Ask The Experts
General Category => Ask the Experts => Topic started by: nyc1347 on January 14, 2010, 08:09:08 AM
-
Just wondering, does anyone on the forum other than myself wager on horses for a living? I see many threads about the whole industry or views on certain races but not about this topic.
-
God bless you.
I tried it for awhile -- toughest and most costly volunteer work I\'ve ever done. I crashed and burned, in spectacular fashion. Thank God I had a decent full-time job waiting for me at the end of that debacle, or I would have been tits-up.
If you would be willing to talk about what your life is like -- what kind of hours you spend working, how you handle the highs and lows...or even more candidly, what kind of money are you making -or- what is your ROI over time, it could be quite an eye-opener for many of us.
And if you decline on all counts, I\'ll understand perfectly.
-
At least two that I know of.
-
I used to play for a living. Did it for a couple of years sort of half time, made more money on horses than I did at my job so ramped up the horses to full time, then came across an opportunity I had to take so I scaled the horses back down to half time. I got out in 2005,started another business and left the horses as a hobby.
I can say this. It took a tremendous amount of work to do this for a living. I used to work 9-16 hour days compiling data, mostly result charts, trainer profiles, track profiles, making my own figures, monitoring workouts, for up to 3 tracks at a time, and then being at the track watching and waiting a lot, making a few stabs here and there to stay entertained. It seemed that I would grind it out for quite a while, win a little here, lose a little there, and then every so often hit the big windfall. So my income could vary greatly. Not to mention the streaks I would get on. I remember one time I lost 19 consecutive prime betting opportunities in a row, 6 with photo finishes and one deserved but unlucky DQ. I also remember losing a photo at Calder for over $50k of winnings, and then lost another one for $22K that same week. That stuff can easily put a person on tilt, so you have to be ready to weather the storm.
I would say to do it right, you have to start out by coming up with what you need to live on for a year. Say it is 50K. Then you are going to need at least 6x that in a bankroll in order to bet enough to make enough when you win and also cover your loses. You also have to be willing to cut off betting completely when you get on a bad streak until you figure out what you are doing wrong. Sometimes you aren\'t really doing anything wrong, you\'re just not hitting. Conversely, you have to be able to load up and double or triple your bets when you are winning or have a very, very strong disposition about a certain race that is contrary to the rest of the crowd. The more contrary it is the better. This is a game of information and the ability to correctly interpret that information. I used to employ 2 clockers and had a part-time assistant that could handle the most rudimentary tasks just to make sure I knew as much as I could without working 24/7 and killing myself. I also networked with a few people in different parts of the country that were playing other tracks than I was so we could swap opinions about the really good ones we came across.
I remember back in 1998 I was making a killing off a trainer named Oscar Delgado that was running on the Florida circuit. To this day I don\'t know how he was doing what he was doing, but for a while there was a rare but distinct trainer pattern that was extremely difficult to discern and highly profitable. That lasted for a few months and then it went away completely. This type of stuff happens all the time. I even remember a day back in 1995 (I think) when I was playing Hollywood and the exacta will pays they put up were making no sense whatsoever. Everything they put up seemed extremely over valued no matter what happened in the race. I kept sitting there watching and checking the numbers and just didn\'t see anyway I could lose no matter what happened. So I walked up and did $100 EX Box ALL, which is something you would NEVER do and the teller, who knew me, looked at me like I was completely nuts. When the race was over I heard a couple of old timers around me saying, \"That exacta paid THAT MUCH?\" I ran up to my teller and as I recall I think I got back about 3x on my money. About 7 minutes later they announced that they were suspending all payouts on that race. Turned out they had some type of computer error and the wrong payouts had been calculated. They then corrected this and paid the right amounts, which were substantially less. I felt bad for anyone who didn\'t pounce to bet and even worse for the ones that did but were not quick enough to collect because it was the surest thing I have ever seen in racing and I have never seen it since.
My point is that in order to do this right you have to be there watching, all the time, do all or most of the work and be ready to pull the trigger fearlessly when the opportunity is there. You also have to be able to handle the losses and the bad beats without going on tilt, which can be very tough to do. Money management is probably 40% of the key to winning, with handicapping being 55% and luck being the remaining 5%. Without good handicapping you probably aren\'t going to win very often no matter how good you are with money. But I\'ve seen LOTS of good handicappers lose more often than they should, or at least not win as much as they deserved to win, simply because they had no concept of Money Management. You\'ve got to understand how the takeout works against you long-term and pick your plays and tracks accordingly. Probably the most common mistake I see is that when people like a horse and it goes off at 9/5 they bet more, and when it goes off at 10-1 they bet less simply because they have the opportunity to win a certain amount either way. I can say for sure that the right way to do it is exactly the opposite. Bet big when the odds are high, and bet smaller or pass altogether when the odds are lower even if it still looks like a surer thing with value.
I mostly just play the Triple Crown and the Breeders\' Cup now, along with going out to the local strip here in MN for some good times and live racing with friends and clients. I am loosely following Gulfstream, SA and Oaklawn right now but not playing. I get what I want out of the sport on this hobby type level, and there is no stress whatsoever.
