Greyhound Grading System & A Live Race

Confused by the grading system?
Well you shouldn't be…
as a matter of fact it’s really simple.
There are six grades of greyhounds indicated by A, B, C, D, J and M (Maiden).
The winner of any race is advanced one grade until reaching A.
If a greyhound finishes fourth or worse in three consecutive official starts in the same grade OR fails to earn more
than one 3rd in four consecutive official starts in the same grade, that greyhound shall be lowered one grade.
(Exceptions in Grades D and J)
GRADE “J” FACTS
• Grade “J” is for greyhounds 30 months of age or younger.
• When a greyhound wins a Grade “M” race, it will advance to Grade “J”.
• When a greyhound wins a Grade “J” race, it will advance to Grade “D”, then to “C”, “B” and “A”.
• Greyhounds 30 months of age or younger who drop from Grade “D” will go to Grade “J”.
• Greyhounds who turn 31 months of age while in Grade “J” will be raised to Grade “D” and will be denoted in
the racing program with a (J).
• Grade “M” greyhounds 25 months of age or older will automatically be raised to Grade “J”, and will be labled in
the program with a (M).
GRADE OFF RULES
• Any greyhound who fails to finish at least fourth in eight consecutive official Grade “J” or Grade “M” starts shall
grade off.
• Any greyhound who fails to finish at least fourth in six consecutive official Grade “D” starts shall grade off,
unless the greyhound is young enough to compete in “J”.
Now I will introduce you to Racing & Mutuel  Terms. Some will be similar to horse betting terms but I will go in depth with greyhounds because,they are much more exciting and hopefully after reading this information you will gain quick understanding and get ready to have some low cost fun with a chance of course to win some money. 

Across the Board: A win, place and show wager on a particular greyhound.

Advance wagering: Wagers that are accepted on a race later during a performance or on a future performance.

AGC: American Greyhound Council Inc., a non-profit group jointly supported by American Greyhound Track Operators Association members and National Greyhound Association members, the purpose of which is to provide for the betterment of the welfare of racing greyhounds and the greyhound industry.

AGTOA: American Greyhound Track Operators Association, a non-profit corporation comprised of owners and operators of greyhound race tracks.

All-America Team: The eight top racing greyhounds selected each year by American Greyhound Track Operators Association.

Backstretch: A straightaway on the far side of the race track.

Bertillon Card: A greyhound's identification card that lists 56 physical identifying points for every registered racing greyhound.

Blanket: A covering for a greyhound bearing a number and color corresponding to its post position.

Box: The post position the greyhound will be racing from or the starting box itself. Also describes a wager involving the inclusion of a combination of greyhounds in a race.

Breeder: The individual who is the owner or lessee of his or her dam at the time of whelping.

Brindle: A streaky combination of colors, usually including a predominance of brown or tan.

Calls: The position of each greyhound at specific points around the track during a race.

Career record: A series of five numbers indicating, in order, a greyhound's total number of starts, followed by first place, second place, third place and fourth-place finishes. Often preceded by an abbreviation showing the track at which the starts were recorded.

Chart: A record of each race showing finish, calls, odds and comments describing each racer's performance.

Chartwriter: The person who compiles the charts and writes the comments on each greyhound's performance during a race.

Class: The grade of a race or a greyhound.

Collided: A comment used by the chartwriter to designate major contact between two or more dogs during a race.

Commingled pools: Money wagered at one track which goes into and mixes with wagering pool at another.

Daily Double: A wagering term describing the selection of the first place finishers on consecutive designated races.                                                                                              Dam: The mother of a greyhound.

Dead Heat: An exact tie between two or more greyhounds in a single race.

Doubleheader: Two race performances in the same day.

Draw: A random process by which each greyhound's starting position is determined.

Escape turn: The turn or curve at which the mechanical lure disappears after the race is over.

Fast track: A firm track on which the greyhound can achieve its best speed.

Flashy Sir Award: Given each year to the nation's top distance (3-8 mile) greyhound by the Greyhound Review ; named for an outstanding distance greyhound of the mid-1940's, now a Hall of Fame member.

Forced out: A chartwriter's term describing an instance of a greyhound being crowded to the outside by one or more opponents.

Grading system: Method of assuring greyhounds compete against racers of similar caliber; grades are assigned according to performance, with the top grade being "A". Some tracks use a grade AA.

Greyhound Hall of Fame: A museum and shrine to the greats of the sport. Located in Abilene, Kan.

Infield: Area surrounded by the oval track.

