You Won't Win

I know it's not horse racing but this article on blackjack, written by Arnold Snyder, is fascinating simply for his frankness in explaining his thoughts about the chances of winning in a game he has dedicated his life. If you are interested in blackjack, card counting or strategies, it makes sobering reading. Not sure if it has relevance to horse racing betting or trading but it makes a point or two that we may all relate.

[Written from the depths of a once-in-a-lifetime magnitude losing streak...]

I am now in the process of editing a new book which, by the time you read this article in Casino Player, will already be published. Blackjack Wisdom is a compilation of some seventy-five magazine articles I have written over the past fifteen years or so, many of which initially appeared in Casino Player.

As I wrap up this project, I must confess that an entire chapter has been excised from this book—and the single longest chapter at that. “Bucks in Flux” was, for many months, the working title of Chapter One. This chapter was composed of more than a dozen articles I had written over the years for various periodicals, all with a common theme—negative fluctuations.

Among these articles were such gems as:

“Is It all Just Luck?” from Card Player,

“Speaking of Streaking,” from Casino Player,

“Those *!%]#* Fluctuations,” from Poker World,

“Good Guys Lose and Bad Guys Win,” from Blackjack Forum, and many other fine essays which, I must admit, bore some of my favorite titles. Perhaps I will include this chapter, or portions of it, in Blackjack Wisdom II. Perhaps I will simply let these writings die, uncollected in any anthology. But I have trashed the entire chapter at this late hour, with a decision instead to end the book with this article you are reading right now. So, you—my Casino Player faithful—do not have to buy the book, since you already know how it ends!

Essentially, each and every one of the “Bucks in Flux” articles delivers the same depressing message, a message I have espoused in every one of my books, a message which can be edited down to three words:

You won’t win.

Do I really need fifteen articles to say those three words? I don’t think so. Though it occurs to me that all blackjack books should have at least one chapter titled: “You Won’t Win.”

The message delivered by most blackjack books and systems has always been the same baloney. Stanley Roberts’ Winning Blackjack was once advertised with the slogan: “Make every casino in the world your personal bank account!” Ken Uston’s Million Dollar Blackjack was promoted with: “Make $500 per day any time you want!” And these aren’t phony systems; these books contain legitimate card counting strategies.

You can’t always tell the real systems from the phonies by looking at the advertising. Promotion is a promotion. Authors of blackjack books, like authors of all “self-help” books—from weight-loss systems to multi-level marketing programs—are reluctant to deliver the message:

You won’t win.

Nobody wants to hear it.

When I self-published my first book, The Blackjack Formula, in 1980, and advertised it in Gambling Times magazine with the catchy, upbeat slogan: “Card Counters Beware,” stating in the ad that most of the blackjack games available in the casinos of the world were unbeatable with any card counting system, the publisher of Gambling Times, Stan Sludikoff, told me bluntly that I would never make any great amount of money trying to sell books with that type of pessimistic advertising.

Stan was write. Seventeen years later, I’m still just scraping by, still delivering that vastly unpopular message:

You won’t win.

Of course, there are a few players who do win. Professional card counters exist; they’re not entirely mythical. It’s just that I know that these professional players are so exceptional, so obsessed, so dedicated, such gluttons for punishment, so terror-stricken by the concept of working a nine-to-five job, so few and far between in every sense of few and far between, that, honestly, you are highly unlikely to be one of these human anomalies. And the most honest thing I can say to you, if you tell me that you really want to become a professional blackjack player, is:

You won’t win.

And the reason is fluctuations.

If you are anything like the masses of humanity, if you like to be rewarded for your efforts within some reasonable time frame, you won’t be able to take the fluctuations. Those negative downswings will be bigger, and harder, and longer lasting, and more upsetting, and more unbelievable, than your level of toleration. Your losses will tear at your heart, and fill you with emptiness, and leave you in a state of quiet desperation. I hear this from players over and over again. I hear this from players who claim to have studied diligently and practiced for hours on end, for weeks and months with a singular dream—to beat the casinos.

And they don’t win.

And they ask me why.

And I say, “Oh, it’s just a normal standard deviation. A negative fluctuation. It could happen to anyone.”

But it happened to you.

Your money.

Your hours.

Your months of dreaming.

And you didn’t win.

So, over and over again, in my books, and my columns, and my magazine articles, I feel compelled to deliver the message I have been delivering since my very first book in 1980:

You won’t win.

Some card counters will win, but not you. Some card counters will actually experience inordinate positive fluctuations! Wow!

