From: olsonb@mac.cc.macalstr.edu
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Re: Horse racing
Date: 8 Apr 92 22:07:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: mac.1992Apr8.160710.2397

In article <167C2A03A.D1SAR@AKRONVM.UAKRON.EDU>, D1SAR@AKRONVM.UAKRON.EDU (Steve Rimar) writes:
> I have two questions for the handicapiers out there.
> 1. What are some of your methods for selecting and betting the ponies.

The best advice I have is to pick up a copy of Andy Beyer's "Picking Winners."
It's the best book for horseplayers I've seen.  He talks about nearly all
selection criteria: how to judge past performances, class, track bias, 
change of equipment, workouts, breeding, trainer, jockey, and of course
(his favorite and mine) SPEED FIGURES!  He's also a great writer -- really
entertaining -- and gives good tips on weighing the various criteria.

I usually get a paper the night before and plan to spend at least a couple
hours on it.  I used to read the Daily Racing Form, but if they've got
an edition of the Racing Times near you, I suggest that.  If you've been
using the DRF, it takes a bit of getting used to, but IMHO it's worth it.
The workout times are more accurate (from what I hear), the race time and
workout times are to 1/100th of a second (you decide whether that's important
to you), and of course, the Times has the official ANDY BEYER SPEED FIGURES,
and MUCH better trip notes (Paul Corman (sp?) does them in New York at
least -- not sure about the rest of the country).  They also break down
the horse's record into "record at this distance" "Record at this track"
and "record this year."

I usually go through and eliminate horses first.  While there are *always*
exceptions, I'm likely to throw out a horse who

*  has lost it's last 6 or 7 races (this is ESP. true for maiden races
   where a horse has been running second for the last several trips out.
   Some would say the horse is due -- i'd say the horse has a psychological
   aversion to crossing the finish line first ;-)
*  hasn't run in 3 months (unless it has GREAT workouts)
*  is obviously in over its head (i.e., has been running 15000 Claiming
   races and is now in a 32000 Allowance)
*  Has speed figures consistently below the competition.
*  Has Corey Black in the saddle  :^)
*  Is running on the turf (or dirt) for the first time.
*  Is running a long race for the first time.

On the flip side, I keep an eye out for horses who

*  Are one off a layoff (i.e., they had taken a long rest, and have 
   ridden once recently since then -- esp. if they seemed to be 
   running well in the last race).
*  Is dropping in class (but not too far -- that could be a sign there
   is something wrong).
*  Has speed figs higher than the competition, or where the speed 
   figs have been *steadily* improving.
*  Finished well in spite of a difficult trip the last time out (this
   is where the Times's trip notes can make a real difference).
*  has been improving steadily in workouts.
*  Has (had) Angel in the Saddle at Saratoga, or Pat Day at the Jim Beam,
   or Diane Nelson in the 9th race anywhere  :^)

Other things to consider in reading the PPs:

If there are two or more horses who consistently take the lead early, 
they might wear each other other.  Look for a good closer.

When I get it narrowed down to a few, my last determiner is usually
Beyer's speed figs.

Once you get to the track, be sure to watch for changes.
I.e., BAR SHOE ON -- that horse is gunna LOSE, and that's a fact!
      BAR SHOW OFF -- that horse is going to run better than it has
                      in a long time!

It's also a good idea to get to the paddock and look at them before you
bet.  They're necks should be up, their ears perked, if it's cold and
they;re sweating, that's bad (in the summer, this is tough to judge).
Tom Ainsle recently co-authored (with a woman whose name escapes me) a 
book about looking at horses.  FASCINATING stuff.  The theory being
you can tell, by looking, is a horse is angry, depressed, nervous, 
excited, or ready.  Can't think of the name of the book -- but definitely
worth reading as well.

> 2. What is doseage and how is it calculated and used?

Truth is, I don't know nearly enough about this to justify the degree of
sh?t I give it.  Seems to me a method of self-fulfilling prophesy.
As I understand, it doesn't really "pick" winners, more like eliminates
losers.  And the criteria and scale changes over time, so that, for
example, a horse might not qualify this year, but two years from now
they'll look back, change the scale, and say "see, we were right again."

I, too, would be interested in more details from anyone who knows.
I may be skeptical, but still (relatively) open-minded.
At least I'll try  ;^)

> Thanks to everyone that replies.
>  
> Steve

Good Luck!

/beth
***
"A bad day at the track is better than a good day anywhere else"
                                                -Andy Beyer
***