In the money: A first, second or third-place finish.

Interference: Intentional and unusual physical contact which obstructs or impedes the running of another greyhound as determined by the judges. After being called for interference, a greyhound must run in two schooling (non-wagering) races before racing in an official race.

ISW: Interstate Wagering. Wagering which takes place between tracks located across state lines.

ITW: Intertrack Wagering. Wagering between tracks located within the same state.

Judge: A racing official responsible for making decisions concerning photo finish results, eligibility and other racing matters.

Kennel: A business that cares for and races greyhounds under contract with one or more tracks.

Leadout: A handler, employed by the track, whose job includes parading racers in front of the public and placing them in the starting box before a race.

Length: The margin equal to the length of one greyhound. Used to denote how far ahead or behind each greyhound is during or after a race. Measuring speed, each length is computed to represent about 7/100ths of a second.

Lure: A mechanical device attached to an arm and electrically driven around the racing oval.

Lure operator: The person responsible for keeping the lure a uniform distance ahead of the greyhounds during a race.

Maiden: Any greyhound that has not won an official race and is less than 2 years old.

Matinee: A program of racing held during the afternoon hours.

Mutuel Handle: The amount of money wagered.

Muzzle: A wire, leather or plastic device, with a white tip, which is fitted over th greyhound's mouth and jaws and used to aid in photo finishes.

NGA: National Greyhound Association, made up of greyhound owners, breeders and trainers; recognized as a registry for racing greyhounds in the United States.

Nose: The slimmest margin of victory.

O.P. Smith: Owen Patrick Smith, inventor of a revolutionary mechanical lure, circa 1912, that could travel around a circular track; considered the "Father" of American greyhound racing.

Paddock: The area of lockout kennels, scales and inspection area.

Pari-Mutuel: Betting among ourselves. Type of wagering system at greyhound, thoroughbred, harness and jai alai facilities.

Place: A wagering term describing the greyhound finishing second in a race.

Post: A greyhound's post position or starting box number.

Post parade: The parading of the greyhounds before the race after they leave the paddock area. It includes the blanket and muzzle inspection.

Post Time: The starting time of the race.

Program: A printed guide to the day's races, including details such as the specifications and grades of individual races, post positions, past performances, charts, handicapper's selections, overnight entries, track records and other racing statistics.

Quiniela: A wagering term describing the two greyhounds finishing first and second in either order.

Racing Commission: A state or county regulatory agency that oversees all aspects of greyhound racing.

Racing Secretary: The track official whose major functions include determining how many races of each grade are to be run over each distance for any given performance and conducting the random draw for post position.

Rural Rube Award: Given each year to the nation's to sprint (5/16ths mile) greyhound by the Greyhound Review ; named for an outstanding sprinter of th late 1930's, now in the Hall of Fame.

Schooling Race: An unofficial training or qualifying race with no wagering allowed.

Scratch: Withdrawal of a greyhound from a race.

Separate Pools: Money wagered on a race at another track which is totally apart from the pool at the other track.

Show: A wagering term describing the greyhound finishing third in a race.

Sire: The father of a greyhound.

Sprint: A race run over five-sixteenths of a mile or shorter.

Stakes Race: A championship race or one for a purse larger than those offered for other feature races.

Starter: A greyhound becomes a starter for the race when the doors of the starting box open.

Superfecta: A wagering term describing the first four greyhounds crossing the finish line in a race.

Takeout: The money taken from the betting pool to be divided among the track, the state and the operators.

Tattoos: An identification number placed inside the ear of a registered racing greyhound.

Totalisator machine: A computerized system that records amounts wagered, prints tickets for bettors and calculates odds.

Tote board: A board which displays odds and payoffs.

Trainer: A kennel employee whose responsibility is preparing greyhounds for racing and caring for them at all times.

Trifecta: A wagering term describing the first three greyhounds crossing the finish line in exact order.

WGRF: World Greyhound Racing Federation, the worldwide promotion association for the sport.

Whelping: The act of birth.

Wheel: A wagering term describing the selection of a greyhound to win, place or show combined with every other greyhound in the race.

Win: A wagering term describing the first greyhound across the finish line.

Winner's circle: Where the winning greyhound proceeds following the race, often to participate in a ceremonial presentation.

Wire: The finish line for the race.

