History of the Methodology

[mowens33]

Originally Posted by Tim Y

First of all is the realization than ONCE the handicapping has PRIORITIZED the horses, NEVER GO BACK THERE, in other words, once you move from the handicapping side of the equation over to the wagering side, NEVER let any old, new or reviewed handicapping drift over to ANY decision made on what I call the "accounting" side of that equation. The only time to revisit that side is in the case of a late scratch or severe weather change.

So often I hear players GO back to yet another handicapping factor (adding MORE confusion to the ultimate decision) RATHER than the odds board in making that decision. If one choice is 2/1 and other 7/1 there should be NO reason to bet the short price, long term, if your evaluation has found that these two are close to the same ability.

Think of the odds as probabilities. There is a great website that explains booking points. https://aqha.com/racing/pages/racing...-morning-line/

After your make a wager, think of HOW much of the pool (probability will tell you) remains IN THE POOL to repay your wager, once you have made a choice. If you wager a Dutch 9/5 and 2/1, that is taking out almost 70% of the pool right there. No wonder the payout will be anemic.

THINK of odds as PROBABILITY, not odds because ultimately that is what they are. i.e. 2/1 is 0.3333 probable. To get this, flip the 2/1 to 1/2 and add 1 to the denominator to get 1/3 or 0.33333. 4/1 becomes 1/4 and then add one to the denominator 1/4+1 is 1/5 or 0.20 probability.Realize that probabilities go from 1.0 (absolute certainty like death and taxes) 0.00 to absolute impossible (Elvis will land in your back yard in a UFO tomorrow).

Change your mindset: think of gambling as no different than wagering on a fight, a baseball or football game. All we use in wagering is the realm of the probabilities of any particular horse...NO different than a wager on any particular basketball team.

I researched this for about 3 years and all but suspended wagering during that time. It was a truly HUMBLING to discover how inept my TOTAL approach was.

NEVER consider any ONE horse as winning a race. Rather think of the possibilities (just like PROBABILITIES) of any one of a group of CONTENDERS could win this race. I have expanded this to only betting contenders in exotics because of my contention that once a contender gets into the race, the move from the 1/16th pole to the wire is unpredictable long term. Think of how the chances of the CONTENDERS are stacked up against the PROBABILITIES and look for overlays.

There is a old (now almost debunked) idea that we have left and right brain activities going on all the time. While separation of these two thought processes continue as distinct, further research showed that it is NOT physically limited to one side of the brain but traditionally it has been promoted that a LEFT brain activity is using logic, math and science skills (rigid rules to follow) while the right brain activity is more creative and innovative. Most study that gave root to this idea were from observations of "split brain" patients and the idea was then retrofitted to normal.

So, on that analogy, we handicapping (creatively, innovatively etc.) with one hemisphere and then turn right around to have to abandon that side to the rigid rule based right side......In theory

It is important to separate these functions DISTINCTLY when playing this game. Set up RULES for wagering and don't waver from them. Set up minimums that you will take from observations of the odds board. IF the crowd is following you choices, PASS...there is another contest coming up in a few minutes if you are at a simulcast outlet.

It takes a bit of personal re-education to keep on in line with this separation, but it is doable for all of us once we have the contenders and LEAVE the handicapping as finished, then only decide based upon odds (probabilities offered).

Tim, first off I really appreciate you taking the time to go in such detail. I’ve have been to the booking points site and understand the concept of picking your contender and setting what you feel the true odds are.
What you have posted today (at least in my case) has hit the nail right on the head. Handicapping is not my problem, my problem is not being able to step away from that side and focus my energy completely on the wager end.
Your analogy (left brain, right brain) is right on, separation is key. I need to trust that the tools I use when handicapping, the Methodology, RDSS2, Matchup, and other factors have done their job so my total concentration will know be on the wagering end ONLY!
Good Stuff!!
Thanks again, Mike

[turtleman]

This is such a great topic. I believe one of the traps in hdcping is everything is focused on picking the winner. There was even a guy who wrote a book about it. In our metrology the talk is 63% winners picking 2 horses to win. When I starting doing a track profile for Hawthorne I did it for win,plc, show and forth, and what struck me was that not only was i looking for the running stile of winners, I was looking for anomalies, something that not everyone would pick up.
i sometimes try to change thought patterns by using little phrases that keep me focused . So I am going to print out this phrase and tape it beside my computer. " I AM NOT LOOKING FOR THE BEST HORSE, I AM LOOKING FOR THE BEST BET!!

Tom

[Tim Y]

Originally Posted by turtleman

So I am going to print out this phrase and tape it beside my computer. " I AM NOT LOOKING FOR THE BEST HORSE, I AM LOOKING FOR THE BEST BET!!

Tom

Perfect I went through about 5 packs of post it notes reminding myself about the use of the early/late balance that SAME WAY.

BRAVO as ultimately we are Wagering NOT JUST HANDICAPPING.

