Short handicapping lesson

[fjh513]

New member and a relative newcomer to horseracing...

With the season just around the corner here in NJ, I need to revamp my handicapping "skills" and sure could use help. I haven't had much luck in the past. My bets are mostly exacta / tri boxes, and I also enjoy playing rolling pick 3's,with one race being a single to keep the costs manageable.
I would like to ask you guys /girls how you narrow the field when looking over a race. How do you toss out the non-contenders ?
Is there a quick "system" you use that makes you focus on horses you like in that race ? something that can be done in the time between races ?
I appreciate you help and good luck with your picks.

[SOREHOOF]

Brad Free's book Handicapping 101 will show you how to read the form. Steven Crist's Exotic Betting may give you some insights into constructing a wager. Time and money are all you need. Maybe some luck to go with it! There is barely enough time to get a beer between races so do most of your work the day before. Use the time between races to watch the board and meet people.

[dellinger63]

Toss anything Mike Smith is riding. Seriously you can pace out a race and if you anticipate a faster than normal pace look to eliminate the weak front types and vice versa for a slower than normal anticipated pace look to get rid of the weak deep closers. That's a start.

[Grits]

I need to revamp my handicapping "skills" and sure could use help. I haven't had much luck in the past. My bets are mostly exacta / tri boxes, and I also enjoy playing rolling pick 3's,with one race being a single to keep the costs manageable.

FJH, my immediate thought regarding your question is not how contenders are eliminated but that your handicapping skills are still in the stages of infancy.

The reason you are having so little luck is you are concentrating on exotic wagering. Unless you are capable of picking winners, it is doubtful that you'll have success in hitting trifectas, where you choose from a field of 10 which horses have the possibility of getting a piece, running 2nd and 3rd. These wagers, and pic 3 wagers get quite expensive, and can eat your bankroll in a New York minute.

If one cannot pick winners, one is going to have an even harder time ferreting out horses that will hit the board. So, in that respect you are ripping a lot of losers. Instead of this, for a while--make your choice and bet them to win.

Horserace handicapping is an ongoing skill of one's own learning and experience involving arduous tasks everyday. And there are NO shortcuts. None, absolutely. You take shortcuts, you're losing.

Stay at it, but take the time involved to learn it properly.

[robfla]

i'm not a fan of exacta or tri-boxes. i'd much rather key. you can use more horses or cut down the cost.

for example:
TRI BOX 12345 = $60

KEY #1 WITH 2345 then 2345/1/2345 then 2345/2345/1 = $36

OR

add an extra horse same price

1/23459/23459 THEN 23459/1/23459 THEN 23459/23459/1 = $60


my 2 cents

[MisterB]

One suggestion is, don't hop around attempting to bet all over the country. Stick to one track. Don't try to cap maidens, firsters, of bottom claimers at first. Look for races more predictable based on form, workouts, and class. Win bets is my recommendation. If you have some friends, pool some cash, and spread on P3's. They will have the most value for your cash.

Don't try to use to many variations of capping. Find what works best for you, and work around that. Way to much stuff out there that only clogs the mind up.

[SOREHOOF]

One quick system that I can't bring myself to use but it hits a lot.... Tri box (I don't like boxes either) the inside 3 horses on the Inner Dirt going 2 turns no matter how horrible thier running lines look or even if Mike Smith is riding. It's amazing how often this hits. But hurry, only a couple weeks left on the Inner!

[fjh513]

Thanks to all who posted they're thoughts so far. Hope it doesn't seem like I am looking for the lazy way out... just something to help get me started in the right direction.
I'll concentrate my efforts on picking A winner.The idea was to try and cover more of the field with the exacta & tri's...faulty thought process from the start.
Seems to be some very knowleable people posting in the Selections thread,I'll spend some time there also and try to understand the logic behind the picks.

[Grits]

Originally Posted by fjh513

Thanks to all who posted they're thoughts so far. Hope it doesn't seem like I am looking for the lazy way out... just something to help get me started in the right direction.
I'll concentrate my efforts on picking A winner.The idea was to try and cover more of the field with the exacta & tri's...faulty thought process from the start.
Seems to be some very knowleable people posting in the Selections thread,I'll spend some time there also and try to understand the logic behind the picks.

No, your thinking is in no way faulty Fjh, its just more advanced for someone relatively new to the game. That's all.

Try looking at possibly 3 horses in the 2-1 to 4-1 range only, and go from there. And don't feel the need to bet each and every race. That may prove more successful for you in these early stages. (These are ideas that have been given to me, as I in turn, give them to you.)

[pointman]

Agree with sticking to winners, Andy Beyer has a good book as well, I think it is called Picking Winners. Love the toss Mike Smith angle.

[jman5581]

Originally Posted by fjh513

My bets are mostly exacta / tri boxes, and I also enjoy playing rolling pick 3's,with one race being a single to keep the costs manageable.
I would like to ask you guys /girls how you narrow the field when looking over a race. How do you toss out the non-contenders ?
Is there a quick "system" you use that makes you focus on horses you like in that race ? something that can be done in the time between races ?

