Help needed

[Bill V.]

I got an Email a couple days ago.
The writer asked me to give him advice.
Seems the writer has been losing and his bank roll is sinking down.
I know he knows how to handicap. I beleive his problem is he tries to mix
too many factors of general handicapping into his interpretation of his RDSS2 readouts .

He is betting horses that 'should' win. But If he could rid himself of trying to handicap, He would bet the horses RDSS2 says "could" win- at a profit. He would WIN
This is not from me, this comes from The follow up . Doc suggest that after each race you run through the program, write down on to columns on a sheet of papertwo list, who should win and of your top 3 who could win.
and then if the should winner wins or the could winner wins write down the price the winner pays, I bet after 20 race the could winners will pay a profit

Bill

[Lt1]

Good info Bill thanks for posting it.
Tim

[Mark]

What terrific advise Bill!
Betting favorites will 33 to 35% of the time? Heavy favorites maybe 40% and the odds these horses get bet to absolutely guarantee that you can not make a profit. So don't bet these horses! Unless you are a Jim Bradshaw and win over 50% of your one horse win bets, don't do it.
Bill has laid out a method that he uses profitably in several posts so give it a try.

[Bill V.]

Thank you Tim and Mark

The e mailer also wrote back to me and said thank you
It made me happy. Now comes the most challenging part for us all
TO DO IT
It works - do we ?

GS
Bill

[atkinsrr]

Bill seems like "could win" usually pay better prices than "should win"....

[Bill V.]

Originally Posted by atkinsrr

Bill seems like "could win" usually pay better prices than "should win"....

YES !!!! I am not sure because I will not participate or use my energy to go to Paceadvantage, . I do know how well the RDSS users are doing in the AQU inner contest.
My thinking is the RDSS people are using more "could" horses than conventional handicappers can see. The conventionals are usually loading up on too many "should" win horses, Not always but usually "should" horses pay less than "could" win horses .

Bill

[rmath]

I could not agree more with you.
Five of the top Ten are RDSS users.
I believe most are using the could win horses and not the should win horses.
I know that I personally look for good priced contenders from my top 4 or 5
final contenders and then structure my tickets accordingly.
So far I have had some very good success doing this.
Rmath

[Bill V.]

Keep it up and to all the RDSS2 users doing fantastic

[MikeB]

Originally Posted by Mark

Bill has laid out a method that he uses profitably in several posts so give it a try.

Is this a change in selection method when betting "could win" horses, and/or a method of bet structuring? Any more info on this would be appreciated. Thanks.