Lady Rose Knew When to Stop Wagering

Many years ago while researching betting systems, I came across Lady Rose, a habitual race track devotee. Lady Rose, who enjoyed wagering on the nags, was a delightful, lovable 75-year-old grandmother, a widow who was a happy-go-lucky sort with lots of children and grandchildren.

Everyone who met Lady Rose at the track loved her good humor and pleasant personality and eagerly discussed their betting selections with her, arguing the pros and cons of each horse, condition of the track, jockeys, post position and all the other factors that go into picking a winning pony.

Her race track cronies said that she didn’t lose very often. In fact, they claimed that she was one of the few bettors who actually made a profit year after year.

It wasn’t much, about $10,000 to $15,000 annually, but it came in handy on holidays, birthdays and special events when she would deluge her family members with beautiful and expensive presents. Sometimes she even had enough money left over so that she could take a trip. Cruising was her favorite form of travel.

In any case, Lady Rose had been winning with a system that many of today’s professional bettors are probably still using. It combined money management and the ability to come up with one winner a day. But if you think that picking one winner a day is easy to do, guess again.

Actually, I wouldn’t want to rely on my own handicapping abilities to consistently come up with a winner every single day. I go to the track for entertainment on weekends, holidays and vacations. If I win, it’s that much more enjoyable. If I lose, it’s no big deal. I don’t invest a lot of money, certainly not more than I can afford.

Probably the easiest way for the average bettor to find a winner is to use the selections made by handicappers in local newspapers or in the Racing Form.

Professional newspaper handicappers are paid to come up with winners. They follow the horses because that’s how they make a living. They receive up-to-date information on the horses every day from trainers, owners, grooms, exercise riders, jockeys and race track public relations people.

There are very few days when they don’t pick a winner. Lots of times they win in streaks. For instance, a handicapper on a New York City paper reportedly had at least one winner 64 days in a row. Statistically, newspaper handicappers across the nation come up with about 22% winners. So you can see that they would be the logical choices to follow.

If you’re the type of person who wants to have a good time and make some money without expending much energy in figuring the horses from the past performance charts in the Racing Form, let the handicappers work for you. And if you do like to study the Racing Form and make your own selections, then consider skipping some races.

Maiden races, for example, are tough to figure. These are the races for horses who have not yet won. Not only can you go broke wagering on these neophytes, but your coffee bills should increase proportionately as you stay awake nights trying to figure out ways to get even.

Particularly 2-year-olds. As the professionals know, they are new to the game and are terribly nervous. They’ll jump at the slightest sound, they’ll run from people and they’ll even skip over track shadows and flying bits of paper. No matter where these “babies” may be--on the track, in the stable area or in the paddock--they can’t be trusted.

It would be a good idea to also skip the cheap claiming races inasmuch as the horses entered in those races are inconsistent, they are not good athletes, so to speak, they don’t have much heart for racing and are probably not in the best physical condition.

Here’s how Lady Rose did it: She relied on the handicappers in her local newspapers. Naturally she developed a following for one who gave her the most winners. Generally she set a limit of $50 a day. Other players, however, may decide they need more money, and others may make do with less. The amount is up to you.

She always started betting on the first race. She figured the odds and wagered just enough to win the limit she set, plus the amount of money she bet. If Lady Rose didn’t win the first race, she bet the second, again figuring the odds so that she got back the total of her limit, her previous losing bet and the amount of her new bet. She did the same on the third and the races thereafter. Once she won, she stopped betting.

Of course, there were days when she ended up a loser. However, over the years, her winnings more than made up for her losses.

What the system requires is your daily limit on winnings and the will power to quit when that limit is reached. And all that’s needed is one winner during the nine-race card.

The big question, of course, is which handicapper to follow or which horse to bet if you’re doing your picks--a nagging problem for all horseplayers.

Consider the new consensus box that appears in this newspaper on all racing days and start with the handicapper’s choice in the first race. If you had chosen to follow Curtis Crayon, one of the three handicappers, on Nov. 3 at Oak Tree, you would have had only to bet the first race.

Crayon’s selection, Encroach, running in a 6 1/2-furlong sprint, started fifth in a seven-horse race from the No. 2 post position. The horse ran third entering the stretch, made its move with a rush on the outside, passed up the fading Bravest Star and Rayal Prima Donna and won by two lengths. Encroach paid $11.80 to win.

If your limit for the day was $50, all you would have had to bet was $11. The return would have been $64.90, and you would have had a profit of $53.90. Then you would have gone home, inasmuch as additional betting that day would have risked your winnings.

And if Crayon had lost the first race, he would have made up for it in the second, when Esteem Belief won and paid $9. He won again in the fourth with Haughty Dancer, which paid $4.40, and finished off the day with his fourth win, Radar Alert, which paid $12.20.

Pat Ray, another Times handicapper, won the first race on Nov. 10. Inasmuch as Ray’s selection, Ono Gummo, was a $9.80 winner, it would have taken a $13 bet to win the $50 limit. The total return would have been $63.70, for a $50.70 profit.

Bob Mieszerski, The Times’ featured handicapper, may have caused some adrenalin to flow when he won the fourth race on Nov. 12 for his first winner of the day. Land Rush, an odds-on favorite, took the lead at the three-quarter pole and went on to win the 1 1/16th-mile race by four lengths, paying $3.40 to win. System players would have had to bet $150 to win in order to come up with a $50 profit and to make up the $45 already lost on the day’s first three races. The total return would have been $255, however, to end the day’s betting.

In the first race, Mieszerski picked Native Conquest, which went off almost 4-1, and finished eighth. It required a $10 bet. The second race found Madonna Blue, about 7-1, ending sixth. The bet was $9, for a total loss of $21 on the two races. Hollywood Hays, 3-1, ran fourth in the third race. The $24 bet added to the $21 made it $45 in losses on three races.

Actually, the faint of heart could have skipped Mieszerski’s fourth selection, since the race was a maiden run and could have gone on to the fifth race. Mieszerski won his second of the day with Super Ready, which paid $5.80 to win. And to top off the card, his Ki Nobre won the ninth race for a $6.40 payoff.

Admittedly, a day without one winner would be a disaster. If so, like Lady Rose, most bettors might want to put a stop-loss on their daily action. That’s the key. Just like winning, once they have lost their limit, they quit for the day and start over the next day on the theory that it wouldn’t take many wins to make up the losses. Obviously, Lady Rose did!