But not you.

You won’t win.

Other card counters will be having champagne parties in their hotel rooms, celebrating that marvelous life of freedom and money and adventure that just seems to come naturally with the lifestyle of a professional gambler. But not for you. You will be among the unfortunate few who, statistically speaking, will be located in the far left tail of the Gaussian curve. Someone has to be there. It will be you.

I have been in that tail; it is a cold and lonely place. I suspect many of those who write about this game have been there, and they know what a cold and lonely place it is. Every professional card counter I know has been there. And if they have played blackjack professionally for many years, they have been there many times. These players have hearts stronger than mine, and I suspect, stronger than yours.

This much I know: it is easier to make a living writing about this game than it is playing it.

In any case, instead of filling an entire chapter of this book with some fifteen articles, written over a period of seventeen years, every one of which simply says, you won’t win, I’ve tossed the whole chapter out in favor of leaving you with just those three words of blackjack wisdom:

YOU WON'T WIN

By Arnold Snyder
(From Casino Player, November 1997)
© Arnold Snyder 1997

Profitable Sports Gambling Begins With Discipline

An article I found from Ross Everett a freelance sports writer and respected authority on sports betting odds comparison. His writing has appeared on a variety of sports sites including sports news and World Cup betting sites. He lives in Southern Nevada with three Jack Russell Terriers and a kangaroo. He is currently working on an autobiography of former energy secretary Donald Hodell.


I get some of my best sports gambling concepts from non-sports gambling books. That’s not really surprising, since there are so few serious works addressing sports handicapping and gambling. Of all the various gambling related disciplines, sports gambling is perhaps the most complex. The paucity of written work on the subject is downright shameful in light of that fact. Since there’s so little specific literature available some of the best theoretical resources available to the serious sports gambler can be found in books written for the serious poker player.


Poker literature is especially applicable to the sports handicapper because both can be very profitable for a knowledgeable, experienced and skillful pro. Poker expert Bob Caro has noted that while there are a number of professional gamblers specializing in poker and sports wagering there’s not a single person who can honestly say they play roulette for a living.

The simple fact is that the house edge in roulette cannot be overcome by any combination of skill, experience and/or discipline. When you win, it is because you get lucky. When you lose, its because you didnt get lucky. To add another Caro concept to the equation, the decisions that the player makes when playing roulette simply dont matter”at least in terms of overcoming the theoretical edge enjoyed by the house. In the long term, it doesnt matter whether you choose red or black, odd or even, or certain numbers. You may get lucky with your choices or you may not, but these decisions do not impact the house edge one iota.

Caro stresses the paramount importance of discipline to a poker player’s long term success and profitability. It’s important to keep in mind that to succeed as a professional gambler that you need to approach a trip to the casino with a diametrically opposite mindset to that of the recreational gambler. A recreational gambler heads to the casino to *avoid* discipline and ‘unwind’. The professional uses discipline to his advantage.

Caro’s emphasis on discipline in poker is also true for the serious sports gambler. The foundation of a professional sports bettor’s long term success is to approach it with the same discipline, rigor and professionalism that he would any other job. If you continue to think about it in the same terms as the recreational gambler does, you’re in for a difficult road. The more seriousness that you bring to your sports betting, the higher the likelihood that you’ll be successful.

There’s nothing wrong with being a recreational sports gambler, or a recreational gambler of any sort. They’re vital to those of us who do this for a living since they’re what keeps casinos and sportsbooks in business. Ultimately, the best handicapping is pointless without a sportsbook to take the action.

If your goal is to bet recreationally, that’s great. Unless you have the dedication, desire and discipline to approach it at a profession a recreational approach to gambling is ultimately better for most people. You might benefit from some greater money management discipline, but at the end of the day as long as you don’t bet more than you can afford to lose it’s really no big deal.

**KNOW THE BEST HORSES IN TRAINING (BEFORE THEY RACE!)**

Penny Up: Childhood Gambling...

I noticed this article about child gambling. It is the kind of game children play, or did. In these modern times they probably play a tenner-a-time competing on Wii. 

Child gambling. It makes for an interesting debate. So what are your thoughts on how to approach the subject of gambling for your children or views on it in general? 

Are you anti gambling for wee nippers or can they learn a valuable lesson? 

I can remember as a child going to the amusement arcade with my tub of coppers. It was fun at the time and in ways it was a good thing because I can't stand fruit machines now. 

