This was wrote by Joe Kristufek
Joe Kristufek is a self proclaimed "horse racing ambassador." He currently serves as the racing writer for the Daily Herald newspaper in Chicago where he has been the area's leading published handicapper for seven of the last eight seasons. He also plies his trade as Arlington Park’s morning-line maker and program comments writer, and is involved in several educational projects within the Chicago horse racing industry. He is also a regular contributor to ntra.com and Horseplayer Magazine.
I'm currently in the midst of an OTB tour, and am somewhat surprised to see just how many people rely on other people's picks (OPP).
I've noticed that:
A) They don't understand the handicapping process.
B) They don't want to be bothered with the work that goes into piecing together the puzzle.
Or
C) They simply trust other people's picks more than they trust their own.
There is one common denominator among all horseplayers – they like the action.
So exactly whose picks are they using?
Some tear out the racing page of the local newspaper. Others use the Daily Racing Form or a tip sheet as a guide. Some go as far as to download and pay for picks.
If you're going to use OPP, make sure that the author actually follows the circuit closely. Some of the people who offer “pay per view” selections are handicapping six tracks a day. How much work do they actually put in handicapping the races, and when do they have time to watch them?
Some pay sites use computers to generate their tip sheets.
Recently I conducted a Horseplayer Magazine “Pro Player” interview with California-based racing expert Tim Downs, who spoke on the use of computers to make selections.
“Personally, I don't respect that,” Downs said. “Anybody can take stats, plug them into a program, and let the computer spit out the best horses. It's not handicapping.”
I have seen some programs that pump out live horses, but computers don't have eyes. They're not capable of dissecting replays, or seeing how a horse looks on the track – two of the most critical factors in any true horseplayer's final evaluation.
Being a public handicapper can be a thankless job. Due to print or upload schedules, your file is usually due in short order, in my case, it's the night before, but others must submit their selections even sooner. In addition, lots can happen on race day that could alter how a handicapper visualizes an event unfolding.
As the handicapper and racing writer for the Daily Herald in Chicago, I can tell you that I watch every race every day and take my job seriously.
In racing arenas, people often ask me if I “bet my own picks”.
This is a difficult question.
When I play the races, my original selections are only a foundation. I have to pick every race every day, and will obviously like some races better than others. There are several races a day that I wouldn't bet with YOUR money, and others that offer great investment opportunities.
I might have a horse picked seventh in what I perceive to be a wide-open race that is very useable in multiple race wagers. Because of space restrictions, it is difficult to get this message across to the reader. That horse could win, I could hit the Pick Four, and a reader could easily question how.
Very few top picks are going to jump off the paper. Often times I have a tough time splitting my top three or four selections. If the third pick is 10-1 and the top choice is 9-5, and I like them almost equally, which one do you think I'm going to back at the windows?
The 10-1, of course.
Regardless if you're a public handicapper or a private horseplayer who makes their selections the night before, you have to be willing to call an audible. Scratches that affect the race shape, track bias, tote action and how the horses look on the track are all factors that must be considered before I begin constructing a ticket.
As a public handicapper, my goal has always been to give the reader food for thought. Personally I would rather pick a 17-1 on top that finished third than the $5.00 winner that could have been had just by looking at the probable favorites listing in the program. By doing so, perhaps I gave the reader a horse to toss into a Trifecta that they wouldn't have otherwise used.
Following a day at the races, do you tally up how many winners you had, or count how much money you have in your pocket?
There are better ways to evaluate a public handicapper's performance than simply how many winners they pick on top. Here are some guidelines.
- WPS ROI
- TP3 % (Top pick in the top three percentage)
- WT3 % (Winners in the top three percentage)
To properly evaluate the skill set of a public handicapper, base their “return on investment” (ROI) on $6 ($2 across the board), not on $2 (to win). The WPS ROI will give you a better idea of how often they select “live” horses on top.
For example, if the public handicapper's top choice finishes second and pays $8.00 to place and $4.80 to show, their $2 win ROI would be $0.00, but their $6 WPS ROI would be a healthy $12.80. That's a $6.80 profit on a $2 across the board wager, not to mention the potential of having that horse in a healthy gimmick.
That ties right into TP3 %. You'd obviously like to see a handicapper's top pick somewhere in the Trifecta as often as possible.
That being said, you also want a handicapper who picks the winner amongs his/her top three selections on a regular basis. If they have a horse picked third that wins and pays $17, there is a better chance that you used that horse in the gimmicks or a multiple race wager than if they had the horse buried. The WT3 % is a good measure of a handicapper's reliability.
Whether they're your own or somebody else's, playing the races is all about having an opinion. If you trust someone else to do your handicapping for you, make sure they're productive. Not over a day, week, or even a month, but an entire meet.
Are you down with OPP?
If so, do you use them exclusively, or as a supplement to your own selections?
