire back then. The horse had gone off as the favorite in its first start but showed little. I was with a friend of mine and I saw the horse on the board at 27-1 odds. I said to my friend, "they thought this horse was a runner just a few weeks ago, maybe he just needed the race." Even though I knew very little about handicapping, I knew that Bold Ruler was the top sire and the horse was a big overlay. We both bet him and he romped home an easy winner and paid $56 to win. I've liked betting second time starters and maidens ever since.
pandy is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-10-2016, 11:49 AM   #25
TheOracle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by castaway01
But setting the morning line is only "handicapping" in the sense of trying to predict what the crowd will make the final odds, not predicting a winner. Just because the ML maker decides to put a "5" at the end of the odds for the favorite is not "handicapping". I thought you were trying to make some point about public handicappers that might be useful. This is just a coincidence, and it's a coincidence involving low-odds horses. Betting on coincidences with low-odds horses is not a way to make money.
Hey Cast,

I get what you're saying the ML maker is just predicting the final odds that the public will make and is not necessarily trying to predict a winner. So odds ending, in say, 5 is not his prediction of who should win the race but how the public will bet.

However, I am still intrigued by the coincidence and how often at times in the short run it lands on the winner or hits the board.

When I saw this:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/...ighlight=%40SAR

I thought there was some type of shenanigans happening where only people in the know were able to capitalize on the occurrences but even if they were it would still be very hard to prove since there is not enough data to show a trend.

Even with all that it's still way better than what I was doing previously.

So it begs the question, are there certain instances where it's better to play the favorite and not try to beat him?
TheOracle is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-12-2016, 10:39 PM   #26
mickey_arnold
Registered User
 
mickey_arnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOracle
So it begs the question, are there certain instances where it's better to play the favorite and not try to beat him?
There are many, many scenarios. Many factors to consider. Here's a general approach to look at based on the Contrarian/Kinky handicapping idea;

Look at some of the factors traditionally used to identify False Favorites. If you're looking for some, try this link:

http://www.netcapper.com/TrackTractsArchive/TT020308.htm

-Use favorites that meet these factors (more than one is preferable).
-Look for positive that might outweigh the negatives.
(keep in mind that what you see may already be accounted for by the handicapping public and be reflected in the price of your "overlay"- meaning they're right about value and you're wrong.)

Here's a link that shows an example of a possible "jockey-trainer combo" angle (system) that might outweigh the false favorite warning signs.

http://www.horse-racing-book.com/free-horse-racing-system.htm
l

Add a couple of speed, class etc. qualifiers and check it out. Remember that absolute rigidity in the "rules" is absolutely the best path to long-term losses. Too much flexibility is just as bad, if not worse,
(Also, try experimenting with it but leave out the "false favorite" signs).

I use a low-volume/high win percentage/low-priced horse approach that is Contrarian in nature and no inviolable rules. A very small margin for error and profit. Needs lots of patience and discipline. You never chase plays, the plays have to come to you.

Has a sensible use of traditional handicapping fundamentals and some nifty applications of statistical functions....Inspired by Vince Lombardi's football philosophy of "Attack strength with strength. Don't attack weakness with strength"....Contrarian like "the best offense is a good defense" or basketball's "pressing teams don't like to be pressed."

It works for me, but it is definitely,definitely not for everyone.
__________________
"I fool with the horses on a regular basis and they do the same to me..…with better results."

mickey_arnold is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-12-2016, 10:51 PM   #27
mickey_arnold
Registered User
 
mickey_arnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 66
I forgot to add that too much flexibility in system rules is not too good either, if not worse
__________________
"I fool with the horses on a regular basis and they do the same to me..…with better results."

mickey_arnold is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-13-2016, 02:26 PM   #28
TheOracle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickey_arnold

Here's a link that shows an example of a possible "jockey-trainer combo" angle (system) that might outweigh the false favorite warning signs.

http://www.horse-racing-book.com/free-horse-racing-system.htm
l

Add a couple of speed, class etc. qualifiers and check it out. Remember that absolute rigidity in the "rules" is absolutely the best path to long-term losses. Too much flexibility is just as bad, if not worse,
(Also, try experimenting with it but leave out the "false favorite" signs).

I use a low-volume/high win percentage/low-priced horse approach that is Contrarian in nature and no inviolable rules. A very small margin for error and profit. Needs lots of patience and discipline. You never chase plays, the plays have to come to you.

Has a sensible use of traditional handicapping fundamentals and some nifty applications of statistical functions....Inspired by Vince Lombardi's football philosophy of "Attack strength with strength. Don't attack weakness with strength"....Contrarian like "the best offense is a good defense" or basketball's "pressing teams don't like to be pressed."

It works for me, but it is definitely,definitely not for everyone.



Hey Mickey

As you mentioned trainer/jockey combinations I did a search on trainer /jockey combos that were hot so far at Belmont and I came across D A Cannizzo and Joel Rosario.

These two have done an outstanding job together over the past month and a half.



They have hit the board in 12 out of 15 attempts giving a return of 149% across the board per $2 wager to win, place or show.

Show wagering on these two is giving you 67% return per $2 show wager so far at Belmont.

I was so focused on chasing the favorites I completely missed so good trainer/jockey profits

I will not be missing these two ever again for the remainder of the Belmont season!!!
TheOracle 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 09:20 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.