Please Click Here for Elite Greyhound Adoption

Related articles

• A Little Anatomy and Physiology of the Greyhound
• Demolition Of Mile High Greyhound Park Begins
• History of Greyhounds
• Greyhounds St Leger Odds : Blonde Reagan to take the money at Wimbledon

Wagering Handicapping Help for Greyhound Racing

Greyhound Racing (Photo credit: Mamboman1)

Wagering Handicapping Help
If you want to win consistently, you should learn.
Here are the Factors to Look for to Give you The Winning Edge;
Palm Beach Kennel Club
Grade

In greyhound racing, the dogs actually grade themselves. When a greyhound begins its racingcareer, it is classified as a maiden, which means non-winner. If it wins, it advances to grade J. When it wins a grade J, it proceeds to D and so forth until it moves up the ladder to the top grade - grade A. A greyhound will also drop in grade during its career. If it fails to come in first, second or third in three starts, or better than two thirds in four starts, the greyhound falls down in grade.

When a greyhound wins and advances in grade, its chances of winning are lowered. Conversely, when a greyhound drops in grade, its chances of winning increase. Smart handicappers always consider a greyhound dropping in grade - it's a good bet.
Early Speed

An early speed greyhound is one that is consistently first, second or third at the first turn. In the program, you can tell the greyhound’s first turn position by looking at the chart and finding the column marked "1/8". Early speed greyhounds will finish in the money approximately 80% of the time. Most problems occur at the first turn when the greyhounds are going at full speed and are usually tightly bunched. So the greyhound that can break out of the box and reach the first turn in front, has a better chance of avoiding first turn problems. So look for early speed- it's ALWAYS a good bet.
Post Position

Post position is selected at random when the races are being drawn. Some greyhounds prefer to run on the inside of the track, while others run the outside and still others prefer mid-track. When the starting box opens, the greyhound will naturally run to the area of the track that it prefers. Thus, when a greyhound that likes the inside position draws an inside box, such as the 1,2 or 3, it is in what is said to be a "favorable post position." If that same greyhound drew an outside box - say the 7 or 8 - it is likely that once the box opens, the greyhound would cross the field attempting to reach the inside. Being in an "unfavorable" post position, it runs a high risk of bumping and colliding with other greyhound. It is a very simple way to gain an advantage,
My next post will show you the grading system. Its going to be shocking how simple it really is.

Related articles

• Greyhounds St Leger Odds : Blonde Reagan to take the money at Wimbledon
• Greyhound
• Betfred Eclipse Greyhounds : Latest odds from Nottingham Showpiece