Joe Kristufek is a self proclaimed "horse racing ambassador." He currently serves as the racing writer for the Daily Herald newspaper in Chicago where he has been the area's leading published handicapper for seven of the last eight seasons. He also plies his trade as Arlington Park’s morning-line maker and program comments writer, and is involved in several educational projects within the Chicago horse racing industry. He is also a regular contributor to ntra.com and Horseplayer Magazine.
I'm currently in the midst of an OTB tour, and am somewhat surprised to see just how many people rely on other people's picks (OPP).
I've noticed that:
A) They don't understand the handicapping process.
B) They don't want to be bothered with the work that goes into piecing together the puzzle.
Or
C) They simply trust other people's picks more than they trust their own.
There is one common denominator among all horseplayers – they like the action.
So exactly whose picks are they using?
Some tear out the racing page of the local newspaper. Others use the Daily Racing Form or a tip sheet as a guide. Some go as far as to download and pay for picks.
If you're going to use OPP, make sure that the author actually follows the circuit closely. Some of the people who offer “pay per view” selections are handicapping six tracks a day. How much work do they actually put in handicapping the races, and when do they have time to watch them?
Some pay sites use computers to generate their tip sheets.
Recently I conducted a Horseplayer Magazine “Pro Player” interview with California-based racing expert Tim Downs, who spoke on the use of computers to make selections.
“Personally, I don't respect that,” Downs said. “Anybody can take stats, plug them into a program, and let the computer spit out the best horses. It's not handicapping.”
I have seen some programs that pump out live horses, but computers don't have eyes. They're not capable of dissecting replays, or seeing how a horse looks on the track – two of the most critical factors in any true horseplayer's final evaluation.
Being a public handicapper can be a thankless job. Due to print or upload schedules, your file is usually due in short order, in my case, it's the night before, but others must submit their selections even sooner. In addition, lots can happen on race day that could alter how a handicapper visualizes an event unfolding.
As the handicapper and racing writer for the Daily Herald in Chicago, I can tell you that I watch every race every day and take my job seriously.
In racing arenas, people often ask me if I “bet my own picks”.
This is a difficult question.
When I play the races, my original selections are only a foundation. I have to pick every race every day, and will obviously like some races better than others. There are several races a day that I wouldn't bet with YOUR money, and others that offer great investment opportunities.
I might have a horse picked seventh in what I perceive to be a wide-open race that is very useable in multiple race wagers. Because of space restrictions, it is difficult to get this message across to the reader. That horse could win, I could hit the Pick Four, and a reader could easily question how.
Very few top picks are going to jump off the paper. Often times I have a tough time splitting my top three or four selections. If the third pick is 10-1 and the top choice is 9-5, and I like them almost equally, which one do you think I'm going to back at the windows?
The 10-1, of course.
Regardless if you're a public handicapper or a private horseplayer who makes their selections the night before, you have to be willing to call an audible. Scratches that affect the race shape, track bias, tote action and how the horses look on the track are all factors that must be considered before I begin constructing a ticket.
As a public handicapper, my goal has always been to give the reader food for thought. Personally I would rather pick a 17-1 on top that finished third than the $5.00 winner that could have been had just by looking at the probable favorites listing in the program. By doing so, perhaps I gave the reader a horse to toss into a Trifecta that they wouldn't have otherwise used.
Following a day at the races, do you tally up how many winners you had, or count how much money you have in your pocket?
There are better ways to evaluate a public handicapper's performance than simply how many winners they pick on top. Here are some guidelines.
- WPS ROI
- TP3 % (Top pick in the top three percentage)
- WT3 % (Winners in the top three percentage)
To properly evaluate the skill set of a public handicapper, base their “return on investment” (ROI) on $6 ($2 across the board), not on $2 (to win). The WPS ROI will give you a better idea of how often they select “live” horses on top.
For example, if the public handicapper's top choice finishes second and pays $8.00 to place and $4.80 to show, their $2 win ROI would be $0.00, but their $6 WPS ROI would be a healthy $12.80. That's a $6.80 profit on a $2 across the board wager, not to mention the potential of having that horse in a healthy gimmick.
That ties right into TP3 %. You'd obviously like to see a handicapper's top pick somewhere in the Trifecta as often as possible.
That being said, you also want a handicapper who picks the winner amongs his/her top three selections on a regular basis. If they have a horse picked third that wins and pays $17, there is a better chance that you used that horse in the gimmicks or a multiple race wager than if they had the horse buried. The WT3 % is a good measure of a handicapper's reliability.
Whether they're your own or somebody else's, playing the races is all about having an opinion. If you trust someone else to do your handicapping for you, make sure they're productive. Not over a day, week, or even a month, but an entire meet.
Are you down with OPP?
If so, do you use them exclusively, or as a supplement to your own selections?
