None of you will ever achieve profitability through this program, and I invite anyone to demonstrate otherwise. I am unconcerned with how many private or special master's sessions I attend. It's all bullshit. The fact that you do not observe the tote board demonstrates this. Thirty-eight percent of the bets you place result in a loss, even when you are successful. Why would you engage in betting when two of the three horses you wager on are expected to yield negative returns? Your assertion that losing $8-$15 is preferable to losing $30 is unfounded. My response would be to select the overlay, wager $10 on that horse to win, and accept the outcome. A loss remains a loss irrespective of interpretation. Excluding individuals based on perceived inadequacies solely exposes arrogance. I would prefer not to associate myself with your community. What is being constructed here pertains to perception, which consequently maintains everyone's engagement.

Thanks, Guys
Congrats again, wish I had it. Unfortunately, I was late on the draw with the upgrade. I missed the pricing part. My bad, you snooze, you lose. I'm calling Dave today to clarify. I watched some of the video...this looks like really good stuff. Let's keep it going.

Congrats guys. Nice work 50-1 shots don't come along very often. I was wondering why a horse might go off at that price in a 6-horse field. Random odds are 5-1. He had a classic 02X pattern and was third off a layoff. This doesn't mean much when betting quality horses. However, betting cheap 5K claimers at Mahoning Valley those patterns are a huge tell. Unfortunately, I haven't got the upgrade yet, I'm curious as to what factors dET qualified this horse as a play. FYI I've had great success with the dET MY FTS factor set betting MSW-MC races. I have hit several price horses.

Will do!

Thanks, guys, great stuff. No wonder some people believe that whales might bring racing to an end.

So, let me get this straight.

1. Whales win on rebates.
2. ADW's pay for the signal and win on the percentage of takeout.
3. Tracks sell the signal and win on the percentage of takeout.

LOL... there's room for us on this list.

Thanks, Dave

I've always been curious about that. Unfortunately, not something I would understand. BTW, I'm guessing it's 5:00 AM there. Get a life!!

Hello Dave,

Thanks for the quick response. Is that algorithmic?

You could argue that the Whale's bets are clearly AI-driven and lack human intervention, such as trips, track bias, angles, and trainer stats. Maybe I should consider taking advantage of that. They win by trying to break even, betting on obvious horses, usually favorites, and subsidizing rebates to make a profit. Unfortunately, a lot of us don't have those resources, and this approach doesn't work for us. They clearly don't handicap races thoroughly and rarely hit a mutual that's considerable. Trying to zig when the whales are zagging is definitely the way to handicap. But this handicapping approach lacks several human elements that I think we should exploit. FYI, Joe Public is just as big as the whales.

For what it's worth, I started buying products from Dave before computer handicapping became common. I remember my first set of Pars I bought from HSH. It was a pencil-and-paper product that included instructions for making your own speed figures. It was revolutionary at the time, and I had some remarkable success with it. However, it really wouldn't have any impact today. Same as choosing pace lines. The pace module we have does this for us. I really don't know what's under the hood, and I'm not sure I would understand it if I did. The tools are there for us to use. Our interpretation of that data is central to our handicapping skills.

One of the top 4 horses in an eight-horse field will win approximately 82% of the time. As is customary Dave being on point once again, the trick is to find value. Get better soon Dave. Take more drugs...! Better life through chemistry.

Unfortunately, I'm not necessarily an exacta player. I haven't tracked this, but I've noticed that the 1st and 3rd horses are on the board more often than not. The place horse-less occurring. Let me know if you find any data on this. You might be onto something.

I like using it. It's a good starting point for picking contenders.

My experience is that the 88% is exceptionally accurate.

I believe the 88% metric is a probability for horses that can win the race, not necessarily run second or third for exacta and trifecta wagers. Also, there is an odds factor built in. Just because one of the horses in the group has a probability of 88% to win the race doesn't mean the others will have an 88% chance to run second, third, or fourth. I don't think it works that way.

Get well soon Jimmy. Thoughts and prayers go out to you.

Nice!!

Thanks, Dave

Catch you on Saturday

Hello Dave,

I watched all the videos. Good stuff! Unfortunately, I couldn't make the meeting.