Horse Bets

The Swifts Creek Cup at the Tambo Valley Picnic Races, 2006 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Wager Types Horse Bets Find information on horse betting, how to place a Win, Place, and Show bet. Racebook also provides information on Exotic wagers like, Daily Double, Quinella, Exacta, and Trifecta. We pay track odds on win place and show plus exotics with the most generous horse racing payout limits available on the web!.Metro Racebook offers horse racing clients a wide variety of horse racing exotics with the most generous horse racing payout limits available on the web! With more than 75 thoroughbred horse racing and harness horse racing tracks available for real-time horse racing betting every day! Horse Bets Introduction: The essence of betting on horse racing is betting odds. It's different from betting your neighbor that Tech will beat State in the big football game. There it is head-to-head. Kind of a 50-50 deal. If Tech beats State, you win. He loses. In horse racing, there are eight, 10, 12 horses in every race, and only one can win. To come out on top in this game, you have to cash winning bets when betting on horse racing at the right odds. The betting on horse racing odds make up for the fact that none of us can pick all the winners. Odds for win bets on all the horses are posted all around the track. In addition, TV monitors show win-betting on horse racing odds PLUS possible exacta and daily double payoffs expressed in actual dollars and cents. The odds are constantly changing in reflection of the betting on horse racing, and are updated on the "tote board." The "morning line" odds listed for each horse in the program are not actual betting on horse racing odds, but estimates made by the track handicapper of how the public will end up betting on horse racing . So it is often interesting to note a horse that is being bet to odds far different from his morning line. If he's way down, that's called an "underlay" , and might indicate "smart money"is being bet on the horse. A horse way up is called an "overlay" . If it's one you like, that horse could be an excellent buy in the big supermarket at odds. Try to be a smart odds shopper. Basic wager types for betting on horse races WIN: When you select a horse to win, you collect if your horse finishes first. PLACE: You collect if your horse finishes first or second. SHOW: You collect if your horse finishes first, second or third. ACROSS THE BOARD : Betting across the board is simply making an equal win, place and show wager on one horse. "$2 across the board on number six" is the same as saying $2 to win, $2 to place and $2 to show on number 6 for a total of $6. Other popular horse racing bets Daily Double This betting on horse racing exotic bet involves picking the winners of two races in a row. The Daily Double is usually contested on the first two races of the day and the last two races, although some tracks have daily double betting on horse racing throughout the day. The betting is straightforward. $2 is the minimum bet, and you must select the winners of both races on one ticket. Quinella -- 1st and 2nd-place finishers. For the Quinella, you have to pick (on one ticket) two horses to run first-second or second-first. Exacta -- 1st and 2nd-place finishers. For the Exacta, you have to pick (on one ticket) the exact order of official finish of the first two horses of a race. If you want No. 2 to win and No. 5 second, simply tell the clerk "$2 exacta, 2-5." Always give the numbers in the order you think your two horses will finish. Your total cost is $2. If 2 wins and 5 finishes third, you do not win. If 5 wins and 2 finishes second, you do not win. NOTE: This wager is also called "Perfecta" at some tracks. Trifecta -- 1st, 2nd and 3rd-place finishers. The Trifecta calls for you to pick the first three horses in exact order of official finish. The simplest form of this wager is the Straight Trifecta, which is a single combination of the first three finishers. The minimum bet for a Straight Trifecta is $2. To purchase, simply tell the clerk: "$2 Trifecta on 1-2-3." Trifectas qualify by each track's rules and regulations (refer to program). NOTE: This wager is also called the "Triple" at some tracks. Horse Racing tips: Bet only on horses you feel have a good chance of winning. If you don't like a horse, don't bet on it. Give preference to winners. Choose a horse that has won before. Avoid betting on a horse that has just moved up in class. Look for value odds as much as likely winners. If you keep looking for them, you will learn to spot them fairly quickly. Look for a horse that has a fair chance of winning and is not overly backed. This is usually a good value bet in the long run. On odds of say, 10:1, you need to win once in ten attempts to break even. Anything more is net profit. Horses backed heavily by touting services and computer handicappers may win more often, but are usually poor value bets. When the track is slow or heavy, give preference to fast starters. Slow, muddy and heavy track conditions usually favor the horse that takes an early lead. A straight bet is simple, manageable and not too difficult to win. Play it but always weigh up the odds. Avoid favorites and long shots (outsiders) too. Be selective - don't bet on anything or everything. When betting straight, consider betting to win and show, or each-way, if the odds are relatively high.

Related articles

• April Horse Race Prize Draw | Ebuyer HQ
• Churchill Downs unveils new way to bet on horse races
• Gambling expansion may come to Michigan - at the horse racing track

The Dangers of Over-betting and Over-Estimating your Edge

Gambling (Photo credit: sincerelyhiten)

These graphs illustrate the long term power of using Kelly sizing to increase one's bankroll over time, and beg the question, 'if Kelly betting will lead to such incredible returns, then betting double or triple Kelly must lead to even higher returns!' Referred to as 'over betting,' this misguided notion is one of the reasons that so many +EV sports bettors go broke just like their square compatriots. It turns out that someone betting 1.5 Kelly has the same expected growth as someone betting 0.5 Kelly, but with tremendously wilder upswings and downswings, and much more risk. Betting 2 Kelly actually has the same expected return as not betting at all: exactly zero, and betting more than two Kelly has a negative long term expected growth even if you are making positive expected value bets, and your bankroll will eventually fall to zero! In conclusion, Kelly sizing is in fact, as has been stated several times, the point at which return is exactly optimal.

Another important point to consider is that the dangers of over-estimating and over-betting your edge are not restricted to Kelly Betting. Flat bettors or even bettors who gamble 'however much they feel like' on a given trip to the casino frequently over-estimate and over-bet as well. Generally, bettors this unsophisticated are over-betting no matter what they do; they have zero edge at best, and probably a negative edge expectation, and shouldn't even be betting in the first place. Yet, many advantageous cappers or bettors who buy my picks can unwittingly over-bet as well.


In addition to the dangers of over betting, the Kelly Criterion also has large swings compared to flat betting. For example, a given positive expectation wager that compounds at 10% per time unit will eventually double, and of course grow to infinity. However, since the swings with Kelly betting are so large, the initial bankroll actually has a 1/3 chance of being cut to half its initial value at some point before doubling. To an academic, this is immaterial, since they can keep their eyes on the long run expected growth. However, to investors who are often investing money for a shorter period of time and expecting immediate and consistent returns, this relatively high short term risk and volatility is unacceptable.

