Successful race playing consists of more than just skilled handicapping. Equally important is money control. This is an area where fans frequently bog down. .Many otherwise good race players appear to have a knack for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. They�ve mastered the art of turning what should have been winning days into losing ones. This questionable accomplishment is achieved through poor betting practices.

An essential ingredient of poor betting practices is the averaging of greater amounts being bet on losers than winners. How often have you had days that, on a flat-bet basis, should have shown a profit yet wound up on the minus side? Such situations usually occur because the bettor is doing exactly the opposite of what he should be doing i.e., increasing the size of his wagers after a winner and decreasing them after a loser. Bear in mind that even the best handicapper will have more losers than winners. Therefore, it follows that caution rather than a derring-do attitude should prevail after a winner.

Joe Fan could typify the average track attendee. We�ll assume he goes to the track with a $100 bankroll. First race he bets $10 and hits a winner. He thinks to himself, "Hey! I�m hot. Let�s push our luck." Next race he doubles his bet and finds that his "winning streak" has came to an abrupt end. "Well," says he, "we�ll give it another shot." He bets another $20 and again loses. "That�s not so good," he says, "Better start cutting back or I won�t last out the day." He decides on a $10 wager, and starts looking for a "possibility" at a decent price to compensate for his two losers. He recognizes that the favorite at 4/5 is legitimate, but picks against it anyway, because a potential $3.60 mutuel won�t provide much satisfaction after two losers. The possibility loses, and -of course - the favorite romps home. There�s little purpose in continuing this harrowing tale. I�m sure the reader gets the idea.

Joe Fan, has bet $50 total on three losers (average $16.66) and $10 on his one winner. This haphazard type of wagering continues for Joe throughout the following five or six races. That night, at home, Joe reviews his selections and discovers that on a flat-bet basis he would have been a winner. Instead he wound up losing most of his original $100 bankroll. Joe obviously needs to improve his betting practices if he ever hopes to become a consistent winner.

The following suggests one approach that would enable Joe to insure he will never again be guilty of betting more on losers than winners. The method may not be every one�s cup of tea but it will provide 100% control. All bets should be structured so that each type of bet falls within its own separate unit or category, and has nothing to do with another type of bet. Example: All straight bets should be considered as comprising one series. All exacta bets would comprise another series, etc. However, the principle we cite should and can be applied to each series.

Now, assume we�re dealing with a straight win bet series and start with a wager of $10. The bet loses. Our next straight bet cannot be less than $10, but it can be more. We�ll further assume the next bet is $20. This too loses, and means we have AVERAGED $15 on each loser. Therefore the rule is we cannot make our next bet less than $15 . It can be more but not less. We make a $20 third bet and this time we win.

Okay, so we�ve now succeeded in averaging $15 on our losers and $20 on our one winner. Keep in mind our object is to not wind up betting more on losers than winners. Or -- expressed otherwise � we seek to average more on winning bets than losing ones. Therefore our fourth bet could range anywhere from $11 on up. This is so because win or lose we still would be averaging more on winners than losers. Example: A loser would give us an average of $8.66 compared to our $20 bet on a winner. A winner, on the other hand, would equal a $15.50 average. This compared to $15 bets on losers.

Let�s assume we�re the cautious type and decide on another $15 bet. If this fourth bet lost we then would have bet a total of $45 on three losers for an average of $15, and bet $20 on our lone winner. That�s fine, but what if the fourth bet won? In that case we would have bet a total of $35 on two winners averaging $17.50. Our purpose has still been achieved. We�ve bet more on winners than losers.

The foregoing approach provides a good control, but before winding up we�d like to interject a fact. Some players labor under the illusion that a progressive plan of betting will provide the panacea for all their wagering ills. The fact is that a progression plan can only be effective if a profit can be shown on a flat-bet basis, otherwise it will do nothing but increase losses. Be wary of progressive betting.

Visit the How To Win At Thoroughbred Racing Web site