In a world of gambling temptation - for young and old - is it wise to allow children to gamble? Or does stopping them just make it all the more interesting? Life is one endless gamble, hey. I don't fancy your odds of walking on the moon. I am sure many of you can relate to Penny Up, which brings back memories from dare I say it school day fun. I can remember a teacher catching us playing at break time and instead of going mad had a game himself. Oh' the good old days...  


Lesser Known Casino Games: Penny Up


Call it “Penny Up”, “Penny in the Crack”, or “Penny Up the Wall” - it’s all the same game. Take a group of people and toss a penny toward a wall. Whoever gets their penny closest to the wall wins!

Penny Up is the first “real” gambling game most people encounter in their lives. Hey, let’s face it - we all know about poker, betting on sports, and other common gambling games growing up. However, knowing about something and being able to play are two different things. It’s easier to carry a pocketful of pennies for Penny up as opposed to a deck of cards and Poker chips. And we’re pretty sure not many ten year olds are able to place a bet on the horses at the track.

The rules are so easy that a child could understand. Two people will stand next to each other. Both people are the same distance from the wall. Two pennies are tossed and if your penny is the closest you win the loser’s penny. Sometimes the rare “Stander” (a penny on its side) wins double.

Despite the usage of “Penny” in Penny Up, the game can be played with any coin. Toss two dollar coins and the game is still the same. Get closest and you win the other persons coin. Keep in mind that other people besides children can play. It’s just most adults don’t gamble for pennies. In this case, they will bet dollars (pounds, euros, etc) and pitch pennies.

Normally only two people will play at a time since tracking more than two pennies is hard. The game has no set limits - players will play as long as they like (or until the school bell rings in some cases.)

Although many of us enjoyed Penny Up growing up, it has its critics. Many parents and anti-gambling groups see it as a way to groom children for a life of gambling. The arguments for each side are as follows.

The “Nay” group feels “Allowing children to gamble teaches them it’s alright to do so and even encourages them. These children will grow up to be problem gamblers."

The “Yea” group’s viewpoint is: “Teaching children about gambling in a responsible setting removes the mystery and allows parents to educate their children about the pros and cons of gambling.”

Both sides have valid viewpoints and we’re sure the truth lies somewhere in the middle. We don’t want our children running mini casinos in the playground but we also don’t want to make something so forbidden it becomes irresistible.

Gambling Movies

Big Hand for the Little Lady

A naive couple and a child arrive to the town on the way to California to buy there a farm. There is a poker play between the richest men in the region. The man cannot resist it and though he is a very bad poker player, enters the game betting all the money of his family. In the climax of the game he suffers a heart-attack. His wife then takes his place in the table. That's the only way of recovering their savings. But there is a little problem. Can anybody explain her how to play poker?



Bugsy

New York gangster Ben 'Bugsy' Siegel takes a brief business trip to Los Angeles. A sharp-dressing womaniser with a foul temper, Siegel doesn't hesitate to kill or maim anyone crossing him. In L.A. the life, the movies, and most of all strong-willed Virginia Hill detain him while his family wait back home. Then a trip to a run-down gambling joint at a spot in the desert known as Las Vegas gives him his big idea.


California Split

A down on his luck gambler (George Seagal) links up with free spirit Elliot Gould at first to have some fun on, but then gets into debt when Gould takes an unscheduled trip to Tijuana. As a final act of desperation, he pawns most of his possessions and goes to Reno for the poker game of a lifetime. A film set mainly in casinos and races, as the two win and lose (but mainly win), get robbed, and get blind drunk.


Casino

Ace Rothstein and Nicky Santoro, mobsters who move to Las Vegas to make their mark, live and work in this paradoxical world. Seen through their eyes, each as a foil to the other, the details of mob involvement in the casinos of the 1970's and '80's are revealed. Ace is the smooth operator of the Tangiers casino, while Nicky is his boyhood friend and tough strongman, robbing and shaking down the locals. However, they each have a tragic flaw--Ace falls in love with a hustler, Ginger, and Nicky falls into an ever-deepening spiral of drugs and violence.


The Cincinnati Kid

In New Orleans, an up-and-coming poker player takes on a long-time master of the game. Not only is there a small fortune at stake, but also the status of being the top player. But the trusted dealer has been blackmailed into rigging the game.


The Color of Money

Pool hustler Fast Eddie Felson finds the young, promising pool player Vincent in a local bar and he sees in him a younger version of himself. To try and make it as in the old days, Eddie offers to teach Vincent how to be a hustler. After some hesitations Vincent accepts and Eddie takes him and Vincent's girlfriend Carmen on a tour through the country to work the pool halls. However, Vincent's tendency to show off his talent and by doing so warning off the players and losing money, soon leads to a confrontation with Eddie.