So while I know many people may dream of gambling on horses for a living, and it can be done, I think there is also a lot to be said for being able to just enjoy yourself,the colorful people in the sport, and these wonderful yet fragile creatures from a distance.
And never bet what you can\'t afford to lose to begin with.
MJ
-
Great post. Really interesting stuff. Thanks.
-
MJ,
Absolutely awesome perspective.
Thanks so much for this. I have never thought of doing it for a living and never would do it but I really really enjoyed this perspecitve.
There was a book that I read a few years back (can\'t remember the name) about a journalist who took a year off and played for a \"living.\" I believe mostly at Arlington if I remmeber right.
Alot of what you said resonated with what was in the book and I find it fascinating.
Looking forward to your perspective on the Derby as always upcoming.
Good luck to everyone
-
MJ-- you may be putting it into the money management percentage, but theere is also the question of HOW to bet a race or series of races, which is a big deal in itself. You gave a real good example yourself here with the BB Derby. A lot of people with the same opinion would not have gotten the ROI you did on that race, OR given themselves as good a chance to hit it.
-
I like this remark about HOW, Jerry.
I like to think that I am versatile enough to fit the bet to the race, though I am probably a gimmick sucker at heart. But let\'s say you see an overlay and think it can win. Do you use it to start a pick-3, bet it across, Key or box the exacta with your next three best ideas?
This is the stuff that I like to discuss. I also like the whole concept of hedging. My pal bet pick-fours for a whole summer and discovered that hedging cost him over the long run. I usually always hedge when I have a single (favorited) to end a pick three or four, because you can get a decent price on your hedges.
Any thoughts?
Leamas
-
Ive def. learned over a period of time that there is no right or wrong way to approach a horse race. There are many opportunities to make money with the different wagers offered BUT there are also many different ways to lose as well. Every race presents a new and much different opportunity. I think this fact goes WAY overseen in wagering the horses. In my opinion, this concept as well as understanding ROI and public money in the wagering pools are a PREQUEL and are 3 major factors to take into consideration doing this for a living. Without understanding these 3 things in conjunction with handicapping theres no point in even betting a race.
Before even doing this as a career I notice that by using the thorographs I was able to catch so many more horses that ran great at better odds in a race. Even though these horses did run well it didn\'t mean i was going to make money though! If i approached the race and said OK lets do a win wager and key the horse with others and it lost for whatever reason it would be really frustrating BUT i learned over time that just because I had lost money didn\'t mean I was wrong with my opinion or couldn\'t have made money. I think years ago it was almost a greed thing in a way cause if i saw 5-1 on a horse looking the best that i would always do a win wager trying to catch that $12 price. I cant even tell you in the past how many times Ive played a 5-1 horse at a track like Fairgrounds and I do win bet and doesn\'t win, but gets 2nd or 3rd and pays $4-$5 to show! Its really unreal. So thru my experience Ive learned that you can actually have the correct horse BUT its how you wager on it that would determine whether you made or lost money.
The best example about how much ROI plays a roll in getting money back would probably be the 2007 Haskell. Any Given Saturday wound up paying $5.60 $4.00 $2.10.. if you notice there is huge difference from his place to show money. Yea in all situations (W-P-S)you would\'ve made money doing any of them but its clear that Curlin was WAAAAY over-bet to show by the public. The win paid slightly more then the place. You wouldve gotten back a %5 ROI to show compared to the %100 place wager! THATS HUGE! The point is that by looking at the Tote Board you wouldve been able to see that the show wager was something to completely stay away from cause chances were Curlin was going to hit the board somewhere and no matter who u bet to show, even if you won the ROI would\'ve been very low. Weighing the tote board money with projected ROI to my handicapping I\'m able to weed in and out certain wagers that don\'t fit the race.
Public money and perception are everything. There is no horse race wagering obviously without pools or money. I think the biggest angle I could give about wagering is that in a majority of races (something like %90+, and I\'m not joking) the public uses the morning line of a race as a basis for how the race should or will run! It seems like, no matter what that ML fave \"opens up\" at with his odds, the money will eventually pour that way as post time gets closer! The other %10 i would say would be a \"betting fave\". Ive actually had people come up to me at the track and say \"LOOK MAN HES 8 TO 1 morning line and now hes 5-2, THEY KNOW SOMETHING\" LOL and i ALWAYS SAY \"Oh the horse knows hes 5-2 so hes going to run good today huh?\" its just silly. %99 of people who wager are clueless! what goes unseen and unspoken is that using the thoros we have a HUGE psychological edge over these people and on the public. That is something to utilize when determining what bet to wager, what horse to wager and what to stay away from!
I use these three things in corporation with my handicapping to determine my race. Ive learned recently for myself that the best way to make money is to seclude myself to ONE race a day (3-4 days a week), do a show wager in which the fave looks like hes not going to run and then walk away hit or miss. The average show fave at an aqueduct track seems to pay around %30-40 ROI from my experience. Clearly, I\'m not betting a fave so I am not getting this ROI. I usually average around %50-70 range. Now this may not seem like a lot but heres the idea..
