Exclusive extract from a top 10 racing book

THE HARMONY OF BETTING LINES (Part 1)

James Quinn is regarded as one of the greats of the American handicapping scene. W
e have chosen his book The Best of Thoroughbred Handicapping, Leading Ideas and
Methods as one of the 10 best racing books of the last 20 years.
In this exclusive extract, Quinn pays tribute to the work of fellow US professio
nal and former PPM columnist Barry Meadow.
Every bet, every day, Barry Meadow plays the races in harmony with his betting l
ines. In three decades of chasing the money at racetracks, I can think of no oth
er player that resembles Barry on the point. The objective is to find value, and
to make money. If the wager should over-pay, Barry may play. If the wager shoul
d not overpay, Barry never plays. The trick is to estimate with a pronounced deg
ree of precision what the payoff should be to render good value, the mark of exp
ertise in handicapping. I imagine nobody does that as carefully and effectively
as Barry.
Years ago, to cite a classic case, the pick six at Del Mar featured a seductive
carryover, and Barry took the Amtrak from his spot in Anaheim to the station at
Del Mar. Minutes later he arrived unannounced at the box.
Its unfailingly fun to spend a day at the races with Barry, because not only is h
e smart and clever, but also hes full of good humour. Knowing that Barry was chas
ing the carryover, I immediately pricked him by saying I had no interest in bett
ing the pick six, but he countered by notifying me that that would not stop him.

Unknown to Barry at the moment, something else would stop him. In the box that d
ay too were a handful of nationally renowned handicappers, each of them eager fo
r the pick-six races to begin.
On the train ride, Barry had isolated the horses he liked in each of the six leg
s. As his custom, he had arrayed the numbers of the horses he liked in several s
ix-race combinations, e.g. 2-5, 3-6-7, 8, 1-7-9, 3-5, 6-7 (72 combinations) such
that his singles and A-horses (top choice in a spread race) would dominate each
ticket. He had constructed as many as a dozen potentially playable tickets. Usi
ng his betting lines, Barry estimated the chances that each ticket would win. Us
ing the morning lines, size of the pool, and the win probabilities he had attach
ed to each ticket, Barry next estimated the number of winning tickets and the pi
ck-six payoffs he could expect. The pick-six races looked formful to a fault, an
d following the numerous calculations, Barry announced he had found no bets.
If memory serves, Barrys cost to play would have amounted to $1,200 or thereabout
s, and he had estimated the pick-six payoff at no greater than $7,000 to $8,000,
or less than 7-1; no value, no play. His colleagues in the box were not similar
ly deterred. One of Barrys colleagues had invested $2,500 and when he hit the pic
k six, he was thrilled, except in short time the payoff was posted at $8,000, an
d the thrill was gone.
Barrys commandment is to make a betting line. The betting line must be a 100 per
cent line, which equals the chances of all the horses in the race, and Barry is
insistent that the handicappers line correspond to 100 per cent, even if that mea
ns agonising on whether Contender C should be 4-1 or 9-2. Barry juggles his orig
inal line until he has reached between 99 and 100 per cent. He suggests to inexp
erienced linemakers this may take as long as 15 minutes to begin, while causing
tension headaches, but soon enough the process can be completed pain-free in a c
ouple of minutes.
In making a betting line, Barry is merely asking handicappers to quantify their
opinions. Instead of saying, I like 6 the best, or Its a closely matched race among
the 4, 7 and 9, or The 5 sticks out but hell probably be overbet, or As many as six h
orses can win here, assign each of the horses a fair-value betting line by asking
rhetorically how often each would win if the race were repeated a hundred times
. Once the percentages have been assigned to each horse, sum them. The percentag
es should add up to 100. If they do not, juggle the line, adding and subtracting
points for each horse, based upon the various handicapping factors that apply.
Once the 100-point line has been established, the next step is easy. The percent
age chances are converted to fair-value odds, using the odds-percentage table. I
f Contender A has 38 points, the fair-value odds will be 8-5. If Contender B has
28 points, the fair-value odds will be 5-2. If Contender C has 18 points, the f
air-value odds will be 9-2, and so forth. Barry urges handicappers to memorise t
he percentages and the corresponding fair-value odds, a sensible and elementary
task.