The Cooler

The unluckiest man in Vegas (William H. Macy) - a guy whose bad luck is contagious - is used by the last of the old time mob run casinos to kill high rollers' action. That is, until he falls in love with a cocktail waitress (Maria Bello) and gets "lady luck," which throws the situation into reverse. Things turn nasty when the casino director (Alec Baldwin) tries to break up the romance.


Croupier

Jack Manfred is an aspiring writer going nowhere fast. To make ends meet, and against his better judgement, he takes a job as a croupier. He finds himself drawn into the casino world and the job gradually takes over his life; his relationship with girlfriend Marion begins to deteriorate. One gambler in particular catches his attention: Jani, whom he starts to see outside of working hours - a serious violation of casino rules. Jani is down on her luck; under pressure from her creditors she approaches Jack, asking him to be the inside man for a planned heist at the casino. Jack carefully considers the odds; it all looks so simple, but even a professional like Jack can't predict the cards he will be dealt.




Diggstown

Gabriel Caine has just been released from prison when he sets up a bet with a business man. The business man owns most of a boxing-mad town called Diggstown. The bet is that Gabe can find a boxer that will knock out 10 Diggstown men, in a boxing ring, within 24 hours. "Honey" Roy Palmer is that man - although at 48, many say he is too old. A sub plot is thrown in about Charles Macum Diggs - the heavyweight champion that gave the town its name - and who is now confined to a wheel-chair.




The Gambler


For $10,000 they break your arms. For $20,000 they break your legs. Axel Freed owes $44,000. Alex Freed is a literature professor. He has the gambling vice. When he has lost all his money, he borrows from his girlfriend, then his mother and finally some bad guys that chase his. Despite of all this he cannot stop gambling.


The Gambler

The Gambler, receives a letter from his son saying he needs help and The Gambler goes to his aid. Along the way he meets up with a young man who thinks he knows everything about playing cards. The Gambler teaches the young man some lessons along the way.


The Grifters

Lily works for a bookie, placing bets to change the odds at the track. When her son is hospitalized after an unsuccessful con job and resultant beating, she finds that even an absentee parent has feelings for her child. This causes her own job to go wrong as well. Each of them faces the down side of the grift.


Havana


A gambler who trusted no one. A woman who risked everything. And a passion that brought them together in the most dangerous city in the world. Cuba, December 1958: The professional gambler Jack visits Havana to organize a big Poker game. On the ship he meets Roberta and falls in love with her. Shortly after they arrive in Cuba, her Cuban husband, the revolutionary Arturo, is shot on the street by the military and Roberta is arrested and tortured. Jack manages to get her free again, however he can't keep her from continuing to support the revolution


Honeymoon in Vegas

On her deathbed, a mother makes her son promise never to get married, which scars him with psychological blocks to a commitment with his girlfriend. They finally decide to tie the knot in Vegas, but a wealthy gambler arranges for the man to lose $65K in a poker game and offers to clear the debt for a weekend with his fiancée. Suddenly the man is insanely jealous, and pursues his fiancée and her rich companion, but finds pitfalls in his path as the gambler tries to delay his interference.


House of Games


A famous psychologist, Margaret Ford, decides to try to help one of her patients get out of a gambling debt. She visits the bar where Mike, to whom the debt is owed, runs poker games. He convinces her to help him in a game: her assignment is to look for "tells", or give-away body language. What seems easy to her becomes much more complex.


The Hustler


"Fast" Eddie Felson is a small-time pool hustler with a lot of talent but a self-destructive attitude. His bravado causes him to challenge the legendary "Minnesota Fats" to a high-stakes match, but he loses in a heartbreaking marathon. Now broke and without his long-time manager, Felson faces an uphill battle to regain his confidence and his game. It isn't until he hits rock bottom that he agrees to join up with ruthless and cutthroat manager Bert Gordon. Gordon agrees to take him on the road to learn the ropes. But Felson soon realizes that making it to the top could cost him his soul, and perhaps his girlfriend. Will he decide that this is too steep a price to pay in time to save himself?




Let It Ride

He drinks. He smokes. He gambles. He curses. He thinks about committing adultery. You'll love him. An average kind of guy who has a slight problem with gambling goes to the track, and mystically, it seems as though he can't lose, no matter how he bets; and he has an incredible day.