I spend about $50 average when I go to the track (including sheets, program and gas). So thats an automatic expense and on top of that I need to make up for the takeout for the track I am playing. I tend to stick to NY or Cali tracks since they are the lowest take-outs. )Heres a list btw of the north american track takeouts... http://www.sportsbettingacumen.com/horse-racing-track-takeout-chart.asp ) Anyway, after determining a good race to play and finding out where the public is wrong handicapping and money wise I place a $1000 wager to show. Making $500-700 a day average minus $50 is a damn good living! If i can manage to seclude myself to that situation and hit 3 out 4 races (3 days out of the 4 days) I will able to make about $850-1300 on average or more clean money for the week.
By doing one race, i am showing many important things in what is required to make money in the long run:
1. Discipline/ money management and consistent wagers
2. Patience - with this u cannot go on tilt
3. Focus - on the one race i am playing and have about 50 opportunities using the thoro book and taking the best one to give the best ROI
4. Time- giving myself the time to go through each situation and weed out whats not good.
The only negative thing i do see to this method is not making that big life changing score BUT over time ive been able to raise my wager amounts with profit made and confidence! i actually started doing this with $300-400 show wagers.
I know a lot of peoples mind frames for using the thoros are to weigh out a horses odds against its respective field that race. i dont think its a bad thing at all cause profit is profit but there is a better approach in my opinion:
if you narrow your race to 3 horses (assuming 8 horses)and your getting 10 to 1 win odds on the fastest horse of the 3, the typical player would play that bc according to the thoros you are making out in the long run doing a win wager. I agree with this idea but you are giving yourself only a %33 in this situation. assuming you do win 1 out of 3 times you are making money but about 3.5 to 1 overall profit back cause your going to lose %66 of the time. The idea is that YES this is profit BUT you are getting 3 to 1 on %33 chance each time you wager.
In the same sentence if you narrow your race to 3 your opinion is saying that its a 3 horse race and you are virtually guaranteeing to yourself on paper that the horse will show. You are getting a show price on a 10-1 which is usually %100-150 ROI average(of course check the toteboard for irregular wagering like curlin above) BUT you are giving yourself a %100 chance \"on paper\" to win. YES there is no such thing as %100 BUT with what I personally do all you would need is %75 or more a week (3 out of 4 races a week to SHOW) in order to make money. AND assuming u made %100 ROI at %75 hits with that situation your overall return would be 7.5 to 1 rather than 3.5 to 1 doing the win wager. Youd have a bigger chance to make more money in the long run since you would be giving yourself a large chance to show each race rather than %33 to win. Playing like this will also give you room for error with anything that may happen in the race (bumping, losing the race by a nose, etc) which means u will win more over time.
Guess thats about it Im not trying to sell u guys anything but just giving you my view on what I do and i really appreciate you all giving your feedback! Il be around!
nyc1347
-
As much as I love horse racing and betting, I\'ve learned the hard way that you can NEVER be a winner in the long run- the fact that you are behind the moment you place a bet makes it impossible. You can say the same thing about all casino gambling, of course, but horseplaying is worse because the takeout is so much higher. The more you play,the higher your chance of losing. The folks who can \"make a living\" in horseracing are the trainers, vets, and racetrack employees.Oh, and let\'s not forget the data providers like Thorograph. Wouldn\'t it be wonderful if horse betting was actually possible to come out ahead? It really is the most beautiful and enjoyable way to gamble, just so impossible...
-
Kent,
I have to say that I absolutely disagree with your perspective 1000%. In fact, the only way to win at this game is long term! You can always win or lose any race. But over the long haul if your principles are sound there is no reason why you can\'t beat this game. This is parimutuel gambling, meaning your primary competition is not the house. It is the other betters, just like the stock market. You are absolutely right about the casino though. Unless you can count cards or cheat somehow, you simply can\'t win over the long term. The math is against you. You have got to get lucky to win, and short term is best. Walking up to the blackjack table and betting $1000 on one hand and walking away on matter what happens offers a better chance to win than playing that same bankroll at $10 a crack over time. The fact that casino handle greatly, greatly exceeds horse racing handle world wide shows you how poor a job the equine industry has done at educating the public about the benefits of their product. In fact, many tracks now have to get slots, which we all know are losers, just to compete for gambling handle. Think about that... It\'s kind of like a Dairy Queen owner having to say \"Hey, nobody is buying my ice cream, so I guess I am going to have to start selling frozen cow crap just to bring them in.\"
To JB\'s point, the biggest part of Money Management IS knowing how to bet a race. I guess I should have been a litter clearer about that. How are we going to best leverage our opinions? Do you bet win? Are you going to play in the EX or TRI? Do you go in the multi-race exotics? Do you do it all? Are you going to hedge? The fact is you can go 5-9 at the track and lose money if you bet it wrong, and you can go 1-13 and really be up a lot if you hit a big one. Think about all the people you have seen that do $2 3 horse exacta boxes, hit and wind up losing money on the race when it pays $9.20. Or bet $2 to show on a 25-1 and that runs second and are shocked when it pays $4.80. I see it all the time, and I am glad those people keep coming back to the track.