However, because variance is exponentially related to return, we find that cutting the bet size in half causes only a nominal reduction in expected growth, but square roots the variance. In other words, if we were to bet one half Kelly unit on our 10% per time unit (with full Kelly) proposition, we would grow our funds at a slightly slower rate of 7.5% per time unit while our risk/variance/volatility would be the square root of what it was previously. To use the previous example, we would now fall to 50% of our starting bankroll only 1/9 (rather than 1/3) of the time before doubling it - a much more tolerable level of risk for the average investor.

Betting one half Kelly unit instead of a full unit also helps prevent accidental over betting when we may have overestimated our edge, and we have already examined how destructive this can be. For example, if a bettor estimates his win percentage to be 58%, he would accordingly bet 11.8% (at 10:11) of his bankroll following full Kelly sizing. But, suppose that despite correctly picking a winner, the bettor had incorrectly assessed the real win percentage, and the side he picked would in fact be a winner only 55%, rather than 58% of the time. In this case, he should have bet only 5.5% of his bankroll, and since he overestimated his edge by 3% he actually over bet and wagered more than 2.1 Kelly. This will result in a negative expected growth despite the fact that the bet was still positive expected value, and would win 55% of the time. However, if the bettor instead followed a policy of betting ½ Kelly, overestimating win percentages is not nearly so dangerous. In this case, the win percentage miscalculation would have caused him to mistakenly bet twice the determined appropriate bet size… and he would have bet 1.0 Kelly instead of ½ Kelly, causing himself no harm whatsoever.

Full Kelly wagering is optimal when you know the odds exactly (as might a card counter who is aware of precisely which cards remain), but is too dangerous when positive expectation wagers are less certain.  Bettors are well advised to halve or even third their bet sizes to cut down immensely on volatility while sacrificing relatively little expected growth.

Talk to any career bookie, and you will find a shocking truth: many (maybe even as high as 20% or 30%) sports bettors actually win over 50% of their games in the long run. However, their concepts of money management are so poor that almost all of them over bet wildly, driving their long term expectation to zero, and they all end up completely broke. The following anecdote, which could be any one of a million different bettors, illustrates the dangers of over betting:

"This guy Archie came into my book on the first week of September and bet about $1k on ten different NFL games. He ended up going 9-1, and turned his $10k into $18k. (n.b. we are ignoring vig for the sake of simple calculations) I knew he would be back though, and sure enough he was there the following week, betting $2k on nine different NFL games and totals. He got hot again, and went 7-2, and his $10k had now grown to $28k in just two weeks. I wasn't worried though, because the story is always the same with these guys. In week three, he came in with 7 more 'locks' and put $4k on each game, only to go 1-6, losing three of the games in the last minute. Frustrated with his bad luck, he put all of his remaining $8k on the Monday Night Under, which busted when the Broncos scored a meaningless touchdown in the final minute. Three weeks after he started, Archie was broke."

Archie is a prototypical gambler with absolutely no investment discipline. He started out with $10k, went 17-10 (63%) and ended up broke. Rampant over betting is a great way to empty your pockets while winning two thirds of your games. If Archie had just flat bet $500 per game the whole way through, he would've turned his $10k into $13.5k in three weeks. If he had bet 5% of his bankroll on each sequential game, he would have run his $10k up to $18.7k, and then slid in week 3 to finish at $13.7k, netting a $3.7k profit, albeit with some big swings. Does this story sound familiar? It should - it describes about 90% of the gamblers you'll find at any given time in a Las Vegas sportsbook.

Related articles

• Vegas sportsbooks took big beating in Week 9
• Prosnotic Sportif Internet: The Bettor in Me
• Restaurant's horse-betting plan picks up speed in Lake Forest
• New York indicts 25 in $50 million betting ring

Bayes' Theorem and Sports Betting Touts

Sports betting (Photo credit: Marit & Toomas Hinnosaar)