Lock Stock & Two Smoking Barrels


Four Jack-the-lads find themselves heavily - seriously heavily - in debt to an East End hard man and his enforcers after a crooked card game. Overhearing their neighbors in the next flat plotting to hold up a group of out-of-their-depth drug growers, our heroes decide to stitch up the robbers in turn. In a way the confusion really starts when a pair of antique double-barreled shotguns go missing in a completely different scam.


Lucky Town


If you find your dad, what happens next? When she turns 18, unhappy Lidda Daniels leaves Southern California to look for Charlie, her father, a professional gambler who abandoned her years before. On her way to Vegas, she picks up Colonel, a video store clerk whom she finds attractive even though they've never spoken. He's is happy to go, in part because he sees himself as a great poker player. It takes Lidda time to track down Charlie, who's involved in his own tangles: he's freshly back in Vegas for high-stakes poker with Tony, an old nemesis. Tony is jealous of Charlie over a woman, plus Tony has a new habit of hiring a hit man to kill anyone who beats him. Can anyone win?


Maverick


Maverick is a gambler who would rather con someone than fight them. He needs an additional three thousand dollars in order to enter a Winner Take All poker game that begins in a few days. He tries to win some, tries to collect a few debts, and recover a little loot for the reward, all with a light hearted air. He joins forces with a woman gambler with a marvelous, though fake, southern accent as the two both try and enter the game.




The Music Of Chance


The film follows the plight of two hapless drifters - Jim Nashe and Jack Pozzi, a down-on-his-luck gambler and world class manipulator. Pozzi convinces Nashe to shoot the works and put his remaining $10,000 into a high stakes poker game against two rich suckers -- reclusive lottery winners Willie Stone and Bill Flower.



Ocean's Eleven


A gangster by the name of Danny Ocean (George Clooney) rounds up a gang of associates to stage heists of three major Las Vegas casino's (Bellagio, The Mirage, and the MGM Grand) simultaneously during a popular boxing event.


Poolhall Junkies

A talented pool hustler whose stayed out of the game for years, must go back to his old ways when his little brother gets involved with his enemy, the very man who held him back from greatness.

Rain Man


Selfish yuppie Charlie Babbitt's father dies and leaves a fortune -- to Raymond, the institutionalized savant brother that Charlie didn't know he had. They set out on a cross-country journey of discovery.




The Sting


When a mutual friend is killed by a mob boss, two con men, one experienced and one young try to get even by pulling off the big con on the mob boss. The story unfolds with several twists and last minute alterations


Two for the Money


Brandon Lang loves football: an injury keeps him from the pros, but his quarterback's anticipation makes him a brilliant predictor of games' outcomes. Needing money, he leaves Vegas for Manhattan to work for Walter Abrams advising gamblers. Walter has a doting wife, a young daughter, and a thriving business, but he has problems: a bum heart, a belief he's a master manipulator, and addictions barely kept in check. He remakes Brandon, and a father-son relationship grows. Then, things go awry. Walter may be running a con. The odds against Brandon mount.



Vegas Vacation

The Griswolds head off for Las Vegas, as Clark got an extra bonus for developing a food preservative. In the city of fortune, the family ties are once again tested by forces of nature: Ellen finds herself tempted by Wayne Newton, Clark manages to lose all the money the Griswolds own, Rusty, not being 21 years of age yet, hits a lucky streak as Mr. Pappagiorgio and Audrey teams up with Cousin Eddie's daughter Vickie to dance at very interesting night clubs. Also, the Griswolds nearly cause the breaking of Hoover Dam, Clark meets some of Siegfried and Roy's white tigers up close and Cousin Eddie, who now owns some land right out of Las Vegas, gladly offers his helping hand. But the feeling of love and family will bring them all back together again, be it richer or poorer than before - what does money matter anyway?


Viva Las Vegas

Lucky Jackson arrives in town with his car literally in tow ready for the first Las Vegas Grand Prix - once he has the money to buy an engine. He gets the cash easily enough but mislays it when the pretty swimming pool manageress takes his mind off things. It seems he will lose both race and girl, problems made more difficult by rivalry from Elmo Mancini, fellow racer and womaniser. Perhaps some singing will help.


White Men Can't Jump

Billy Hoyle (Woody Harrelson) and Sidney Deane (Wesley Snipes) are an unlikely pair of basketball hustlers. They team up to con their way across the courts of Los Angeles, playing a game that's fast dangerous - and funny.