I am just these past weeks reviewing the entire Woodbine season: NO surprise that every year the last 5 or so programs have NO LOGIC at all....BUT November 18th was a day to remember. That worked out better overall than on a day, 4 years ago, I SWEPT THE ENTIRE CARD AT WOODBINE!




Did I forget to tell you that we cancelled due to high wind after 3 races? Hmmmm I still SWEPT THAT CARD!!!.

[Tim Y]

I had that same epiphany a few back when I realized I had gone as far as I could go on the handicapping side of the equation. What was missing? One of my true mentors (he does the Odds Professor choices at Hastings) enlightened me to what the deficiency was BUT, he warned (paraphrasing here):"That is path you have to find by yourself. I can help you get started, but ultimately YOU have to work our the approach."

His favorite bit of advice to all who will listen? "They teach this game completely BACKWARDS, You should become a proficient gambler FIRST before you ever try the handicapping game, NOT the other way around."

Marc Cramer, Dick Mitchell were on that was eye opening. list as well as Dave Schwartz with his balanced approach.

Always good to have solid minds see things just a tad differently than you do to help broaden your horizons, and in this case, broaden success as well.

[MikeB]

Originally Posted by Tim Y

BRAVO as ultimately we are Wagering NOT JUST HANDICAPPING.

Seems to me I read somewhere, maybe in one of the Follow Ups, that you should not concentrate on which horse should win, but which horses could win. Anyone remember that?

[Tim Y]

Originally Posted by MikeB

Seems to me I read somewhere, maybe in one of the Follow Ups, that you should not concentrate on which horse should win, but which horses could win. Anyone remember that?

Same comment, but from about 5 different sources.

[Lt1]

I do believe it was in the Follow Ups regarding wager capping.
Tim G

[Tim Y]

In the realm of probability, almost NOTHING gets the mathematical expression of impossible (0.00 probable) or certain (1.0 probability). Everything in racing is in the middle spectrum.

Think of the possible probables we see in each race. The WIN ODDS out there flashing and changing on the board (delayed much like the ticker tape is at the old stock market scenes in movies) represent a STRAW vote of the crowd's belief in which horse they (collectively) believe CAN WIN,,,,,,not can come in second or third. Pierre Ollier first used this in Paris (so it became know as the PARI Mutuel way of wagering) with EACH of the players playing against ALL of the players rather than at the expense of bookies LIMITING the range of available odds.

In any race there are only so many ways one can separate these different opinions, and STATISTICALLY, the more runners one enters into the mix, the lower the probability of any ONE of the combatants becomes. That is why for MOST races, cutting off at a minimum or 7 horses is almost a mandatory starting point. Most not all as having a vulnerable big favorite will negate that limitation on field size.

The magic of the exotic bet has become that the MAJORITY of the crowd does not have the wherewithal to go DEEP enough into a wager to cover the marginal, though absolutely POSSIBLE situations that give the best payouts. The vast majority of "every man" exotics bets included usually the favorite and the 2nd choice but once even the odds on choice comes in THIRD, in a blanket run, MOST don't have the one covered as obvious as that is.

The less logical horses that hit the board come, usually, in one of two varieties) surprisingly effective early speed (most often) or 2) deep closer gets up in the mix after a pace collapse.

As I have noted there is a lot of "less sophisticated" money in each of these exotic pools that are devoted to the guileless, Pavlovian dogma on how to wager these contests. Leaving out a logical horse to run third is a MAJOR flaw in their approach.....ONE OF MANY.

Part of thinking like a gambler is understanding when the rather ignorant crowd gets it right, or completely MISSES the boat.

All of this exotic talk is EXCLUSIVE to vertical wagers, NOT the horizontal ones that suffer from their OWN unique troubles like late scratches heaped on a horse (the post time favorite) that you may have eliminated, or not being able to know both the odds nor the physical shape of the animal that you are investing in.

[Dorianmode]

I was looking to see if there were any recent posts about Money Management in racing ... and there well may be some here I have't seen. I agree with everything written here that invokes the work of the great Huey Mahl. The really nice thing for us is, he wrote a seriously great piece for the second Follow Up, (long time ago) and it's available here (thanks to Bill V. who uploaded all the Follow Up's I think ?)

If you can't answer : "What is my win rate for this type of race, on this type of surface, at this distance, and what is my Kelly Advantage (I'm sure most here knows what that is and where it came from, if not it's worth learning about), in this situation, you may not be ready to start seriously wagering, (if your goal is to make this a profitable hobby, ... or maybe more).

The nice thing is, it's all right there in Follow Up #2, starting on page 33. All the variables and equations may look a bit intimidating at first, but they are pure gold.

Not sure I ever mentioned this before, but if after reading the Mahl piece, anyone is interested in a working Excel sheet that does all the computations automatically, which Mahl talks about, I made one quite a while ago and am happy to share it.

Good skill to all.

[mowens33]

Hey, Doc I would love too have your Excel sheet!

Thanks, Mike