The next step is crucial, and its Barrys signature point. Handicappers should not
bet at any time, unless they are getting a 50 per cent bonus. Contender A, with
38 points and a fair-value line of 8-5, must be 5-2. Contender B, with 28 points
at 5-2, must be 7-2. Contender C, with 18 points at 9-2, must be 7-1. Fair valu
e is converted to good value. Barrys chart, Win Overlays (on the next page), presen
ts the 50 per cent bonus line for horses having a handicappers fair-value line of
2-5 to 6-1. Memorise these adjusted lines now.
The 50 per cent bonus is not pulled from midair, but is subjectively biased. In
Money Secrets At The Racetrack (TR Publishing 1987, 1990), his signature book, B
arry reports that after studying thousands of his personal bets, he has conclude
d the 50 per cent bonus will guarantee profits of 8 to 10 per cent. Any smaller
bonus percentage may convert profit to loss. This happens because:
(a) handicappers have a tendency to overestimate their horses winning chances, es
pecially the low-priced contenders;
(b) late betting often lowers the odds to the players disadvantage; and
(c) the race will be susceptible to a relatively large error factor, which is no
t considered in setting the betting lines.
If handicappers have no access to the odds-percentage table, but have assigned t
he percentage chances on a 100 per cent betting line, fair-value odds are estima
ted easily with a calculator by dividing the percentage chance of each horse int
o 100, and subtracting 1. Contender A above has 38 percentage points, so 100 div
ided by 38 equals 2.63, minus 1, equals 1.63, or 8-5.
As demanding as Barry can be that handicappers must make a betting line, or theyv
e probably been kidding themselves, he compromises to the extent that the line m
ight be set for the authentic contenders only. Eliminate the horses having a nom
inal chance.
Instead of a 100-point line, now use an 80-point line, allowing the non-contende
rs a 20 per cent chance. In other words, the handicappers contenders should be wi
nning four of five bettable races, a proficiency standard that can be examined,
and should be.
Barrys records show his non-contenders win 15 per cent of the races he bets. Hand
icappers without records can assume their non-contenders will win 20 per cent of
the races. The weakness of the 80 per cent line, however, extends in undesirabl
e ways to exacta wagering, a topic Barry covers exceedingly well, and which we a
ddress next.
Reiterating the importance of setting a betting line, Barry summarises his betti
ng procedure succinctly:
Analyse the chances of every horse in the race.
Determine the fair-value odds using the odds-percentage table.
Bet to win on any horse having odds 50 per cent higher than the betting line.
The betting lines accomplish all the important money-management objectives:
They force handicappers to quantify their opinions, such that they can consider
intelligently, not just one horse, but several horses, and how each relates to t
he others make decisions, not selections.
They allow handicappers to test abilities that can be measured with personal rec
ords across the seasons, e.g. do your even-money shots win half the time, 2-1 sh
ots a third of the time, 4-1 shots 20 per cent of the time, 9-1 shots 10 per cen
t of the time; how much money do you make on horses that go at 5-2 and below; ha
s your handicapping been improving, or is it in decline?
Best of all, the line enables handicappers to spot the true overlays, and the ho
rses and combinations by which bettors can win, not only in the straight pools,
but also in double pools, exacta pools, quinella pools, and the pick-three, pick
-four, pick-six pools.
Barry accomplishes something else, quite wonderful, in Money Secrets At The Race
track. He presents an amazing array of charts that tell handicappers exactly how
much they should bet in relation to the odds and what the cut-off points are fo
r finding his 50 per cent overlay combinations in doubles, exactas, quinellas, a
nd the serial bets. I counted 32 charts, and eight of them displayed pick-six ca
rds and scenarios that featured various combinations of singles, A horses, and B
horses (backup horses), how many combinations must be covered for each scenario
, how to fill out the several betting cards exactly, leg by leg and horse by hor
se, and is easily the best, most accurate material for pick-six shoppers on reco
rd.
In his chapter How Much to Bet, a brief treatment of the Kelly Criterion, Barry ex
plains the dangers of overly aggressive betting and reminds handicappers the opt
imal bet size is equal to the edge divided by the odds. If handicappers enjoy a
15 per cent edge when wagering to win (33 per cent winners at average odds of 5-
2) and the odds on Contender A will be 3-1, the optimum bet is 5 per cent of the
bankroll. To bet more is to overplay your edge, and risk ruin, and to bet less
is to win less than youre capable of winning.
