View Single Post
Old 11-19-2016, 07:01 AM   #13
Tim Y
turf historian
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,596
Wagers SHOULD be based on CLOSING ODDS, at least that is the way I have played the game since the middle 70's. One can only suggest where the overlays will be, but they MAY, or MAY not, meet the criteria for a GOOD WAGER as opposed to being a logical HANDICAPPING choice. Exotics are less dependent on them as the order of finish can negate them.

This game has TWO sides: Prioritizing the animals based upon LOGICAL aspects as to what your records show work at a particular track, surface or class, and THEN, WHOLLY DIFFERENT, is the evaluation of the MARKET offered on those initial assertions.

The TWO sides can ONLY be rectified at the time of the race. It is folly to suggest that anytime more than about 2 minutes before the race, ANYONE can logically and repeatedly point out the possible OVERLAYS in that contest as the crowd probabilities (odds) are in flux. A great theoretical wager on Friday evening may be a total underlay come post time Saturday.

ANYONE who is proficient at the game in the long run, realizes this dichotomy and waits for his/her spot, rather than stick with possible underlays that may well reflect proper handicapping for that race.

Handicapping is NOT wagering. Wagering is NOT handicapping. They require completely different modus operandi (like the old idea of left brain right brain functions). The TYPE of wager on any particular race is arrived at differently based upon the odds of that contest. Those odds are NOT available well in advance of the race.

My only adversary is the CROWD and how they see the contest relative to my interpretation. They have no idea that randomness is controlling their outcomes.

Last edited by Tim Y; 11-19-2016 at 07:03 AM.
Tim Y is offline   Reply With Quote