The other frontier we never adequately address

[Tim Y]

I have a good friend who is a competent gambler but his forte is
cards. We often run into one another at the racino and he has been
very interested in the way the program works, BUT is all the time
telling me: "That (racing) is too much work! Learn to read these
suckers who come into the card room after watching the world series of
poker on the tube for a few weeks and thinking that they are going to
make a killing. It is like candy and the proverbial baby."

I asked for some pointers and after getting the basics of the program
(which he finds fascinating) he gave me a D+ on profiting from the
pre-bet knowledge. "You have the potential to make a killing there but
you are squandering it by not expanding your coverage of possible
wagers in the exotic, and place markets. If I had the discipline and
record keeping abilities that you have there, I would be profiting a
lot more than you do. IT IS NOT THE MODE of the game, but
understanding the profit in the game that you still need to master."

With that, he volunteered to be a wagering coach..Let's see what happens.

[Jonathan Steele]

Your friend is very astute. Exotic bets are were the profits are at; especially in the Superfecta.

I look forward to learning any new insights.

Regards,

Jon

[clore1030]

That should be illuminating Tim, I look forward to future posts on the subject. I'm fairly decent at picking winners, and at knowing when to pass.

But my weak point has always been in plotting exotics. I used to chase them, and hit once in a while, but not enough, and by not backing the winner in side bets. I decided after much record keeping that I was better off, and more focused when I handicapped to win. In that regard, I should play more doubles, but most of the time I can't find two consecutive races worth an investment.

Even now, on those occasions that I back two horses, I have a stronger feeling about one of them. The second bet is more of an insurance policy.

[Jonathan Steele]

"But my weak point has always been in plotting exotics."

If you only use Sartin Methodology-based computer software, you will not be able to do so. At least not consistently. At least I have not been able to. That may be the reason for your weak play, provided you are proficient at structuring exotic bets, and your only problem lies with just not being able to correctly identify (consistently) that group of horses that finish in the money and fourth place (superfecta).

It is my opinion, you need to use some "mainstream" handicapping procedures in concert with Sartin Methodology to consistently identify those horses. At least that has been my experience. Especially if you concentrate on lower class tracks with less consistent (read: ailing) horses.

My suggestion is that you first analyze the race using your Sartin program of choice. Then again, using your "mainstream" handicapping methods to see if any contradictions exist.

Remember, I am strictly talking about exotic wagers like trifectas, and especially, superfectas. Successful win/place betting is a given when using proven Sartin Methodology.

My personal experience with exotic wagers confirms the value of trainer stats, angles, and speed figures to identify those in the money and fourth place finishers those times the program doesn't.

If someone can show me how to do so using only using Sartin Methodology software, say for example Val4, then that would surely take less mental energy and be a real time saver.

Regards,

Jon

[clore1030]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Steele

"But my weak point has always been in plotting exotics."

If you only use Sartin Methodology-based computer software, you will not be able to do so. At least not consistently. At least I have not been able to. That may be the reason for your weak play, provided you are proficient at structuring exotic bets, and your only problem lies with just not being able to correctly identify (consistently) that group of horses that finish in the money and fourth place (superfecta).

It is my opinion, you need to use some "mainstream" handicapping procedures in concert with Sartin Methodology to consistently identify those horses. At least that has been my experience. Especially if you concentrate on lower class tracks with less consistent (read: ailing) horses.

My suggestion is that you first analyze the race using your Sartin program of choice. Then again, using your "mainstream" handicapping methods to see if any contradictions exist.

Remember, I am strictly talking about exotic wagers like trifectas, and especially, superfectas. Successful win/place betting is a given when using proven Sartin Methodology.

My personal experience with exotic wagers confirms the value of trainer stats, angles, and speed figures to identify those in the money and fourth place finishers those times the program doesn't.

If someone can show me how to do so using only using Sartin Methodology software, say for example Val4, then that would surely take less mental energy and be a real time saver.

Regards,

Jon

Actually, I pretty much shy away from the bottom 2 or 3 claiming levels. At 25K or more is where I've had my best success.

Long ago, I tracked my results in handicapping 1,000 claiming races. This took me several years to do, and it was back in the days when the DRF cost a dollar. I also compiled a data base of angles that I hoped to use to my advantage.

Back then, a lot of systems would tout playing drop downs, so that was one of my researched angles, as was the converse - the horse going up. My stats showed that 27% of the horses that won were drop downs, but even more important to me was that 26%, an almost equal figure, was class-climbers. But they paid much more on average, so that became one reason for me to avoid the lower claiming ranks, since there was no room to go up.

I'm not really too interested in exotics presently, other than daily doubles and I don't find many situations where I'm playing consecutive races. I'm probably too conservative in my play, but I'm also relaxed in it. Just looking for winners may narrow my focus, but it also doesn't complicate my perspective and I'm not spending half my waking hours compiling stats as I used to do.

These days I am pretty much wedded to software as my eyes are not getting any better and using the DRF started to become fatiguing and that in turn affected my handicapping. It just wasn't the same anymore when i had to use a magnifying glass to read the DRF, but I still buy it on the days of the big events such as the Derby or Breeders Cup.