For me, I\'m usually playing to get at least 3x my money back or I am not playing at all. My hedge bets are not designed to get part or only most of my money back. They are designed to get me a 25-100% return. You will almost never see me do a box of any kind because the payouts are almost never equal both ways so a box does not properly leverage your money. And I have no problem breaking a $500 EX down into fifty $10 tickets to avoid having to claim the winnings if I hit. I will punch out 20, 30, 40 whatever it takes pick 6 tickets rather than playing one or two large tickets that cover the same horses. Same with the Pick 4. I see no reason to have one or two tickets that are playing minor contenders and long shots equally with as many horses as I am playing with the favorites. If the favorite wins I need to hit that Pick 4 mutliple times, or in the 6 I need to be able to spread in another race and hit a bomber to actually collect a decent payout, much less take the whole thing down, etc., etc.
I can also say that in my opinion, perhaps one of the best ways to play the races is not to look for winners. Rather, look for vulnerable favorites or under valued contenders that you think can hit the board. Then figure out if there is a way to leverage those opinions into a bet. This takes much experience and practice. I can say that in large fields or on big race days, the TRI and Super will almost always offer more value than the WIN-PL-SHO. The Tri and EX are also usually better places to hedge than PL or SHO. Right now, overall the Pick 4 seems to offer the most value in racing. And Kent, if you have the bankroll, large Pick 6 carryovers offer a chance to bet into favorable take out situations almost every time they occur. That\'s like someone offering to pay you $1.20 every time you call a coin flip right and charging you $1 every time you get it wrong. I\'d play into that as often as I could, for as much as I could, anytime.
And I would beat that game.
To NYC\'s point, I\'ve talked to a lot of people who grind it out in Show pool day after day. I know it can be done that way. Never was a good fit for me. Just doesn\'t match my personality. I don\'t want to go 2-4 or 3-4 and wind up making a little or even losing. I\'d rather go 1-7 and hit a nice score, but that\'s just me. No right way or long way to win at this.
-
I appreciate your response, but \"do the math\"
The takeout in horseracing is 15-25%, depending on the state and the type of wager you play. In a sense, its like playing musical chairs. There is 15-25% less available to distribute to the winners than should be given out. Over time, it eats you alive!
Casino gambling takeout is sometimes worse (slots) and sometimes much better- Blackjack and craps played the correct way has takeout of 1-3%.
I justify betting on horses because it is a far more interesting and beautiful way to gamble compared to the casino games. Also- someone has to pay for the purchase and maintainence of these magnificent animals!
But honestly, there is no way to make a steady living wage playing the horses in the current regime in the US. Anybody who says different is telling tall tales- or works for the racing industry...
-
Wrong. And one reason (not the only one) is that the serious professional horseplayers (and there are a lot of them) get rebates, so they\'re only playing into 12%, give or take size of handle.
Most of the guys who make a living at this keep a low profile.
-
Thank you to everyone posting on this thread for reinforcing my realization that I am not qualified to be a professional horseplayer. My friend in Paris, Mark Cramer, has pretty much outlined what mjellish said-just too much committment leading to exhaustion. So I will happily keep cutting dogs\'balls off, being a poodle repairman, and playing casually.
-
Sorry to tell you guys:
1)Santa Claus ain\'t real
2)\"Professional\" horseplaying is just as big a myth.
That doesn\'t take away from the fun of betting on the races. I had the best time of my life watching Zenyatta come down the stretch in person last Breeders Cup. But let\'s let the tooth fairy die folks- mathematics makes winning over time impossible in this game. All the discussion about \"pros\" or \"whales\" under the radar making a real living as a horseplayer are just mythological.
People making a living in the racing industry aren\'t the bettors. Just like in Vegas, they have to get the money from somewhere to build all those nice fountains!
I looked closely at the possibility of owning a horse, or perhaps being in an ownership syndicate. I get all the info from West Point, Team Valor.
But then I had a talk with an owner, sitting next to him at the BC. He was pretty blunt about it- horse ownership is a total losing proposition- maybe breeding can come close to breaking even.
So- I continue to follow the DRF and Thorograph websites, and go pretty regularly to Santa Anita. I\'ve realized there is no better sports deal than a box at Santa Anita on a beautiful spring Saturday. You can walk right up to these million dollar beauties, and say hello to the brave jockeys.
Just be realistic about the way your wager money is siphoned off!
If you could eliminate all the takeout, maybe it would be a more interesting betting proposition- but then- how would you keep the sport going?
