Horse Racing Handicapping Book Bet With the Best: Expert Strategies from America's Leading Handicappers

Excerpt from the book hailed as the most comprehensive book on handicapping thoroughbred horseracers that has been published in over a decade. Written by DRF experts Andrew Beyer, Steve Davidowitz, James Quinn, Tom Brohamer, Steven Crist and many more. This excerpt is a courtesy of NBN Books, the book's distributor. Order your copy online!

CHAPTER 3: CRIST ON VALUE

BY STEVEN CRIST

Continued from Page 3

Probability and Odds

I now faced two totally unrelated decisions: Whom to "pick" in Daily Racing Form as my selections for the race, and then which horse to back on Derby Day.

If the Derby were being run at Utopia Downs and each of the 17 entrants were paying off at odds of 16-1, I would simply have picked the likeliest winner, which to my mind was Point Given. However, at probable odds of 2-1, I would be recommending a fundamentally bad bet-tripling your money on a horse with a 25 percent chance of victory only gets you to 75 percent, or a 25 percent loss. So I knew I would have to pick one of my other two, both of whom figured to be at least the 5-1 needed to make them square bets. With Monarchos listed at 6-1 and Dollar Bill at 10-1 on the early lines, I selected the superior value and picked the race Dollar Bill-Monarchos-Point Given.

By post time two days later, however, I invoked the handicapper's prerogative of changing his mind when it comes time to wager. The following table shows the probability I had allotted to each starter, the odds necessary to receive fair value, and the actual odds at post time:

Horse	     Probability    Req. Odds Actual Odds
Point Given	25 percent 	3-1	9-5
Dollar Bill	15 percent 	6-1	6-1
Monarchos	15 percent 	6-1	10-1
Millennium Wind  8 percent 	12-1	9-1
Congaree	 8 percent 	12-1	7-1
Balto Star	 4 percent 	24-1	8-1
Fifty Stars	 4 percent 	24-1	40-1
Jamaican Rum	 4 percent 	24-1	20-1
A P Valentine	 4 percent 	24-1	19-1 
Thunder Blitz	 4 percent 	24-1	25-1
Express Tour	 4 percent 	24-1	18-1
Each of 6 others <1 percent	>100-1	From 35-1 to 
					102-1

Point Given was still the likeliest winner in my mind, but 9-5 was still an unacceptable return for a horse with a 25 percent chance of victory. To nearly everyone's surprise, Dollar Bill had been bet down to 6-1 and Monarchos had floated to 10-1. Dollar Bill now offered no real value relative to my assessment of his actual chances, but Monarchos was offering well above the return I thought was fair, as was Fifty Stars. My lack of regard or appreciation for Invisible Ink, the eventual runner-up, cost me all my multi-horse bets on the race, but win bets on Monarchos and Fifty Stars saved the day.

Thirteen days later at Pimlico, an uninspiring five-filly Black-Eyed Susan Stakes caught my interest because there were only two legitimate contenders and I thought one of them might be severely overbet. Two Item Limit had the superior speed figures and experience to be a worthy odds-on favorite, but I thought there was a scenario under which Tap Dance, the second choice, might end up very loose on the lead. While Two Item Limit was the better filly, she might lag too far back off slow fractions and fall short at the end. I made Two Item Limit 60 percent to win the race, giving a 35 percent chance to Tap Dance and the remaining 5 percent to their three overmatched opponents. Odds of 2-1 or better on Tap Dance would make her playable.

Unfortunately, everyone else seemed to have had the same idea about Tap Dance waltzing to the lead. With five minutes to post, both fillies were even money, and I felt neither remorse nor disloyalty as I went to the window to make the only logical bet: Two Item Limit to win, which she did at $4.40. Betting 6-5 shots to win is not my usual style, but I saw no other way to play the race and was convinced I was receiving outstanding value. When I first began playing the races, I probably would have bet on both Dollar Bill and Tap Dance instead of Monarchos and Two Item Limit, out of loyalty to my initial selections and the sense that you "should" bet on the horses you initially like.

The success of these two plays, though, was ultimately based upon the probability of victory I had assigned to each winner. I cannot argue in good conscience that Two Item Limit had precisely a 60 percent chance of victory as opposed to 57 or 63 percent, and I doubt that such calibration is in fact achievable. It is, however, possible through experience to get close enough that if you demand sufficient value to cover the margin of error, you should outperform the competition-your fellow horseplayers.

Continue reading.... The Competition