A brief discussion of Bayesian probability is relevant to begin an examination of the claims of sports betting 'touts.' Bayes' theorem relates to the conditional probability and marginal probabilities of two given events, where both events have non-zero probabilities. In other words, it examines an outcome based on the known background distribution from whence that outcome arose.
The basic idea is perhaps most easily explained through this common example: A patient in Country X sees his doctor to determine whether he is suffering from disease Y. A preliminary test is administered, and the test comes up positive. The doctor administering the preliminary test already knows that 5% of the inhabitants of Country X suffer from disease Y. Through extensive research, the doctor also know that when the patient actually has the disease, the test will come up positive 100% of the time (there will never be a false negative), and when a patient does not have the disease, the test will erroneously come up positive 10% of the time (a false positive).
Given that the patient's test came up positive, what is the probability that he actually has the disease? Initial reactions are generally that the probability is high - after all, the test was positive, so therefore the patient will probably actually have the disease somewhere around 90% of the time! In actuality, this results-based logic falls apart when examined from a Bayesian perspective, and when we consider the background distribution.
Ninety five percent of inhabitants do not have the disease, but 10% of them get a false positive anyway. Only 5% of inhabitants actually do have the disease, and all of them come up positive. Thus, only about 1/3 of the total number of positive results are from people who actually suffer from the disease. When a population of 1000 people is tested, 50 will suffer from disease Y and will test positive, while the other 950 will be healthy. Yet 95 out of the other 950 will still be given a false positive, and thus 95 out of the 145 total positive tests will actually be false. We know that the patient took the test, and we know that the test was positive - but all that tells us is that the patient is a member of that group of 145 people whose tests were positive. Thus, it is not quite time to despair - there is still 65.5% chance that he is in fact not suffering from disease Y!
The patient in Country X was horrified to see a positive test result, because he assumed that it was almost certain (~90%) that he had the disease, while in reality the probability was only 34.5%. Many touts use this same false, results-oriented trickery to fool customers into thinking that they are beating the lines, when in fact they are just lucky.
Consider that if 5% of sports bettors can actually beat the lines in the long run, and 80% of those are winners over a 2 year period, and 95% of bettors are hacks who are just flipping coins , and 20% of them are winners over a 2 year period (due to variance), then this means that 82.6% of bettors who are winners over a 2 year period are actually hacks who are long term losers!
Thus we stumble upon the golden tout philosophy: there are so many hacks out there, that some portion of them are going to experience several standard deviations of variance, and will be winners over a period of several years, despite the fact that they are 'truly' long term losers - in practicality, that adds up to hundreds of touts who have built huge winning records through blind luck, and are selling their picks to an unwitting public. Yet despite their record, these Bayesian touts have at best a 50% win rate looking forward, if not worse.
An even simpler way to examine this is through Warren Buffet's famous quarter game: say all 300 million Americans paired up and flipped a quarter, with the winner keeping the loser's coin. The next day, the 150 million winners would pair up and flip, and again the winner would keep the loser's quarter. The survivors would repeat this for 22 days, at which point 71 players would be left, each having amassed a fortune of $1.04 million in quarters. The world would praise these 71 incredible flippers, laud them as geniuses of coin calling, and examine in minute detail what exactly it was that made them so good at calling heads or tails. No doubt dozens of books titled, "How I Became a Millionaire in Three Weeks doing nothing other than Flipping Quarters" would be published. This scenario seems laughably ridiculous, but this is almost exactly what sports betting touts who sell their picks to an unwitting public are doing! Touts base all of their results on past metrics which hold no predictive value, and disappear as soon as they have a bad season only to reappear with a new name and website when they run hot again.
So how can a smart investor figure out which touts are sharps with a positive expectation for future performance, and which are just members of a large crowd of losers who happened to hit a lucky streak? How can he tell which claims are significant, meaningful indications of future success, and which are nothing more than lucky hot streaks?
1. Justification for success. An analyst with extremely complex statistical metrics, such as my math model is more likely to be successful in the future than a gambler who won 30 out of 50 games, but can't offer a reason other than, "I'm the million dollar man, I just pick locks."
2. A very, very large sample size. Some touts sell their entire product based on a 15-0 hot streak, or winning 60 out of 100 games. Sample sizes this small are completely meaningless. If you flip 100 coins over and over, you'll get heads 60 or more times about 1 out of every 30 times, which is pretty frequent when you consider the number of touts there are trying to sell their picks based on tiny sample sizes.
On the other hand, my college football picks have gone 1132-843-42 (57.0%), my NFL picks have gone 217-169-9 (56.2%) and my basketball picks have gone 5328-444-226 (54.5%) over the last ten years. Now that is a meaningful sample size, and every statistical test, measured to the highest degree of certainty, would conclude that I am without question able to beat the spread a high percentage of the time. How many other handicappers have been consistently producing winners for ten years? Just one.
3. Clear statement of records. Many touts fudge their numbers by quoting ridiculously selective, meaningless statistics. Claims of, "90% winning percentage on Thursday night inter-conference games," or "undefeated on Monday nights in November," abound in the tout industry. Numbers such as these which are artificially created ex post facto are so ridiculous that any serious investor should quickly learn to ignore them.
I care about only one statistic: my overall record. Beyond that, I quote win rates which grow slightly higher when I assign more confidence (stars) to a pick. This is further evidence that my models predict outcomes better than Vegas lines; the further off I think a line is, the more likely my pick is to win.
Do not be fooled by the lucky few touts that emerge with hot streaks every year. There are so many thousands of touts spouting drivel that a few of them are bound to get lucky once in awhile. I have reasons to expect future success to match my past record, and I have been a consistent winner for 22 years.