-
I dislike the take-out in principle, but, it would not be a deterrent to me were I so inclined to try the game as a professional. My own handicapping skills, however are sufficient to keep that vocation at bay. Nonetheless, when I look at the take-out, it is one piece of the pie, and a much bigger piece of it may well be filled by \"contributions\" of the utterly clueless. This is not a level playing field like the roulette table where fate is an equal opportunity abuser. I\'ve stood behind bettors in Vegas, who are poster children for the \"more money than brains\" rubric. With fists full of money they bet tracks they\'ve never even heard of. Yes, the blind squirrel finds the acorn on occasion, but, over time they are simply enlarging the pools at eighty six cents on the dollar, for those who have the savvy and discipline to make the right moves. I can\'t help but think it\'s at least a wash against the track and state rake, but, obviously that\'s much more intuition than empiricism.
-
Smithkent
You, at least to me, draw a murky distiction between \"making a living\" and showing a profit.
I would not offer argument on making a living but your initial post this thread you wrote, in bold type, that players could not be a winner in the long run.
In essence, accusing me, and others of losing money over the long run. Clearly, to me you need to improve your game. Many of us show a profit over the long haul and have the tax returns to prove it. BBB
-
It\'s a popular pastime for failed horseplayers and those on the outside to insist that beating the game can\'t be done.
Most of us here know better. However , except for a very few, the dollars earned per hour spent would probably be in the burger flipper category for many.
Of course, the psychological rewards are infinite.
The takeout only guarantees that horseplayers as a group must lose. The individual can make his own way, though the onerous rake is an impediment even to the highly skilled, else we\'d have long ago retired to Tahiti.
-
To make my point further, take the situation of a takeout rate of 100%. You all would grant me that it is impossible to show a long or short term profit-right?
OK- then howabout takeout of 90%? Perhaps there may be an occasional player who would be a winner, but the far more frequent result is total loss, especially the longer one plays.
OK- now take it to the current 25% takeout. It may seem as if there are some real winners- some of you guys may think you are \"smart\" enough to beat everyone else because you have had some winners. You think your winnings are because of superior skills, or maybe even some luck.
I argue that you all will eventually be totally cleaned out- no matter how smart.
If you look at the stats that honest \"pro\" handicappers post, you will see that their long-term results always end up with a loss of around 25%- whatever the takeout rate is. This is fairly simple mathematics guys.
Now- you may have an occasional big winner- say a guy gets lucky on the pick6. But his win is counterbalanced by the cumulative losses of thousands of others.
There was a large study of many thousands of races that showed the odds of a horse winning were overall reflected in the final odds as determined by the bettors. This shows a generally \"efficient market\".
Now- if you have some inside information- injury, illegal medications, etc- you may be able to get an edge on a particular race. But overall, even if you can occasionally parlay this information, you will still get screwed by the takeout.
I know this line of thinking is heresy on a board like Thorograph. Heck- I buy a fair number of their products, because I enjoy thinking that \"just this one time\' I\'ll end up a winner!
I suppose its human nature to think that you will be different and specially gifted- that you will be smart enough to beat that 25% takeout.
Keep playing- the takeout from your bankroll maintains the view I love at Santa Anita...
-
Again, your argument is based on the assumption that the take-out (which is not 25% on every bet, and the smarter players are quite aware of that) has the same affect in racing as it does in Vegas games of chance (excluding blackjack) where the only determinant is the roll of the dice or the wheel. The odds are not set by the \"house\" in horse racing. They are affected by people who don\'t have the knowledge or skills to make prudent decisions. Often, I am one of them. But, the disciplined pros have an edge, and that edge can overcome the take-out. I have met a few. Some actually make a living doing this, but, it\'s not a recreational pursuit. Others don\'t have the discipline or skill to be successful, or they just flat burn out. But, the fact that some can do it, profitably, shows that it can be done, just as serious card counters can overcome the house edge in blackjack. Unless you\'re betting your house numbers, this is not a random game of chance.
-
Cove,
I read this book recently. It\'s called Horse Players Life at the Track. A very entertaining read by Ted McClelland.
He spent a year at Arlington and Hawthorne here in Chicago and wrote about his experiences gambling and the many \"characters\" and their failures at the track. My common thought while reading the book was \"thank God for these guys\". Some of the decisions that were made as to why a horse would run well were hilarious. Especially when they were using \"inside info\".
Jerry, you\'d be interested to know that Ragozin is mentioned in the book. Not directly but one of the \"guys at the track\" was known for showing up at the post track bar with handfuls of video taped race replays. The writer mentioned that he would go home, watch the races and then figure out what the wind was at O\'Hare and come up with figures based on that.
-
I will also add that on top of all these factors what really puts people who are playing exotic wagers at a big disadvantage is the factor of contradiction. You are literally betting against YOURSELF! Lets say you play an exacta.. not only is the exacta a higher takeout at the track but for the most part people tend to most play different combinations in conjuction with their opinion on the race (straight number combos, boxes, etc..).
