Handicapping The Handicapper

Firstly, my apologies for not posting the HANA and Public Handicappers picks this week. It was just one of those weeks and I didn't have the time to make the post. You didn't miss much with the PH races; however, I am sorry you missed the my only overlay out of 4 contenders in the 7th at Monmouth, Themanmythnlegend ridden by the stunning Shannon Uske, who rode a terrific race to guide Themanmythnlegend through some horrific traffic down the stretch and get her mount up in time, and trained by Lloyd Kromann. Themanmythnlegend paid 24.60 to win.





While driving down the street one recent day, I revealed to my lovely wife that I'd like to write a book sometime before I pass on to whatever awaits after this life. Because of my line of work, I am a published author in a few respected scientific journals. Although I must admit that other people did the writing. That is the way it works in the scientific world where the principle investigator usually does the writing and gives co-authorship to others who contributed in some way to the generating of the published work.





My wife asked me what I would write about and I answered,"I don't really know, I just know I'd like to write a book, novel or something." Of course, she suggested I write a book on horse racing since that is how I spend most of my spare time. Unfortunately, I had to confess that there is not much new I could really introduce on the subject since nearly all of what I have learned has come from the writings of others on the topic. In that respect, I can only parrot those who have written before me. What would be the point?





Now, for those 2 of you who have followed this blog from the beginning, you know that I am big on creating an odds line on my favorite contender for any race I contemplate playing. This is not my creation but is promoted by such racing-author luminaries as Barry Meadow, Mark Cramer, and Steve Fiero. I love their books and highly recommend each and everyone of them.





However, one major flaw I find in all of these books is that while each of them promote the making of an odds line for contenders, or even the entire field, in a race, each of them come up short in the how to exactly make an accurate odds line. Steve Fiero does offer a handy chart to help set up an odds line for 3 and 4 contender races where your contenders are assigned an overall probability of 80% to win the race. Mark Cramer in his book, "The Odds On Your Side" makes an attempt at giving a more defined process of creating an odds line, but it still requires that you assign a % value of one or more factors which will influence the outcome of the race and how each horse will either benefit or be disadvantaged by such factors. In the end, it is no less subjective than any other method of assigning an odds line.





Before going any further, let me explain to those who may not know that odds are simply another way of stating the probability of an event occurring. In our case, a particular horse winning the race. I typically think in terms of probabilities rather than odds because that is how my mind has been trained for many years; however, converting probabilities to odds is a simple mathematic operation. For instance, if you believe a horse has a 25% chance of winning the race the odds are 3-1. The conversion is simple: 1/0.25 = 4 then 4-1 =3 and, voila, 3-1 is the odds of your 25% chance.





Calculating odds from probabilities is a simple process. Assigning probabilities is not so simple. There are many factors and a high degree of randomness in any race. As a handicapper, we have to weigh every factor against the other in an attempt to decipher the horses most deserving of being considered contenders in the race. Then, if you are concerned with getting a fair price for your investment, you have to make your best guess as to what the proper odds for each contender may be. And a guess is just what it is.



There are computer programs available that will do this guessing for you. Check out Brisnet.com where you can choose from several free downloads. I tried the Allways program a few times a couple of years ago. Wasn't really all that impressed. But the truth is, any program you use to choose contenders is basically guessing. Someone had to write the program, and, in the writing of the program, had to weigh various performance and statistical factors so that the program can make a decision and assign a probability. A question you should ask yourself is how the programmer arrived at the different weightings? Perhaps the programmer used a very strict statistical method to arrive at the weightings. Perhaps the programmer used some trial and error with a lot of back testing to arrive at the ratings. Remember past performance is no guarantee of future returns.



Computers are marvelous inventions and most excellent at crunching numbers. We use computers to send spacecraft to Mars and beyond. Some computers are capable of defeating the best human chess players. But I doubt there will ever be a computer that can out handicap a good horseplayer. Computers are not so good with intangibles. What computer predicted that Dunkirk was going to set the pace in the Belmont Stakes? Maybe Todd Pletcher's. Maybe Mr. Pletcher has a program that calculated the best chance Dunkirk had to win the race was to surprise everyone and go to the front. Somehow I doubt it. If you have a computer program that consistently keeps you ahead of the game I want to know about it. Not that I would use it, because that would take all the fun out of the game.



So the question becomes, if all our best efforts at making an odds line amount to mere guess work, then where can we find hard numbers from which to make an odds line. I'm here to suggest that one has to look no further than one's own performance to make an odds line. Handicap the handicappper.



Yes you read correctly. Keep a record of how often your top choice, 2nd choice, 3rd, 4th, etc. win and base your odds on the winning percentage of each. For instance, if you are a very good handicapper and your top choice wins 33% of the time than you can make the odds for that choice 2-1. If I had the odds at 2-1, then I would ask for 3-1 before playing, but you can make that decision for yourself.



Its important while doing this to keep your records as close to being a reflection of your current performance as possible. After all, unless you are Super Handicapper you go through hot streaks and cold streaks just as I do. If you can track your performance in such a way then you would be able to bet more at lower odds when hot and less at higher odds when chilly maximizing the return on your investment. For this purpose, I recommend using a 30 race moving average.



Creating a moving average is simple. Once you add a result at the end of a series, remove the result at the beginning of the series. For example, when I add result 31 to my records, I remove result number 1 from the average. When result number 32 is added, then result number 2 is removed and on and on and on.



Now the number 30 for the moving average was not pulled out of thin air. For statistical purposes 30 events is usually considered significant for giving reliable data. One drawback of using a moving average is that it is a lagging statistic. If we used, for instance, a 60 race moving average, it may be a better overall indication of our handicapping ability, but it would be less reflective of our current performance.

Now the real beauty of this methodology is that you can conceivably handicap an entire race card without ever looking at a past performance. Does your local newspaper have a handicapper? You could handicap how well he does with his picks. Calculate odds for each selection and play off the local tout's picks.

Another possibility is to handicap how well the masses are at picking winners. Check out the results charts for any track you are interested in and calculate how often the first, second, third and fourth choices come in. If you choose the to handicap masses, I suggest you divide the races into logical divisions such as dirt and turf, sprints and routes, maiden claimers and stakes races, etc. The choices are nearly limitless.

Now in the interest of full disclosure, I have to admit that I really have not tried this out on anything but my own performance. And the moving average thing, that's just something that I came up with as I was brainstorming the idea. But, at least, using this method, you have something concrete to base your line on. I don't know about you but this idea makes perfect sense to me. On the other hand, perhaps this will merely qualify as another whacky betting method. There is one way to find out. Run the numbers.

I'll be back in a day or two with my HANA and PH picks for Saturday. The HANA race will be the 9th at Arlington Park. A 5 furlong Turf Sprint, one of my favorites.