Related articles

• Bayes' Rule
• Savile: remember Bayes theorem?
• Nate Silver Explains The Most Important Concept In Statistics
• Proper analysis does not need Bayes

How To Bet NASCAR

nascar (Photo credit: rogerblake2)

Like it or not, NASCAR’s popularity has continued to grow ever since FOX and NBC took over the television broadcasting rights four years ago. This exposed many new markets to stock car racing, and the Nextel Cup Series is now second only to the NFL in terms of fan popularity. This recent surge of interest has also increased the popularity of NASCAR betting.
There are two main types of NASCAR wagers, including picking the outright winner and picking the winner of head-to-head driver matchups. A money-line is used in both situations and resembles the same format used in wagers on golf and tennis.
When picking the race winner, all drivers are plus (+) money, which means a bettor can pick four or five different drivers and still profit if one of them wins. Normally the favorite is at least 5-to-1 (+500) or higher, with many competitive drivers at 12-to-1 (+1200) or higher.
NASCAR has become more competitive than ever with at least 15-20 drivers having a chance to win each week. Last year, 31 different drivers had at least one Top-5 finish during the 2004 season with 13 different winners in 36 races.
Because of the great parity in the sport, it is not uncommon for a longshot to grab an occasional victory. In 2003, Joe Nemechek was 40-to-1 when he won at Richmond and he was 40-to-1 again last year in his Kansas Speedway win. Even a competitive driver like Elliott Sadler was 25-to-1 when he won at Texas in 2004.
Another popular type of wager is head-to-head driver match-ups. This wager involves only two drivers and the bettor must predict which driver will finish higher in the race. This is the preferred method used by many professional handicappers, as it allows them to focus on or against a specific driver, without having to worry about the other 42 cars in the field.
Once again, oddsmakers use a moneyline (just like baseball) and most match-ups are on a 20-cent line (-130 / +110 for example) all the way up to -200 / +170 where a larger split takes place. Head-to-head match-ups allow great flexibility for handicappers as they can either look to play on certain drivers or against certain drivers. The best betting situation occurs when a hot driver is pitted versus a cold driver in the same match-up.
The beauty of handicapping NASCAR lies in the intricacies of each individual track. There are 36 races at 22 different tracks over the course of the 2005 Nextel Cup season. Each track varies in distance, banking, surface, etc. The longest tracks are 2 1/2 mile super-speedways like Daytona and Talladega with race speeds nearing 190 mph, while the others are 1/2-mile short tracks like Martinsville and Bristol (or road courses like Infineon and Watkins Glen) where the race speeds are under 80 mph.
Certain drivers excel at super-speedways (Jeff Gordon, Dale Earnhardt, Jr, and Michael Waltrip have won 15 of the past 18 restrictor plate races) while other drivers excel at short tracks (Kurt Busch has won four of the past seven Bristol races). Past history is an important handicapping factor as certain drivers and teams consistently do well on specific types of tracks.
NASCAR is a team sport and it takes more than one individual to win the race. The driver is the star, but he must rely on his pit crew of six to eight members and his crew chief to prepare a winning car and then make the necessary adjustments as the race progresses. Current form is important as teams go through slumps during a long nine-month season, just like athletes and teams in any other sport.
Another important handicapping factor is practice. Each driver is allowed three practice sessions on the Friday and Saturday before the race. The first practice session usually takes place on Friday morning, followed by qualifying to determine the starting order. The next two practice sessions usually take place on Saturday morning, with the final practice known as “Happy Hour.”
The oddsmakers and media put too much emphasis on qualifying times, as the practice times are more relative to the overall race results. The first practice session is usually run in “qualifying trim” meaning the teams prepare the car to run fast for just two laps. Many changes are made to the shocks, brakes, oil, etc. which would not be optimal for actual race conditions.
The second and third practice sessions are usually run in “race trim” which more accurately simulates real racing conditions. These times provide an excellent gage into how a team will perform that weekend, including race day.
With all its details and numbers, NASCAR continues to grow in popularity each year. It is a competitive and balanced sport and this parity provides excellent opportunities for the smart sports bettor as many winning drivers have odds of at least 10-to-1 (+1000) or higher.
It is extremely important to shop around at various sportsbooks to obtain the highest odds on each driver you play. Some sportsbooks will post a driver at +600 while another sportsbook has him listed at +1200. This type of discrepancy is seen every weekend and by having multiple offshore sports accounts, a bettor is guaranteed the highest possible payout on every winning wager he or she makes.
The same holds true when playing head-to-head driver matchups. One sportsbook might have a driver at -130, while another has him at -115. Money saved is money earned and this is what separates a long-term professional winner from a recreational amateur.

