Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Wild Again

Pages: [1] 2
1
Ask the Experts / Re: All sorts of nuggets in this indictment
« on: March 10, 2020, 04:15:35 PM »
Sheep Collagen was contained in the cocktail Bill Romanowski used to prolong his career in the NFL.

According to Romanowski, sheep collagen has an effect on endurance and strength.

So if Sheep Collagen was the only thing used by Navarro and Servis, where is the crime?  I cannot fathom a law specifically banning this substance.

The problem with enforcement is the criminals if smart enough will always be 2 steps ahead of the regulators.

So other than a horse being under 24 hour surveillance, how do you stop cheating?

If money is involved people will always try to cheat.

2
Ask the Experts / Re: Man Bites Dog
« on: May 14, 2018, 11:08:36 AM »
I would like to ask a hypothetical question.

Assuming you have a perfect odds line 100% correct.

You are faced with a 20-1 who you believe wins the race 1 out of 10 times.
Or in other words, the horse is 20-1 but should be 9-1.
Also assume the odds will not go lower after you have made your bet and all the other horses in the race are fairly priced.

How much do you bet?  As a % of bankroll and as a multiple of your bet size?

As I believe this is the most important wagering question. Any help would be appreciated. And is a question I haven\'t been able to answer in 45 years.

Thanks

John Perona

3
Ask the Experts / Re: Man Bites Dog
« on: May 13, 2018, 09:47:21 PM »
Unless I am very mistaken Instilled Regard was given by someone on this board as a wet horse move up.

So the discussion of Instilled Regard may be pertinent.

Just sayin. And if it was never mentioned and I imagined it, I apologize in advance.

Regarding the 4-5 coin toss bet, read up on the idea of Gambler\'s Ruin.
Your statement is not as simple as you make it out to be.

The Kelly criteria was theorized invented choose whichever word is best for you, to explain a set of circumstances where betting plus expected value can still lead to the Gambler\'s Ruin.

The problem with horse racing is it is almost impossible to have enough information to know 100% the correct amount to bet.

Or in other words it is very hard to maximize your play.

To the thorograph board this may be an assertion as I have presented neither the science nor the history of the Kelly criteria but if you are really that curious I suggest you do your own research.

You might be pleasantly surprised.

Thanks

John Perona

4
Ask the Experts / Re: This is What Man O'War Looked Liked
« on: March 31, 2017, 07:25:03 PM »
Thank You for posting the Meydan numbers.

After looking at the superhorse\'s sheet it kinda makes me wonder?

Does anyone else feel that way?

A 9 point move and no reaction

Just wondering.

5
Ask the Experts / Flora Dora
« on: July 24, 2016, 12:44:46 PM »
Don\'t discount the Flora Dora
6 ounces Ginger Beer
3 Ounces Hendricks Gin
2 Ounces Blackberry Syrup

It\'s very very nice.

If you are a Gin Drinker make it 4 ounces of Hendricks.

Enjoy

John

6
Ask the Experts / Lani FWIW
« on: June 10, 2016, 04:06:40 PM »
I don\'t know if this true, but my wife of all people saw a Belmont preview featuring Lani.

The gist of the preview; the surface at Belmont is the same as the racing surfaces in Japan,Lani did not take to the track for the Derby or Preakness; Lani loves Big Sandy, Lani wins the Belmont.

Could this be true.

Thanks

John Perona

7
Ask the Experts / Re: Computer-Robotic Wagering
« on: November 21, 2015, 12:41:05 PM »
Rocky

I\'m not throwing stones.  As far as the gambler is concerned, horse racing is not a zero sum game.

It is a negative sum game.  The takeout is deducted from the pool.

The difference between a zero sum game where the computer robotic wagering systems have a slight edge thru ability to place bets late and a negative sum game where they receive a rebate and can always act last is a considerable difference.

While all my words may be assertions i.e. I have no proof.  If it walks like a duck, and it talks like a duck, it ain\'t a mongoose.

Computer Assisted Batch Wagering is bad for me. A small time recreational player.