Value Betting: Gaining an Edge over the Bookie

If the bookmaker's odds are unfair, how can a punter ever win? Given the disadvantage the overround imposes, it is no surprise that as many as 95% of gamblers fail to win at fixed odds sports betting over the long term. There is no denying that most bookmakers, particularly the well-established firms, are very good at setting prices, estimating the true chance of sporting results and locking in a profit margin.


Nevertheless, sports are not statistically quantifiable, in the sense that cards or other forms of casino gambling are, where simple laws of probability govern the outcome of games like blackjack, roulette and craps. I know that I have a 1/37 chance of landing a number 36 on a European roulette wheel (1/38 chance on an American wheel). But how can I know what the true probability is of Ronnie O'Sullivan winning the world snooker championship again? And if I think I know what his chances are, how can I be sure that my estimate is more accurate than the bookmaker's?

Unfortunately, the answers to these questions only come with time and experience, by acquiring a "knowledge" of a sport and its betting market, and a familiarity with the way bookmakers set their odds. The good news, however, is that whilst bookmakers are very good at setting odds for sporting events, they, like punters, can make mistakes, sometimes very glaring ones, which knowledgeable bettors will snap up without a moment's hesitation. William Hill, for example, astonishingly offered 200/1 on Primoz Peterka, the back-in-form Slovenian ski jumper, to win the opening ski jumping World Cup competition of the 2002/03 season at Kuusamo, Finland, despite the fact that he had won the qualifying competition the night before, and had been double world champion in previous seasons. The true odds, by contrast, were likely to be nearer to 10/1, and most other bookmakers had priced accordingly. Peterka won, and William Hill ceased offering odds for the ski jumping World Cup thereafter. Of course, such large mistakes are relatively rare, but smaller pricing errors do and must exist to account for the few per cent of gamblers who are profiting regularly from fixed odds sports betting.

Punters differ in the methods they use to acquire a sports betting "knowledge". Some like to adopt a more mathematical approach by using rating systems based on past performance to predict future outcomes. Others spend hours each week poring over sports journals and Internet sites to glean as much information as they can about a particular event, including news about the weather, and team or player injuries and morale. Still others base their judgement on a subjective feel for the forthcoming event, relying on an inkling or a hunch about what may happen. And finally there are punters who simply pay others to do the thinking for them, by subscribing to one or more sports advisory services.

There is no right or wrong approach to seeking a betting edge. Ultimately, the best one is the one that works for you, one that returns a profit. However, what each approach has in common is a shared aim of finding "value" in the odds, where the true chance of a win is greater than that estimated by the bookmaker. Many punters fail to appreciate the importance of value betting, preferring to subscribe to the "back winners, not losers" school of gambling. Betting on Liverpool at Anfield to beat Sunderland at 4/11, it might be argued, is surely preferable to betting on Sunderland to beat Liverpool at 13/2, even if the bookie has restricted Liverpool's odds but been generous with Sunderland's. Liverpool, simply, are too good, however poor the price.

This analysis is confused because the punter has failed to assess Liverpool's chance of a win in probabilistic terms, but instead rather simply by whether he thinks they will or won't be victorious. "Winners" cannot win all the time, no matter how much a punter is convinced that they can. The important question a punter should instead be asking is whether the true chance of a winner is greater than that which the bookmaker has unfairly (in his mind), but potentially mistakenly (in the punter's mind), estimated it to be. In other words, is the bookmaker's price greater than that which the punter considers to be the fair price? If it is, then he has found betting value, provided he can estimate prices better than the bookmaker, of course.

A value bettor will be generally unconcerned about backing the underdog, or perhaps more relevantly backing a team which he thinks will not win (underdog or not), provided there is value in the bookmaker's odds. A value bettor estimating the likelihood for the Liverpool win to be 70%, with a 15% chance of a Sunderland win would back the away team, despite believing that Liverpool should win. According to these estimations, the fair odds for the two teams are 1.43 and 6.67 respectively. If the punter is right, and the game could be played 100 times, a 13/2 bet on Sunderland each time would, on average, return £12.50 profit from 100 £1 stakes. By contrast, backing Liverpool at 4/11 would, on average, lose him £4.55. He might believe that Liverpool should win each time, but in this case so does the bookmaker, who has cut his odds. Equally, however, the bookmaker has underestimated the chance of a Sunderland win, offering odds that the value bettor considers, in this case, to represent value.

