Chapter 10 - Your Friend, The Selector

How to take advantage of professional selections.

Professional selectors generally fall into two classes, the cautious and the speculative. However, it is hard to follow either class without worrying because, as we have seen, neither ever finishes in the black. A more speculative selector may pick only half as many winners as a colleague but because he stabs for long shots may wind up with more money. The cautious selector may have picked twice as many winners but at smaller prices.

The fan who can get to the track only a few times each meet is faced with a provoking choice: should he depend more upon the man who selects the most winners or upon the man who at times comes down with big mutuels? And the answer depends upon the temperament of the player. Some players prefer to take less risk because they get such a lift from visiting with the cashier although their tickets may pay only $5, or $6 or $7. Other players don't care to get sociable with the cashier but when they do see him they like the visit to be worthwhile.

Professional selectors, however, can be of service even to the most independent player who "hears no hunches, sees no hunches and thinks no hunches." For one thing, the professional selector, if permitted, can do a lot of spadework for the fan. The player then can take the results of the professional's findings and start at that point to apply his own formula. In other words, he can start where they left off.

He can also use the professional judgment as a basis for determining where the greatest risks of the day lie. He also can help himself by eliminating those races which the professional selector would gladly have passed up had he been permitted to do it. These races include the two extremes—the race in which no horse shows particular form and the race in which three or more contenders show about equal form.

The professional selector may have struggled for hours before he arrived at his selections for these types of races. The fan can save wear and tear on his own nervous system by just sitting in the grandstand as a non-participating spectator and enjoying such races. After all, the odds against the average player are high enough without adding to the hazards. And the tracks will be open for business tomorrow, too.

Professional selectors have different ideas of their job just as the players have different ideas of how to arrive at a probable winner. Some strive to snare good priced winners and others concentrate upon obtaining winners with the least possible risk. In between are those selectors who take more risk but not as much as their colleagues who specialize in telephone-number mutuels.

The player soon gets to know the habits of the selectors, and he can make his own decision about following them directly or using them as a basis for figuring his own method. In the Daily Racing Form, for example, Sweep is the most conservative. His yearly percentage of winners usually ranks higher than any of his colleagues, but his prices are lower. Trackman and Handicap at times come out with box-car mutueis. The player can presume that Trackman, since he is at the scene of action, has the best line on the entries. That doesn't mean he will pick the most winners. His formula seems to be that, given several possible contenders, he will select the one with the highest odds.

Handicap seems to seek even harder for long shots although his "stabbing" probably comes from his own systematic formula. Analyst and Hermis are kind of in-between. They are not as "conservative" as Sweep and not as prone to seek long shots as Trackman and Handicap.

The player can make many uses from these habits of the selectors. For example, if Trackman picks a horse on top which gets little attention from his colleagues, the player can turn to Sweep's graded handicaps in which he makes some comment and gives the odds for each entry. If Sweep says this horse will be a serious threat today, the player might decide to ride along because the odds will be good. Trackman has told the player, in effect, that the horse is in shape, and Sweep in his conservative way has confirmed it.

On the other hand, if Trackman and Handicap pick a horse that gets no attention (first, second or third) from the other selectors, the player can decide if he will hang onto his hat and ride along. For if the horse wins, the player probably will be able to make up for many previous losses. (See System No. 1 in Chapter 23.)

The Racing Form selectors sometimes disagree so widely in even their best bets that two or three horses in the same race may be designated as best bets. Some players latch onto these discrepancies to form a purely mechanical method.

Thus if Dandruff is the top consensus horse and also the best bet of one or more selectors, and in the same race a selector chooses Brown Warbler as his best bet, this player would elect to ride with Brown Warbler. The theory is that the selector who went in the face of the collective judgment of his colleagues to choose Brown Warbler must have had some good reasons. Therefore, the horse must have a good chance of winning, and if he does win, he is apt to pay a sizable mutuel.

A check of this method shows that the best results come when Trackman is the dissenter, followed next by Handicap. This showing again bears out the fact that Trackman, at the scene of action, often has a better line on the horses than his colleagues in the home office.

It can be assumed that all selectors go over each horse's records carefully before rating them. The player, then, is foolish if he ignores such ratings entirely. On the other hand, if he follows them blindly he gets nowhere either.

Once in a while, ignoring all the selectors can pay off handsomely. Some players like to cross off every horse named first, second or third by any of the selectors. They play every horse which is left. (See System No. 6 in Chapter 22.)

Even this method can be refined by picking the races carefully. Obviously, the more outstanding a contender or two are in a race, the less likely the winner will be a horse not named by any selector. Races in which the selectors differ widely are the best races in which to ignore all the selections entirely.

The player, in effect, is trying to catch "form" off balance. For there are days when the most prudent arranging of all the variables doesn't seem to produce winners. On such days, long shots just gallop home to the astonishment of the "form" players, track and horse.