Heres an example of what i mean: someone plays a 10 horse race., they make a $1 exacta box wager with 3 horses in this box ($6 wager, 6 combos). lets assume that this person gets back $30, that would be 5 times the money back for a $24 profit. Heres the key.. lets say that this person loses the box but then plays another box for $6 again and this time hits for $30.. this person has won but has spent a total of $12 to get back $30.. 4 to 1 ROI QUICKLY turns into 2.5 times the back with OVERALL investment taken into consideration. When a player wins that 6 horse box, FIVE wagers lose thus making the ROI much lower. I understand that the payoffs arent consistent and the ROI can be compromised with a higher payout.. Im just stating that this is more of an uphill climb for players playing this wager cause the added factor of needing something to pay higher to compromise a higher ROI or to get more money is present.
I take that out in my personal method cause i play one race, one wager, one horse, and take a stance on something i really like. There are many factors into a show bet alone i cant imagine the stress and the adjustments that would have to be made in order to make money in the longhaul doing exotics. Once you lose \"X\" amount of times the player is naturally looking for a bigger score, longer shot wager such as a super (with even more of a chance to lose), a horse with bigger odds and/or handicapping becomes much different. even if we assume a player remains consistent with the approach they have they still have a higher hill to climb to just get money back to even compared to something more simple. Again I know payouts are different but the contradiction, in my opinion, is a silent killer.
Just wanted to add my take on the contradiction aspect of wagers cause I dont think I have ever seen something on here or heard anyone ever talk about that angle with wagering on horses. lemme kno what ya think!
-
Well Kent,
You are entitled to your opinion. But you are just flat out wrong. While I agree that the takeout does need to be overcome, you are forgetting the parimutuel aspect of this sport allows you to do that. It is a completely different form of takeout than what occurs at the casino, where you are actually playing against the house, and your logic is deeply flawed. At the track, you are playing against the other players. Show me a casino game where I am playing against other players and I will bet you that I could figure out a way to beat that game. Are you saying there are no such things as a professional poker players because the rake makes it impossible?
Ludicrous...
There is nothing special about me and I made a living at horse racing. You want to call me a liar then that is your choice, but I have the tax returns to prove what I say. There are other people all over that make a living at the track as well. These are real, walking, talking, breathing human beings that are not named Kaiser Soze. But I guess you are just going to keep saying they don\'t exist anyway.
-
\"There are other people all over that make a living at the track as well\"
Kent/Mjellish
...talk about ludicrous.There is some data which indicates that 97% of all regular horseplayers lose over the long term and the 3% that win have a fair number of rebate whales in their ranks.
People all over making a living at the track, not even close!
Mike
-
SmithKent,
\"I\'ve learned the hard way that you can NEVER be a winner in the long run\"
\"It really is the most beautiful and enjoyable way to gamble, just so impossible\"
We are absolutely entitled to our opinions.We\'re absolutely never correct all
the time.How long exactly is the \"long run\" and is \"so impossible\" more than
just impossible?
mjs
-
Actually, horseracing is in fact a game of chance. The fascinating part of it, which keeps me interested, is that there is a well defined \"market opinion\" available on the tote board- established by thousands of bettors opinions. Study of thousands of races show that the final odds do in fact reflect the probability of a given horse winning are accurately reflected by the odds they eventually go off at.
However- there is a random element to the game- in any given single race, the crowd may be incorrect. We call those underlays or overlays. We spend a lot of time trying to identify those situations, since that is when you can make some money, disproportionate to the odds that are establish by the bettors.
The problem is that you never know in advance whether a given race is going to turn out to be an overlay or not. Only when the race is run do we get to discover whether we were right or not.
Frustrating? Yes. Some people like me find the combination of chance and certainty to be unique, and compelling.
But make no mistake- the longer you play- you *will* end up a loser. The takeout (which can be 17-33%) will eventually get you. Its like the 2nd law of Thermodynamics- everything eventually tends to entropy.
So- if you want to proudly show me your tax returns, I say- Keep your day job friend. Eventually you will be needing it. If you are ahead overall now- consider retiring as a \"pro\" now and count yourself among the lucky...
-
Jack72906 wrote
-------------------------------------------------------------------Not directly but one of the \"guys at the track\" was known for showing up at the post track bar with handfuls of video taped race replays. The writer mentioned that he would go home, watch the races and then figure out what the wind was at O\'Hare and come up with figures based on that.
Jack,
I laughed so hard that I almost cried - this should be reserved for SNL.
-
\"Greatest trick the Devil ever pulled, was getting people to believe he doesn\'t exist.\" Verbel Kint.
-
Lol! I had to look up the passage in the book. Here it is:
\"(Horse Player) banged through the screen door, stepping from the bright summer evening into the saloon dusk from behind a beer belly that could have cushioned a headlong run into a brick wall........
...he gulped his beer and explained that he\'d stayed late at the track to pick up films of that week\'s races. He analyzed them for the Sheets. A service started by Len Ragozin, an ex-communist and professional gambler from NYC....the Sheets attempted to improve on speed figures by taking into account wind resistance, weight, and ground loss....
..he charted every horse\'s trip, collected wind readings from O\'Hare, and reported his findings to NY.
Ted McClelland
Horseplayers
A Life at the Track
-
smithkent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The takeout (which can be 17-33%) will eventually
> get you. Its like the 2nd law of Thermodynamics
No, it\'s not.
