Gentlemen;
I read your analysis comments regarding Warleigh. He was rated A- at 4-1 or better.
I personally thought Warleigh was an \"A\" play at 9-5 or better. My question is not should Warleigh be played at 4-1 or 9-5; but if one looks for 4-1 on plays such as Warleigh how many plays in a week do you think you will get?
My experience playing 1 track per day, indicates that in a weeks time I find only 1 play per week where I have an advantage in speed, and pattern, and a significant advantage in odds. At best 2 plays per week.
Thank You
Cozzene
I didn\'t handicap that race, but I can respond in general about my own play.
Naturally, the higher your standards for value, the fewer bets you will get.
IMO, most profitable prossional bettors get most of their profits from a relatively small percentage of all the bets they make in a year. They just don\'t know it. A lot of the time they are either spinning money through the windows with little or no edge or actually losing a little money.
I think what you need to do is set a goal for your minimum ROIC (return on invested capital) - basically what edge are you willing to accept before wagering.
Then you need to analyze your results and be honest about your ability to make an odds line in certain types of races, circumstances etc...
I prefer making few wagers with a very high ROIC expectation. In other words, I build a huge margin of safety into my odds line.
If I think a horse deserves to be exactly
3-1, I won\'t bet it if it is 7-2. I want more because I am rarely very certain that my information and my interpretation it is entirely complete, accurate, or correct.
I play horses like Warren Buffett buys stocks. If he thinks a business is worth $50 per share, he doesn\'t buy it at $45. He buys it only if reaches $30 or so. That is his \"margin of safety\".
I am rather extreme in my margin of safety because I only play horses casually. My method produces an extremely high ROIC and consistent winning years. However, it doesn\'t produce a huge amount of actual dollar profits or a lot of action. So what I do is probably not suitable for most players. If I were to attempt to go professional, I would obviously have to adjust my margin of safety downward a bit to try to get more profitable plays. That would lower my ROIC, but hopefully raise my net profit.
I believe the thinking process I am expressing here is relevant for everyone. You have to think like an investor, know what you know, and try to maximize your profits.
Post Edited (11-17-03 22:29)
Based on the TG sheets and the fact that speed holds quite well on the CD course when it\'s yielding, WARLEIGH was a terrific play in the one & two hole in the exacta. If you look at HARD BUCK coming out of PP #2 with his recent #\'s, the $90 and change exacta was quite playable.
My feeling is that you can maximize on a horse like WARLEIGH by playing him up and down with the most likely to beat him. HARD BUCK, on his TG figs and post, was certainly one of them. I also used ROWANS PARK as an improving 3yo, but did not play the tri...ugh!! Of course I could have ended up losing if a GRETCHEN\'s STAR or a ACT OF WAR, both of whom I did not use, had jumped up to run an improved race.I guess I finally got lucky this time.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Classhandicapper,
Good post. As someone who made his living as a Wall Street analyst and then as a mutual fund and hedge fund manager, I agree completely. The biggest move forward for me (and I would bet for most) was the day I moved away from being selection oriented and became value oriented.
I could ramble on with discussion forever, but I will spare all! Good stuff.
No Edge, No Bet!
CC