Since odds are just probabilities, value betting offers really the only way to beat the bookmaker. A punter can back as many "winners" as he likes, but if he fails to take into account the bookmaker's prices, it may not be enough to return a profit. There will always be some losers. Really, the argument about value betting is a hypothetical one. The "back winners, not losers" philosophy is itself inherently all about finding a betting edge. If a punter is finding winners and making a profit with them, it means simply that he is winning more bets than the bookmaker believes the punter ought to be winning, according to the odds the bookmaker had set. If this is the case, the punter has found value and established a betting edge, whether he quantitatively set out to do so or just followed his hunches. Successful betting, then, is really all about understanding and managing probabilities. Know the true chances of a sporting win, and there may be profitable opportunities waiting at the bookmakers. As Geoff Harvey says in his book Successful Football Betting, "Find the value, [and] the winners will take care of themselves."

No Luck

Premium television network HBO issued a statement March 14 saying it has decided to cancel production of the horse racing drama "Luck" after a horse that was part of the series died the preceding day at Santa Anita Park, in Arcadia, Calif. Meanwhile, the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) said it is investigating the latest incident.

The most recent accident, in which the horse reportedly reared while being walked to her barn and fell and struck her head, was the third equine death associated with production of the program. "Luck" was filming its second season when the latest equine fatality occurred.

"It is with heartbreak that executive producers David Milch and Michael Mann together with HBO have decided to cease all future production on the series Luck," the HBO statement read.

"Safety is always of paramount concern," the statement continued. "We maintained the highest safety standards throughout production, higher in fact than any protocols existing in horse racing anywhere with many fewer incidents than occur in racing or than befall horses normally in barns at night or pastures. While we maintained the highest safety standards possible, accidents unfortunately happen and it is impossible to guarantee they won’t in the future. Accordingly, we have reached this difficult decision.

"We are immensely proud of this series, the writing, the acting, the filmmaking, the celebration of the culture of horses, and everyone involved in its creation."

Milch and Mann were quoted as saying, “The two of us loved this series, loved the cast, crew and writers. This has been a tremendous collaboration and one that we plan to continue in the future.”

HBO renewed the series, starring Dustin Hoffman, in January for a second season only a few days after the show's premiere.

The show faced intense criticism from animal rights activists after the first two horses died as the result of accidents during filming of racing sequences for the opening season.

Read inspiring true stories of ex-racehorses that successfully transitioned from track to new careers when re-trained inSecond-Chance Horses and the difference they made in the lives of people around them.

The CHRB is following up on the latest fatality, according to a statement from the agency.

"Even though HBO announced the cancellation of the Luck series Wednesday, the CHRB will conduct a thorough investigation, which will include a postmortem examination and toxicology testing," the statement said.

"The CHRB is assured by those onsite at Santa Anita who are responsible for equine health and safety that every precaution was being taken to protect the horses appearing in the HBO program," the statement continued. "In fact, because the filming was taking place in an enclosure within the CHRB’s jurisdiction, the level of care for these animals exceeded the level of care for animals on other filming locations. Everyone involved in the handling of the horses that appeared on Luck is licensed by the CHRB and qualified to do so."

Rick Arthur, DVM, CHRB equine medical director, said in a preliminary report that the horse slipped on a hind leg when she reared, going over backward and striking her head on the ground.

"Three equine veterinarians were on the scene and did everything possible on behalf of the horse," Arthur reported. "They were Heidi Agnic, DVM, HBO’s attending veterinarian and licensed by the CHRB as a racetrack practitioner; Gary Beck, DVM, who normally works as the CHRB official veterinarian at Los Alamitos Race Course, and Scott Meyer, DVM."

The horse reportedly had just passed a physical inspection done by Beck and was being led back to her barn when she was injured.

Despite its strong creative team and cast, the show has reportedly performed poorly. The premiere, according to press reports, attracted just 1.1 million viewers and later episodes have struggled to hit the 500,000 mark.

Originally posted on Bloodhorse.com.

Betting Golden Rules

DON’T SHOW BLIND FAITH IN YOUR ANTE-POST SELECTIONS


Readers occasionally criticise tipsters for tipping against a player or team we have already recommended backing for long-term success.

This is most common in snooker and tennis. For instance, we may have advised a bet on Andy Roddick to win Wimbledon but, come his quarter-final match, have reached the conclusion that the value lies with Roddick's opponent and advocated a wager on him instead. "What is that all about?" the reader will demand. "If you tipped Roddick at the start you can't start riding another horse halfway through the race."