Thanks

John Perona

8
Ask the Experts / Re: Computer-Robotic Wagering
« on: November 20, 2015, 12:47:29 AM »
Mr Chandler

The tone of your answer speaks to me.  It tells me you have a dog in the fight and seek to sway opinion.  It also causes me to mistrust what you say.  I thought computer assisted wagering was something that gave and edge to some and takes edge away from me, and now I believe it more so.

Maybe you could try again to convince me I am wrong and net net it is actually a positive for recreational players like me.

Thanks In Advance

John Perona

9
Ask the Experts / Re: How much would 8% takeout move the handle?
« on: September 24, 2015, 11:06:35 PM »
Mike

Substitute Cantebury for Any Track USA, The reality is the game can only continue if the takeout is less.  How we get their is one question the other question do we get their or does the game die.

I\'ve played for close to 40 years the track was the ONLY place my entire family was happy.  It had something for everyone.

The only way change can come is if the players demand the change.

The only way to demand change is thru your actions.

Somebody needs to lead.  And the rest of us need to follow.  

Some might think the leading is the hard part, it isn\'t.  The hard part is following.

If anyone wants to approach any track and offer them an increase in handle on the condition that if the increase in handle comes, they will lower their take to 8% for the next meet I would play their exclusively.  Whats the worse that can happen.  They change their mind.  Then we call it quits.  We admit defeat and start playing poker.

From what I understand this board has a following of industry insiders.

Its time for one of them to step up and lead.

Thanks

John Perona

10
Ask the Experts / Re: How much would 8% takeout move the handle?
« on: September 23, 2015, 11:00:37 PM »
Mr Brown

We spoke about 10 or 11 years ago when I bet on horses seriously.
My group and I bet about $15,000 per week in the good old days.  And in the real good old days a little bit more.

In 2014-2015 I played almost every day of Gulfstream bet about $150-$200 per day.  It was just for fun, give me something to do during the afternoons.

Once Gulfstream closed I played maybe 10 or 12 times DMR SAR MTH.
Again Maybe $150-$200 per day but without a doubt not more.

If you can convince Cantebury to have an 8% take and a wagering menu almost identical to Gulfstreams maybe I start betting serious again.

And that is how you convince the other tracks to do what we want.  You put your money where your mouth is.

F the rebate shops; the same take for everybody, let the better man win that\'s the American Way.

Thanks

John Perona

11
Ask the Experts / Re: 10X worse than the Lasix issue!
« on: May 22, 2012, 01:39:42 PM »
About 30 years ago their was an article in American Turf Monthly about a couple of wise guys who \"fixed\" a 6 horse race at Charles Town in much the same way as this race was \"fixed\".

Only difference was the end result.  The bettors got what was coming to them but it wasn\'t money.

Thanks

Wild Again

12
Ask the Experts / Re: Letter to Cuomo
« on: May 17, 2012, 01:00:57 PM »
From all of the very informed posts the problem is evident.

Not enough money.

Not enough money to enforce the rules.

Not enough money returned to the owners.  Purse money doesn\'t cover expenses.

Not enough money returned to the bettors.  Take out is too high.

Not enough money returned to the owners of the racetracks.  If I\'m not mistaken Gareden State Park was demolished and sold for the value of the land.

Maybe racing needs to fail.  And only through this failure can it be rejiggered into a succesful format.

Thanks

Wild Again

13
Ask the Experts / Re: Mike Smith
« on: May 05, 2012, 08:48:46 PM »
I don\'t know what your point is because I am on my 9th rum punch; but Mike Smith is the best jockey in the world right now.

Bar none. take it to the bank.

Thanks

Wild Again

14
Ask the Experts / Re: Creative Cause rumours
« on: May 04, 2012, 12:57:43 PM »
15% = 6.5 to 1

6.5 to 1 to run a zero.

You will get at least 15 to 1.

Easy bet.

Thanks

Wild Again

15
Ask the Experts / Re: Creative Cause rumours
« on: May 04, 2012, 12:31:20 PM »
Creative Cause is only an easy toss if you are using something other than the numbers to handicap.

8 weeks since the second fastest #.

Intervening race.

Generous odds.

Whats not to like.

Yeah Yeah Yeah 15%.

The real question is what does the pattern yield for stakes quality horses.

Go Creative Cause.

Thanks

Wild Again

Pages: [1] 2