Thank you Dave and Tony!

Love listening to these types of interviews...very enlightening and inspirational!

Hi Tony,

I have both HMI and the Opponent method. I think they are among Dave's best works. It would be interesting to hear you expound on both of those more. I think bet structure and sizing is one of the key components of success but they always seem to be the last thing discussed and mostly as an afterthought.

Best
Ken

Hi Ken- I'm sorry it took a few days to reply.
I found both publications very interesting reads with somewhat conflicting approaches. To me the most important item was the session play explanation found on both documents. The concept of session play made perfect sense to me and 'felt' like a good fit for my psyche. I attempted to implement this approach as described by Dave in each document. Through trial and error I made some modifications that raised my confidence. For example, the percent of bankroll that I dedicate to each session is 5%. So my bankroll is broken into 20 sessions. This change greatly reduces the chance of 'tapping out'. i will admit that I probably went overboard with this change but it made feel comfortable and less likely to feel pressure when making selections and constructing tickets.
Of the two publications I was most intrigued with the progression concept in the Opponent Method. While I do not use the Opponent Method per se I do use a progressive style betting strategy that evolved from it. In short, I increase the number of units I wager after a number of losing plays.
I hope this helped you Ken. Please let me know if this did not answer your question

We should have a phone call soon because I've made some interesting improvements in the OPP as I use it. BTW, it is the OPP with my mods that I credit with making me so difficult to beat.

Our dear friend, Dick Schmidt, deeded me a strategy he used very successfully with Forex. I melded that with the OPP to make it extremely powerful. If you have a positive expectancy, it actually raises your $Net! (As does both HMI & the Opp.)

Maybe I should call it OppEx. LOL

Thanks Tony. I realize you play horizontal but it's great to get insight from a successful player. Myself for now I'm staying with win betting as I find it psychologically easier to deal with a loss. I found HMI to be a bit complicated and couldn't quite wrap my head around the worksheet. I do like the opponent method. I've always used Dave's session approach with a slight variation. I confine play to races with greater than 8 betting interests or a race with what I determine to be a flawed favorite, I also dont play a race with unknowns. For me this overcomes a series of trading back and forth (win/lose) and helps me to not wind up spending longer on a session then I am able to keep my energy up. For instance today I had 23 races to start the day. Could only get half done before I needed to break away. Thanks to you and Dave for taking the time both to record the presentation and to respond here.

Best
Ken

Ken- win betting is a solid way to play. It’s most important to do what feels comfortable to you. If you’re not comfortable with your methodology it affects your decisions.

Hi Dave and Tony
Tony was instrumental in my becoming a horizontal player in my betting. I was at theHarrisburg seminar and Tony and I corresponded on the bulletin board. Great podcast. Happy to hear that Tony is doing well. Dave has transformed my betting techniques with his manuals. Apart from the Sartin Pirco guys, he's the best there is.

Great to hear from you Gerard!!! That seminar was great fun. Also got the opportunity to meet some wonderful ppl like yourself. I realize that economics and logistics make on-line seminars so much more practical in todays world, but I do miss the human interaction. Dave was so great on the fly at those seminars.
I hope you can stay active on this forum and contribute!!

Tony was instrumental in my becoming a horizontal player in my betting. I was at theHarrisburg seminar and Tony and I corresponded on the bulletin board. Great podcast. Happy to hear that Tony is doing well. Dave has transformed my betting techniques with his manuals. Apart from the Sartin Pirco guys, he's the best there is. — Gerard Rodrigue

A lot of people might not know but @Tony Kofalt actually was the host at that seminar. He did all the work - and I just should up with computers & slidfes.

It would never have happened without him.

That's how we became lifelong friends.

It was a bittersweet seminar as Dave was transitioning from ThoroBrain 4?? (which I loved as a product) to the Handicappers Notebook. 30 years later and I'm still whining about it. Lol

Always enjoy listening to people who do this well enough to go pro. Thanks.

Always enjoy listening to people who do this well enough to go pro. Thanks. — Steven

Yes, I had a friend who went pro for a few years. I was always impressed with how detailed and thorough he was in some matters. He eventually decided he could make more money working a 9/5 and that racing was changing, so he went back to the grind.

That’s interesting. I’ve heard lots of people (non pros) say they would be making more money working at McDonald’s than playing the horses.

That’s interesting. I’ve heard lots of people (non pros) say they would be making more money working at McDonald’s than playing the horses. — Steven

Such is the difference between the true professionals and everyone else. One fellow on PaceAdvantage - in the discussion about our post about Whales talked about having a friend he called "whale" who was making about $80,000 per year.

While $80k would qualify him as a low-end professional in my mind, I'd never equate that with a WHALE betting $100m per year or more. In fact, the comparison is laughable.

That PA discussion can be found here.
WHALES: A little back story Part 1

I think my friend was making about $25,000 a year live at the track, not online. I think that is very good compared to what most people could do. He did have his bills paid off. But he was able to make a lot more at a regular job.

Of course. And he deserves credit for being profitable.