Look, you are clearly sour on gambling as a possible way to make a living -- we get that. That\'s your right.
This is quite possibly the most intelligent bunch of horseplayers you will find on the Internet, though, and your attempts to use logic to explain decisions you\'ve made with emotion won\'t fly here. You\'ve had it explained to you in at least 3 different reply posts that takeout in horse racing is in fact a very different animal than casino or lottery takeout...and you\'ve just flat out ignored these explanations, and repeated \"the takeout is going to get you\".
Is it possible that you are being stubborn about this? Or do you just \"know what you know\"?
-
Miff-- 3% of the people who play horses is a REALLY big number-- thousands.
Kent-- I know a way you can make a lot of money. I know a couple of guys who are always looking for bookmakers. They bet a couple of thousand a race. Since there is no shot they can win, why don\'t you match the current rebates they are getting (net takeout about 11%), and book them? You can make a fortune. Let me know.
FYI, some of us rememember the joint that opened in Vegas with a lot of fanfare in the late 80\'s or early 90\'s and was dedicated to just booking horseplayers-- no rebates, no bet too large, they held everything. The guy in charge issued a flat out challenge, saying words almost exactly the same as yours-- you can\'t beat the horses.They got blown out by the pros in less than a year and closed up shop.
It\'s a tougher game now-- we are in the information age. But rebates are the great equalizer. Back when I was an active pro player, I was (for a while) considered number one (I had 18 consecutive winning months at one point). I\'m pretty sure my results would be a lot better if I could devote myself fulltime to handicapping (I work at least 320 days a year running this show), but nowadays I don\'t do well enough to make a living at it-- WITH rebates.
Do pretty well in the real-money contests, though. Not that hard to find the time to focus for two days.
-
If I remember correctly that place was named The Sport of Kings. And yes, they got their clocks cleaned in a hurry.
I\'m done with this thread. It\'s impossible to debate with people that ignore empirical evidence or use flawed logic when formulating their opinions. And it\'s just fine with me if they want to then give other people a bad piece of advice and hope they take it. People can believe whatever they want.
-
A recent book you all will enjoy is \"The Drunkard\'s Walk\". It is a fascinating discussion of the role that randomness plays in our lives. One of the overriding principles is that eventually, there is a regression to the mean. That means that eventually, your good(or bad) fortune will revert to what is mathematically true. In the world of horserace betting, that means you will eventually lose whatever the takeout rate is.
It is in the nature of human beings to live and interpret events in a very anecdotal fashion. Nowhere more do you see this than in the world of handicapping. Great effort is expended to sift through the past results, thinking this will provide the clue as to what will occur in the future. While a fascinating exercise, it is ultimately impossible.
You see the same behavior in stock market predictions. Wise knowing individuals make predictions about future stock behavior, only to be undone by events that were not forseen. They go back to the drawing board, hoping that they will be able use that data to predict the next trend. Really a Sisyphean exercise.
I enjoy the experience of horseracing more than almost any other live sporting event- like I said- I love going to my box at beautiful Santa Anita on the SA Derby day. I always take a fine cigar with my father. A little Jack Daniels with that cigar at the end of the day is a ritual with us. I\'ll be very sad if the political/economic conditions ever take that experience away.
I\'ll leave you guys to the hard work of beating a game that mathematically can\'t be beat. BTW- I have a great day job. I am a practicing physician, have been for 30 years. One thing I can tell you is- getting a good education is one of the best investments I ever made. I\'d tell every one here to take your capital and think about deploying it into a solid education...
-
Miff-- 3% of the people who play horses is a REALLY big number-- thousands.
JB,
Daily players, not occasionals. When the NYRA franchise was up for bid, the lead attorney for one bidding group was a friend. I saw all sorts of data re racing(tons) produced by consulting firms. One report put the \"daily\" player at less than 28% of the whole but no figs were shown.
I don\'t know one player and I know many many high rollers/whales who are NOT beating the game without a rebate.For the purpose of this conversation,the guys who are beating the game WITHOUT a rebate are few and far in between and no way there are thousands.
Mike
-
I crushed my MCAT and got accepted to med school, UW Wisconsin and Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, and never went to either. I consider myself better off for that.
Not sure what your point is.
-
Kent-- I\'ve told the story about the jumping frog here before (frog with 3 legs jumps 3 feet, etc.). See if you can find it. Then read your first paragraph again.
It actually scares me that someone who wrote that paragraph is a doctor, no kidding. (Big hint-- your mean and my mean are not the same).
By your logic, even if only one person was clocking the races, and everyone else was betting without knowing the times of races,he couldn\'t win-- can\'t beat the take, you know.
-
That was awesome--thanks!
Leamas
-
This is an awesome post MJ. I doubt you recall, but I asked you about wager construction shortly after you crushed the BB Derby and how you allocated funds. The money management, handicapping and luck percentages you state here (while I\'m sure approximate) are super helpful to me in better understanding the way the pros formulate this. Of course, I couldn\'t agree more with whoever posted about betting strategy. I read Crist\'s book \"Exotic Betting\" last year and it\'s enlightening to say the least. I\'m sure it is something to which I will continually refer.