Why not? If, subsequent to our original advice, Roddick's last-eight foe has shown better form and is overpriced it would be remiss of us not to advise getting on the best-value player.

So it is with everyone's punting. Each event has to be analysed using the most up-to-date information available and should not be clouded by an earlier trade on the same event.

In other words, if you have backed Mill wall to win the Championship, you are not obliged to stick by them come what may. On a match-by-match basis they may represent what you consider to be value - this should be especially true in the early part of the season given that, if you dispute the bookmaker's assessment of the team's long-term prospects you are also likely to disagree with their match prices - but you should not wear blinkers that lead you to the conclusion that they will always be value or, indeed, are never worth opposing.

Evaluate each proposition on its current merits. Be prepared to admit an earlier long-term wager you struck may have been wrong.

Stubbornness and intransigence are characteristics no successful punter possesses.

BE RECEPTIVE TO THE VIEWS OF OTHERS, BUT DON’T BE SWAYED TOO EASILY


Just as bad as not backing a winner that you fancied is not backing a winner because you let someone either talk you out of making the bet or, worse, still, into backing something else.

It is interesting, if not always beneficial, to hear the views of others on a betting event you have an opinion on. Sometimes you will pick up a key point you had overlooked. Other times you will hear a theory you disagree with, thus strengthening your belief that you have made the right choice.

What you should never do is fall into the trap of believing the person whose view conflicts with yours is probably right.

If you have confidence in your judgement you will be immune from this pitfall, but there are times, especially when you are on a bad run, when you are vulnerable to latching on to someone else's opinion in the belief that they are probably in better form than you.

This is a particular risk when the person expresses his views in vehement tones. If you find yourself sold on a proposition other than the one you were planning to back simply because you are impressed by the way the person is stating his case, you should switch off and stick to your guns. Oh, and don't answer the door to salesmen. You are probably just the sort of person who would be coerced into spending a fortune on a set of encyclopedias.

The best punters quietly go about their business without telling the whole world who they fancy and why.

They used to be two-year-old horses: but that changed on 1st January

.

So it's a New Year: 2011.

Already much has changed. On the 2nd January, while reading the race cards in the Daily Nag it was obvious something was missing.

Where had all the two-year-old horses gone?

Vanished spontaneously without a please or thank you from Racing For Change.

While Poirot enjoyed his holiday on the Orient Express, he could rest assured the mystery had been resolved. In fact far from shouting: 'It's Professor Plum with a piece of lead pipe in the stables,' there was only one word to be uttered on such a murderous occasion.

'Congratulations!'

For as every racing fan knows - irrespective of it's natural birth date - all race horses celebrate their birthday on the 1st January. (And you thought only Her Majesty The Queen had the luxury of blowing out the candles on two cakes.)

So seemingly in the twinkle of Storm Cat's eye last year's two-year-olds collectively turned three and while there is no mystery about the a new batch being broken-in, learning the ropes, cantering and taking a turn or two in the starting stalls, racing has been left with something akin to a two-year-old Bermuda Triangle or perhaps more appropriately a Newmarket Square. So for at least a couple of months we await the first juvenile race of the new turf season in mid-to-late March - Doncaster's Brocklesby Stakes -while racing is sadly devoid of its 'equine hopes and dreams'.

Bad news always travels fast. It has been clocked at a fantastic speed in Pegasus-style over Epsom's 5f sprint. Worst still, it could be a double helping.

Certain subjects are always difficult to broach. It's like asking a lady her age (or for that matter a filly...it's not so bad with colts and geldings couldn't give two...hoots). But sometimes you have to dismiss barriers - forget the days, months and years which make an age.

Why?

Well HCE has some unfinished business.

As our readers will know, we have a fondness for group-entered two-year-olds. In fact they have always had a place in our heart since our study - the first in the world - was published in the Weekender by Nick Mordin many moons ago revealing our analysis showed that these talented juveniles often become tomorrow's equine stars.

So two-year-old or not, it's no time to talk blog politics. Irrespective of age, this selection of unraced and lightly-raced three-year-olds have a touch of class and most are likely to appear at the start of the new season. In fact there is only one thing wrong with them. They are no longer two.


Horses: 3yo

No Heretic (P.Cole)

Strategic Bid (P.Cole)

End Or Beginning (P.Cole)

Midsummer Sun (H.Cecil)

Kota Sas (M.Jarvis)

Mashaaref (M.Jarvis)

Raymbek Batyr (J.Noseda)

Passing Stranger (J.Noseda)