Related articles

• Motorsport: Toyota enters NASCAR - You think Bubba will like us?
• Is Sunday NASCAR's best day?
• FYI WIRZ: NASCAR's Top Four Chasers Hope for Top Results in Texas
• NASCAR Fan to Win Chance to "Begin the Batman Begins 400 at MIS"
• Brad Keselowski feels positive about Chase position heading into NASCAR Texas race

BCS Championship Predictions

Notre Dame Stadium (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

BCS Championship

Alabama Crimson Tide vs. Kansas St. Wildcats

Projected line: Alabama -16

Kansas St. likely controls its own destiny against a very doable remaining schedule. The Wildcats started slow this past week against Texas Tech but eventually pulled away for another lopsided win. They have a stern test this week hosting Oklahoma St. before hitting the road for two games at TCU and Baylor. Alabama had no issues with Mississippi St. as it got warmed up for its big game at LSU. The Tide are 10-point road favorites there and they are showing they can cover anywhere, so making them more than a two-touchdown favorite against the Wildcats on a neutral field is legitimate.

Fiesta Bowl

Oklahoma Sooners vs. Boise St. Broncos

Projected line: Oklahoma -7

Despite losing to Notre Dame at home, the Sooners remain in the Fiesta Bowl. Besides Alabama, there are other four SEC teams ahead of Oklahoma but those teams have to go elsewhere and the Sooners will likely be the highest at-large team left. The Broncos are very well alive here as they have to finish ahead of at least one conference champion, which comes from an AQ conference and that could easily be the Big Ten or Big East. As long as it wins out, Boise St. will eventually end up in the top 16. This is a great rematch from the 2007 Fiesta Bowl and the Sooners will be around the same sized favorite here.

Orange Bowl

Louisville Cardinals vs. Florida St. Seminoles

Projected line: Florida St. -10

The Seminoles are coming off another blowout win and they remain on pace to take the ACC Atlantic. They play next Thursday at Virginia Tech, which is no easy task and close the season against Florida, so nothing is a guarantee. Louisville takes this spot now after Rutgers fell to Kent St. and while the Scarlet Knights are still undefeated in the conference, a loss like that shows they are not very good. As mentioned last week, the Big East Conference is the lowest ranked conference and it will not get much respect from the linesmakers no matter who is here.

Rose Bowl

Oregon Ducks vs. Nebraska Cornhuskers

Projected line: Oregon -15

Oregon is playing at a high level and will likely need help to get into the BCS Championship although its schedule gets stronger the rest of the way. The Ducks face the Trojans this coming week and Nebraska moved ahead of Michigan after defeating the Wolverines on Saturday night, so it is now the frontrunner to meet Wisconsin in the Big Ten Championship. The Ducks look unstoppable and should they fall into the Rose Bowl, they will be big favorites not matter who they face.

Sugar Bowl

Georgia Bulldogs vs. Notre Dame Fighting Irish

Projected line: Notre Dame -7

The Fighting Irish made a lot of people believers after their very impressive win over Oklahoma. The problem for Notre Dame is its remaining schedule as the last true test is against USC, which lost again this past weekend. It is looking more likely that Notre Dame can go undefeated and not play for a national title. Georgia moved back into the national championship picture following their big win over Florida. Playing in the Sugar Bowl could be determined by how bad the Bulldogs lose to Alabama in the SEC Championship. Notre Dame goes from underdog to favorite.

Related articles

• Boise State Football: How Boise State Can Still Make a BCS Bowl
• The Notre Dame Fighting Irish Argument
• 2012 bowl projections: Notre Dame to face Kansas State Wildcats in Fiesta Bowl