I\'ve played craps for about 15 years now, so I\'ve got the money management thing down, just need to keep honing my handicapping skills and betting strategies and almost everyone here has helped me in one form or another to that end - so thanks!
On a totally separate note, I tend to only play the triple crown, BC races and a bunch of other NY races (live in NY). I don\'t know if this is possible or even realistic, but if TG had a mechanism on the site that indicated, for example, that the sheets for today\'s card at Oaklawn are showing a solid pattern for a horse that\'s likely going to be overlooked by the public, it would definitely entice me to get more involved. (Not that it is even remotely about me, but perhaps there are others who would also \"get more involved\"). Apologies if this is something that has been previously discussed or sounds pedantic in any way, it\'s only meant as an idea to get more people more involved in the game.
-
Being that there are soooo many different angles to approach a race and that public money is a huge factor into betting a race i couldnt imagine anything but one mechanism that would exist to allow a secluded offer thru this site. beauty is in the eye of the beholder and just because a certain pattern exists with the fastest horse or best horse in form or whatever you are looking for doesnt mean a person would even wager on it.
the only thing i can possibly imagine is maybe an opportunity through a customized thoro pattern percentage statistic. something being offered such as:
a page on this site allowing a random person to choose a custom situation within the thoro percentages (top %, pair %, off% and X%) and leaving an email (such as thoro-track) so that they can be informed of their customized thoro statistic.
example: Person A goes on the web page made on this site, choose that they want a horse to have a minimum of 100 starts with a %40 Pair(min)and %20(min) within the percentages stat, and then getting informed thru email that this situation exists giving the person the option to purchase the race at $5.
my opinion in this case is that its really not even worth it.. it makes no sense either because even if a horse has these percentages to pair or run a new top, it doesnt mean its even competitive within the field its running against in that given race. Plus, its a pain in the ass to even set up and theres no edge whatsoever involved without the many other factors involved such as ROI, toteboard action, etc..
-
Everything else aside, George would shoot me if I asked him to program that, so there wouldn\'t be any more figures.
-
Of course it\'s easy for me to lob in \"suggestions\" from the cheap seats! I for one don\'t want George being overworked or shooting anyone - least of all, you! NYC - thanks for the thoughtful response - I agree that there are LOTS more factors one would evaluate and I suppose such a thing would be far more \"marketing\" than gambling edge, but for the occasional, casual player like me, I have overweight a bet when I saw the TG analysis showing an \"A\" for confidence and that was sort of the angle I was going for. Some kind of \"signal\" that there\'s an \"A\" out there instead of a \"B\" - but of course, the second that worked (if at all) with any consistency, it would cease to be profitable. I think the Jet\'s victory is affecting my brain - I\'m having a tough time digesting the win (despite being ecstatic).
-
no problem man, in my opinion, there are only \"A\"\'s and \"F\"\'s within the same race you are handicapping.. those 2 letters are the only ones you should be using in my opinion bc the specific wager you are making will either win or lose and that is all that matters with this game when putting money up. An \"A\" \"B\" \"C\" or D\" point of view with handicapping and placing a certain wager will always receive an \"A\" of \"F\" result.
The only thing seperating an A or B rating as an example is a percentage that has NOTHING to do with ROI! you could have A information and win 9 out of 10 times but lose money overall on that 10th time. on the reverse you may have C information giving you 3 out of 10 wager winners and you can be up money... and vice versa. The point is that every situation presents a new opportunity. Weigh out your bet options with your opinions and ROI and take things step by step.
Also, in my opinion, the Jets should Bounce next week =D
-
This game is so difficult to beat, most are either incapable of doing so or throw in the towel long before they develop the knowledge and skills to do so. Most of those that eventually beat the game limit it to hobby status because they can make more money doing other things with less effort.
I think you have to make a distinction between winning and making a living. I know a lot of winners (myself included). I only know two people that made a living for an extended period of time. Both eventually burnt out and one got a job.
This is the problem.
Assume you find 150 races per year at your track where the public makes a huge mistake that you can exploit. You bet $200 per race. You\'d put 30K through the windows. No matter how selective and skilled you are, your ROI will not be high enough to make anything close to a living even though you are winning player.
To make a living you\'d have to be much less selective, accept much narrower edges (which in turn raises volatility), raise your bet size sharply, and follow other tracks in an effort to get massively more money through the windows. All of that involves extra work, extra stress, a larger bankroll, and at some tracks after a certain point you might even be playing a self defeating game by impacting your own price with the larger bets. It makes no sense to try to make a living playing horses unless you have no monetary alternatives.
Every winner I know finds their own balance between horses, personal life, career, family etc.. that works best for them and horses are usually low in the pecking order.
-
Good memory...it was called \"The Sport of Kings\" and was in a separate location (not adjacent to any of the casinos)..lasted less than 18 months!
John