Harness: Strength in numbers when handicapping

In about a week, some of the best harness handicappers will gather at The Meadowlands to compete for a $40,000 first prize in the World Harness Handicapping Challenge. It’s a battle of wits and skill with a healthy amount of luck thrown into the mix.

What separates racing from other forms of wagering is the number of options and variables. Table games and slot machines offer many results, but in the end, even the perfect player can only do so much to improve their odds. While sports wagering comes with variance since multiple human actions and decision are involved, ultimately there are only two possible results for each game. In addition, in both of these forms of gaming you are playing against the house rather than other players. Perhaps the closest form of wagering to racing is poker, which pits players against each other and allows the astute player to form opinions and gather information to increase the chances of success.

It is the ability to form opinions that is the most intriguing part of harness racing for me. The room at The Meadowlands will be filled with over 100 players using varied methods and handicapping angles. Player A likes the trainer change angle, player B likes horses making their second start off a layoff, player C uses race replays to form opinions, player D likes the driver change angle, and so on.

How marvelous that dozens of people can look at a track program, study race replays and call on their years of experience playing the sport to form completely different conclusions. That is what makes an experienced handicapper one of the best tools available wagering.

No, I’m not here to tout my ability as a public handicapper, but rather to express the importance of all opinions and how when used properly they could be very helpful. Moreover, let me be very clear, I’m only referring to actual analysis and not picks, which are horse names or numbers that come with no basis for how opinions have been formed.

Humans are inherently flawed. Even the best handicapper in the world, no matter how long they study for a card of racing, is bound to miss something eventually or perhaps be missing a key piece of information. That is where outside sources become vital.

The key is to decipher the important information from all of the fake news that is available. Find someone who is watching the races closely on a regular basis and provides consistent information.

At The Meadowlands, Dave Brower has been handicapping for years and there is a reasonable chance he may have seen something that you missed. At Yonkers, I use Matt Rose. At Woodbine Mohawk Park, Garnet Barnsdale is about as sharp as they come and catches all of the action. There are certainly other examples at tracks across the country.

Years ago I instituted a policy where we include stats for each of our regular handicappers. That makes it easy to determine the quality of the person providing the information, though it is far from infallible. The statistics do not account for bad luck or in-the-money percentage. If a handicapper selects 13 races and has just one winner but seven of his top picks finish second, he had a decent day but the numbers will reflect the card as a failure. That’s why it is important to pay close attention. Another reason is because just like a good hitter will be better at certain times, handicappers get “hot” as well. They could hit 50% for a month and then fall to 20% the next month.

One of the most controversial pieces of information is comments from trainers or drivers. Some people hate them stating that if a trainer says he doesn’t like his horse and it races well, it looks bad for the sport. I can’t refute that possibility, but what if the trainer brings specific actionable facts, like the horse bled last time or he choked down?

My advice is simple, keep track of the horsemen you follow and how their prognostications turn out. Does one trainer have a high success rate when they say something positive about their horse? If so, that is an opinion worth future consideration.

The art of handicapping can be tricky. There are so many variables to consider and there are no perfect handicappers. That’s why I’m convinced two or more experienced handicappers are better than one.