You should do what the others are saying and focus on trying to get the hang of picking the winner. It'll be much easier to string together some exotics without boxing the field if you can get to a point where you're fairly confident that the horse you pick on top is going to be in the running for the win.

As far as a way to narrow down the field, do this...look at what the horse has done in the past...primarily, I mean distance. Has the horse won at that distance? If so, don't toss him. If the horse has never tried the distance or has and didn't get in the money, toss it. Not 100%, but I guarantee you it's going to get you off of a bunch of losers. In general, don't trust horses to do things that haven't proven they can do. What they've done in the past is the best indication of what they'll do in the future. Don't try to make a story for a horse, make a case against it. Look at this way, if a horse has won at the distance it's running today, you're not making a case FOR that horse, you're simply finding it hard to make a case AGAINST that horse. It is easier to make a case AGAINST a horse that hasn't run the distance or has but has never placed. This is the easiest system I know of to make it easier to narrow down a field. Wouldn't work on the Kentucky Derby, but when you find a system that does......let me know. Other than that, if you having a problem trying to narrow down, let the race do it for you by picking some races that have small fields...obviously it's easier to pick from 6 or 7 than it is 10 or 12 (just generally speaking). Hope that helps.

[brianwspencer]

Bet the gray.

[POINTGIVEN1985]

i consider myself a good turf handicapper i will always go on the internet the night before i plan on going to otb or the track or whatever and find turf races that i want to bet, i do not like betting claimers, i agree with the poster earlier who said at first dont bet maidens and cheap claimers, if i were you i would start with allowance and stakes races, allowance/optional claiming is ok you will find some hard knockers in those races, depending on where you are i wouldn't start off by betting ny breds or cal breds or any state breds, i would just look for open company stakes or allowance races.

[jman5581]

Originally Posted by POINTGIVEN1985

i do not like betting claimers, i agree with the poster earlier who said at first dont bet maidens and cheap claimers, if i were you i would start with allowance and stakes races, allowance/optional claiming is ok you will find some hard knockers in those races, depending on where you are i wouldn't start off by betting ny breds or cal breds or any state breds, i would just look for open company stakes or allowance races.

PG1985, to be clear, I'm not trying to pick on you....I've seen a few people post this on here. What's the big deal about betting claiming races?? I have always found them just as "game" as the stakes. If anything, the stakes/allowances/handicaps tend to be deeper, more contentious fields. Granted, the studs of the sport race in stakes which gives them a degree of predictability, but the information you use to look at a stakes race is, for the most part, the same as what a player looks at to play claimers. In fact, one might argue that after getting some familiarity with a track and the trainers/jocks/owners, claimers are as suitable to play as any.

[jman5581]

and, I might add, a basic familiarity with the economics of the sport...but, really once you've got a handle on that, claiming races can be great wagers. And, if anyone is going to play, he better damn well learn to play claimers because that's by far the majority of races available to bet on...unless someone does like you do PG and play only turf races, which I've found to be the most volatile of any surface to play on.

[miraja2]

Here is my pithy piece of advice: Bet the race, not the horse.
Here is what I mean:
Look at all the pp and try to visualize how the race is going to play out. Who is going to be on the lead? Will there be a battle on the front end? Who might get caught wide? New people sometimes make the mistake of always betting on the best horse in the race! Sounds stupid right? Well a lot of times the best horse in the race is not a smart play for any number of reasons such as:
1) The pace scenario won't fit the horse.
2) The horse is likely to get caught wide.
3) The race is not at the horse's best distance.
4) The horse should be a solid 2/1 favorite but is instead at 3/5.
etc.
Take your time with each race and try to figure it out.
Then, after you lose, , look at the race again. This is key. You will learn a lot by looking at the horses (that you tossed) that just won. Occasionally the horse will really just have come out of nowhere, but more often than not you will see that you overlooked something. This will help your handicapping immensely.

[POINTGIVEN1985]

Originally Posted by jman5581

and, I might add, a basic familiarity with the economics of the sport...but, really once you've got a handle on that, claiming races can be great wagers. And, if anyone is going to play, he better damn well learn to play claimers because that's by far the majority of races available to bet on...unless someone does like you do PG and play only turf races, which I've found to be the most volatile of any surface to play on.

i dont only play turf but i do look online every night for the turf races for the next day , im in ny so there is no turf at this time of year i look at fairground, gulfstream, tampa bay, and santa anita, i think im a better turf handicapper, and as for the claimers its just a opinion if you just bet stakes and the nice allowances that you can find any day at the nyra track of florida or cali then i think you will do better, i could be wrong some ppl might like the claimers better, but i know for me when im looking to spot play 1 horse on a given day and make a big win place bet, i know it wont be in a claiming race, never.

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Here is my pithy piece of advice: Bet the race, not the horse.

This is great advice...

[blackthroatedwind]

Wait a sec....I just responded to a post that no longer exists?

Should I look for it in Narnia?

[fjh513]

Sorry about that. My mistake...I thought I'd start a new thread so people didn't have to wade through the first set of responses.