That is, the Kelly Criterion guarantees the maximum growth of a bankroll, as no
other money-management method does. But as Barry explains, the problem with the
Kelly Criterion in pari-mutuel settings (racetracks) is that the edge is always
subjective, not objective. Handicappers believe they have a 20 per cent edge in
an exacta, but the handicapping has been less than perfect.
The correction is a fractional Kelly. Barry suggests a half-Kelly, such that a 1
5 per cent edge to win on a 3-1 shot is no longer an optimal bet of 5 per cent,
but half of 5 per cent, or 2.5 per cent. Few handicappers have records that info
rm them of their betting edge to win, not to mention the edge in doubles, exacta
s, and the serial bets. An a priori edge when betting to win might be assumed at
15 per cent, if handicappers are confident they can win 33 per cent of their be
ts at an average odds of 5-2, an attainable goal for competent handicappers. Div
ide the 15 per cent by the odds to win on selections, and bet a 50 per cent Kell
y. A 2-1 shot would warrant 3.75 per cent of the bankroll (15/2 x 0.50). A 5-1 s
hot would warrant 1.5 per cent of the bankroll (15/5 x 0.50). A 10-1 shot would
warrant 0.75 per cent of the bankroll (15/10 x 0.50). This follows Kelly, as the
percentage amount should decline as the odds grow greater.
Barry recommends a $2,000 bankroll for each of the several pari-mutuel pools win
, place-show, exactas, doubles, pick-threes and his charts reveal the optimal be
t sizes for the $2,000 bankroll at the various odds levels. Examine the Win-Bet
Chart. It shows the optimum bet size where the handicappers line varies from 1-5
to 6-1 and the tote odds vary from 4-5 to 10-1. If handicappers believe a best
bet should be 3-2, and the public offers 2-1, the optimal bet for a $2,000 bankr
oll is $26. To bet more is to risk converting profit to loss. To bet less is to
win less than the handicapper is capable of winning. If an overlay is not listed
on the chart, play the highest listed number, e.g. your 3-5 standout that is se
nt away at 8-5 deserves an $80 bet.
Barrys discussion of place and show wagering is concise and excellent, and will h
ave tremendous appeal to contemporary handicappers finding an unprecedented abun
dance of underlays in the win pools.
Underlays to win are often overlays to place and show, as the oversupply of win
wagering is not reflected in the place and show pools, where the casual customer
s will be supporting their favourite longshots. As Barry tells, the crowd genera
lly overbets longshots to place and underbets favourites and low-priced contende
rs to place. An overlay occurs when a horses percentage of the place pool is sign
ificantly less than its percentage of the win pool. A favourite that has 50 per
cent of the win pool, but just 25 per cent of the place pool, and 20 per cent of
show pool, is probably an overlay to place and show.
But is it? How seriously must a horse be underbet to place and show to qualify a
s an overlay? Barry provides the chart that tells. Using the crowds well-known ef
ficiency when betting to win, Barry has estimated the maximum percentages of the
place and show pools that expose the overlay opportunities. Examine the Place-S
how Maximum Percentages Chart. The even-money favourite that has 25 per cent of
the place pool can be bet to place, as that percentage is less than the 26.95 ma
ximum percentage the horse can have to place. Similarly, the 1-1 favourite that
has just 20 per cent of the show pool can be bet to show, as 20 per cent is less
than the 23.99 maximum percentage.
Ignoring the win pools, if handicappers have a calculator, they can calculate th
e place-show percentages and compare them to Barrys friendly charts. Overlays are
identified quickly. Handicappers leave literally thousands of dollars untouched
among their place and show overlays annually, as I discovered on my inaugural d
ay at the races with Barry, at Santa Anita, in 1987. Overlays I covered to win i
n the first and second races were overlays to place and show as well, the first
paying $6 to place and $5 to show, and the second paying $6.20 to place and $4 t
o show. Their percentages of the place and show pools fell significantly below B
arrys cut-off percentages, but I did not realise that. Handicappers should notice
that Barrys place-show percentages have been estimated for horses at 4-1 and bel
ow, and not for the mid-level and longer-priced horses that inevitably underpay
to place and show.
NEXT MONTH: We continue our extracts from James Quinns marvellous book. The book
is available from most Internet booksellers, including Daily Racing Form at www.
drf.com.
Click here to read Part 2.
By James Quinn