view raw text
THE SUCCESS IN HANDICAPPING. Cincinnati System Player with Intelligent Ideas Is a Winner. Cincinnati. ., October ill. Around Cincinnati one can lind more handicappcrs, anil good ones it may be said, than in any other racing center in the country. The writer met one of these "dope-smiths" recently, a business mail, and a mail who: has successfully played the races for the last two; or three years, and gleaned some interesting ideas. from him. "I went into the racing game as a diversion," said he, "and I carried into it theories that hail; benefited me in business enterprises. After con-; siilerablc study I came to the conclusion that the only Avay to beat racing was to heat the percentage, to boat the odds. That is what the, honk--maker does. So I decided to devise a system whereby I could play the bookmaker against his, own game. After considerable study I came loj this conclusion h;it in a fifteen horse race, which is about the largest field that ever goes to the post on western tracks, uoL more than live can be; figured as contenders. Thereore, it appealed loj be plain to me that 1 would have to pl:iy no odds: at less than G to 1 in order to break even. 1!: have followed that plan religiously. That is Jo j say. I play no odds but f to 1 or up, and when: my figures point to a winner the higger the odds the better I like it. I helieve that I can take a bankroll of 00 or ,000 :ind follow this system of playing the odds against the ring, use any good newspaper or other handicap, and heat, the races, and the proof of the pudding is that I "have been beating them for the past two years. "I use my own handicap because I believe it lobe better than the average, although it is formed on lines largely that I figured out for myself. In studying the records I made up my mind that,: In a general way, time is no factor in handicapping, for the reason that the time made on no two tracks is alike. A horse, say, that can run a mile in 1:10 at Lalonia might not be able to perform in hotter than 1:11 on some other track. Therefore I decided to throw time out of consideration. From the records I also got the-notion that the condition of the track cuts little or no figure, for tin; reason that, as a rule, you will liml that a horse that can run well on a heavy track can also run to advantage on a fast track. The elimination of these two factors led me to the conclusion that winning percentage is the sum and-.substance of the whole matter of handicapping. Therefore I evolved a system of handicapping the horses on winning averages over a number of previous races. I also handicapped the jockeys in similar manner. "Applying the. system to any particular race, the percentage of winners gave me the best three liorses in their class. On. the best horse I placed-the best jockey on winning mounts, on the second horse the second best jockey, and on the third horse the third best jockey. At the track if I found that the best jockey was on the second-best horse, and the first and second horses figured closely together, this would compel me to play the second horse if the price happened to be 3 to 1 or better. I began operating on a 00 bank roll, and my system hits always been to bet on each horse that I play live per cent; of the bank roll, whatever It may be. ,By computation I found that on this system I would need to lose seventy, consecutive bets to deplete the bank roll. I also found in practice, naturally, that the oftcner you lose the less you lose, while the oftener" you win the more you win, and if you happen to ret two or three long shots close together your bank roll goes soaring upward like a rocket. I made 11,000 playing the system last season, and to date results have been satisfactory so far this year. "The keystone of the system is, of course, playing the odds witli a sufficient bank roll behind you. In a way I have been a follower of the races for the last twenty-live years, and this idea came to me through observation of the operations of the few big successful plungers. I think that "Pitts-, burg Phil" and David Gideon will figure in history as the most successful plungers of the American turf, inasmuch as for long periods of years they both won right along consistently, and both were-smart enough to keep right along fighting the ring and augmenting instead of lessening their winnings. The secret .of the success of these two men was simply the matter of the price. If either Gideon or IMiIl liked a horse which they thought ought tjy b9 4 w -C to 4? thvy would not take 8 to 0; against him. They went back at the bookmakers at their own game and they beat them, and that in my opinion is all there is to race track or any other kind of speculation. If you can beat the odds you can beat the man behind the gun, and if you dont you cant. You certainly cannot beat the bookmakers, unless you have unlimited capital and phenomenal luck by playing odds-on favorites only. "I dont mean by this that the favorites arc pulled. The bookmakers aim to open what they consider the best horse in the race as favorite, but accidents often dcfontlhcfayoritcs, and besides that ;the bookmakers often make mistakes just as other people do. Oftentimes they make a horse favorite that ought to lie 10 to 1, and frequently ihey open a Jiorso at 10 to 1 that should be an even-money shot. I merely play the luck of the game and the odds and I have found the scheme to be a satisfactory one." This gentlemans theories, as exemplified in practice, may interest haullicappers, but after all Is said and done the element of luck enters largely into racing, and that is what gives td the sport the increasing zest and interest that it lias today.
