Monmouth handle & attendance

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

I'm not up on handle for these smaller tracks, though I do bet PID. Not one of my 'must' tracks, however.

I looked at handle for 3 days:

Date Attendance On Track Handle Off Track Handle
7/01 518 $28,509 $620,747
7/02 823 $38,754 $280,170
7/03 1045 $46,255 $156,972 (why is this so low?)


I'm too lazy to compare these to other smaller tracks. But it appears that it would take more than $40 wagers to turn a profit into a loss. Of course, there are incredible odds swings at this track.

Not to imply that I disgree with your overall premise.

I don't really have the time or inclination to do the math, but the win pools are just a fraction of the overall handle. My point is that it is easier to do because the competition is very weak. There is no point in a big player trying to make serious money at these tracks. To devote a large amount of time to a small track like PID or WRD or LNN makes no sense.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

My point is that it is easier to do because the competition is very weak. There is no point in a big player trying to make serious money at these tracks. To devote a large amount of time to a small track like PID or WRD or LNN makes no sense.

I agree with your overall premise. I don't buy the competition thing because a strong player should be able to win in just about any environment, and, from experience, PID is not an easy track to beat. Doesn't mean it's hard, either, just that it's 'nuanced' and take a bit of getting used to. My point is that playing a single track, whether large or small, is a dated way of going about it. While some might think that 80 hour weeks spent watching replays and keeping notes (and doing a bunch of other things) is the way to win at the game, I think this is just too much grunt work. Playing a handful of races, at best, a day is not keeping up with the times. I was reading over at your forum where someone wrote that before you can beat multiple tracks you need to be able to beat a single track. This is ridiculously banal but what's lost in this is that it's a lot easier to beat a single track than it is to beat multiple tracks.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

I agree with your overall premise. I don't buy the competition thing because a strong player should be able to win in just about any environment, and, from experience, PID is not an easy track to beat. Doesn't mean it's hard, either, just that it's 'nuanced' and take a bit of getting used to. My point is that playing a single track, whether large or small, is a dated way of going about it. While some might think that 80 hour weeks spent watching replays and keeping notes (and doing a bunch of other things) is the way to win at the game, I think this is just too much grunt work. Playing a handful of races, at best, a day is not keeping up with the times. I was reading over at your forum where someone wrote that before you can beat multiple tracks you need to be able to beat a single track. This is ridiculously banal but what's lost in this is that it's a lot easier to beat a single track than it is to beat multiple tracks.

I think we agree, but I'm not sure you see the big picture of my argument. There is no point putting in time at those places, not the kind of time required to watch replays and such. Sure, a good player can win, but there is a line where the time involved isn't worth the effort.

A +5% ROI in SoCal or NYRA is on much more solid ground than a 20% ROI at PID or PNL. Because big bettors know this, and by and large big bettors are probably better bettors, they aren't going to waste a lot of effort on these smaller places. Thus, the competition is easier. People can argue theories and what ifs all they want, I have studied and bet the pools at most tracks in the US for nearly a decade.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

A +5% ROI in SoCal or NYRA is on much more solid ground than a 20% ROI at PID or PNL. Because big bettors know this, and by and large big bettors are probably better bettors, they aren't going to waste a lot of effort on these smaller places. Thus, the competition is easier. People can argue theories and what ifs all they want, I have studied and bet the pools at most tracks in the US for nearly a decade.

I don't agree with some of this.

PID would be utterly impossible to beat - at 800 races a meet - for anyone if not for the simple fact that - in all 4 meets so far - some pretty powerful and very legit track biases have lingered on for an extended period of time.

It's also a lot better place than most for people who study trainers intently - and it's also a track that runs it's fair share of 2yo maiden races - and you get a lot of debuters in the 3yo maiden races as well ... which, in terms of having to make selections 24 hour out ... would favor me over others I believe. You don't see a lot of public handicappers pick debuters 10/1 on the ML on top .. and in a lot of cases here, those prove to be very bad ML's and those end up being the right horses.

I've had many of my best days betting on the biggest racing days of the year. Breeders Cup Day, Derby day, etc. I've had some of my best meets at Saratoga and AQU Inner. Belmont Spring is the only NYRA meet where I'd been raped and pillaged on more than one occasion.

Bottom line - if PID is a fair racetrack ... your avg good handicapper is dealing with an extremely unattractive situation. Small fields, a lot of uncompetitive races, a lot of maiden races with debuters, Ness running straight down peoples throats. etc.

[cakes44]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

To devote a large amount of time to a small track like PID or WRD or LNN makes no sense.

There are other places that receive a LNN signal?