Sometimes the results surprise both player and horse. Although races with 10 to 14 entries seem best for this method, a seven-horse race at Balmoral (Washington) on June 2, 1955, produced Mr. Prosecutor at $36.60. Only one other horse failed to get recognition and that horse was Nickie's Boy. He ran second. In other words, the player who put down $4 to play both horses walked away with $36.60. In the sixth race at Sportsmen's Park on May 12, 1955 there were eight entries of which four were not picked by any selector. An eight-dollar investment on those four would have returned $31, for the winner was Restraint.

The player who chooses this method of ignoring all selectors naturally must expect to suffer many losses. He can cut down on some play if he watches the percentage of favorites. The Racing Form at the top of charts for each track prints the percentage of winning favorites to date and the percentage which won at the last previous meet at the same track. When the percentage of winning favorites is much below that of the previous meeting, prudence tells the player to refrain from playing all horses not mentioned by any selector. It's the old hunch working again that a string of favorites is "due."

As a general rule, form also returns after a "field day" for long shots. On that day, too, the player is wise if he doesn't attempt to outguess all the selectors. Conversely, after two days in which four or five favorites won each day, the player might try his hand at outguessing the selectors provided he has the capital and the temperament to sustain the plan. It takes a particular type of player to wager on five or six horses and see them all go into the soup.

A horse selected to win by any of the selectors in the Racing Form earns five points. A second place is worth two points and a third mention worth one point. There is a bonus of two points if the selector also makes that horse his best bet. If all five selectors picked the same horse on top and each made the horse his best bet, the horse would compile 35 points. But this seldom happens, and if it does, the horse is such a substantial betting risk that the odds probably will be one to five or even less.

Some players like to watch the point total in the consensus where the points assigned to each horse have been tabulated. A number of players have built methods around this consensus choice. Obviously, the more points that separate the first and second choices, the better risk the first horse should be unless form means nothing.

A number of fans will not play against a consensus horse which is 25 or more points better than the second choice. They either play the consensus or pass the race. In the seventh race at Sportsmen's Park on May 12, 1955, No Tricks was the top consensus horse with 31 points. The second horse, Resigned, had five points. No Tricks won easily at even money. On June 2, at Delaware Park, Imagem was 25 points the best and he also won. (See System No. 2 in Chapter 20.)

The player, however, need not take these raw figures. He can make his own formula to include restrictions on distance, consistency, form, and other variables.

There is another selector who so far hasn't been mentioned. He is the track's own handicapper who makes up the first odds or what is popularly known as the "morning line." These are the odds before any betting has taken place.

The fan, no matter how early he gets to the track, will find odds already posted on at least two races—the two races on which is based the daily double. Under the pari-mutuel system, there can be no odds technically until the betting starts because the odds are based upon the amounts wagered on each horse.

Daily double players, however, want some estimates to guide them. Players, too, as soon as one race is declared official, want to know odds on the next race. The tote board posts an opening line which is really the morning line.

Many times the odds on the morning line differ widely from odds quoted by the professional selectors of the racing papers. A long check shows that the "morning line" is not as accurate as the choices of the professional selectors. The exact reason for this discrepancy has not been determined because it is a kind of paradox. After all, the track handicapper should be better acquainted with both the horses and the situation.

Many tracks have still another selector whose advice can be studied, if not followed, by the player. These are the tracks at which the official program makes selections for each race. At times, the professional selectors, track handicapper and program choices are far apart which adds to the player's confusion.

Program selections also produce another paradox. Program selections on small tracks (tracks less than a mile in circumference) seem to hit more winners and larger prices than the program choices at the larger tracks. At a small track, it is not unusual to find the program putting on top a horse not chosen first, second or third by any other professional selector.

One explanation might be that the professional selectors are so busy making choices for the larger tracks that they cannot devote sufficient time to the smaller plants. Then, too, the smaller tracks attract the cheaper horses and cheaper horses do not hold their form as long or as well as the better thoroughbreds. Moreover, cheaper horses are more erratic, just as a Class C pitcher is not apt to be as polished and poised as a major leaguer. The program man is in much better position to keep his eye constantly on all the horses quartered at the track. He even gets to know their eccentricities as well as their abilities. The fan can profit many times by looking over carefully, especially at tracks of less than a mile, the program selections. If the track selector has a horse on top which is not picked first by a professional selector, the horse is worth the risk.

Although the professional selectors cannot be followed blindly, the cautious player, however, is going to study their choices carefully before he makes his own decisions. He may not agree with the selections, but before he plays against them he should determine some good reason for differing with them.

For he can be certain of one thing: the choices probably were made as honestly as possible since the professional selector doesn't have to lure anyone into betting. The professional selector gets paid because sufficient people buy the paper each day. The track makes money from each bet. Track owners don't care upon which horse the money is riding because it is waiting at the betting booths, along with state representatives, to get its share.

Since neither track nor state can lose, they have no reason for wishing anything but good luck to the player.

Are You Ready To Move Onto The Next Lesson? Click Here….