- Search Results
In reply to: Is each way betting a waste of time?
They are ways and alternatives to backing each way by using the Tote online or Betabet’s place only market.<br>There you will find the bet you should have made ;)
In reply to: Is each way betting a waste of time?
Of course, we all have losing runs. I see how you have come to the conclusion that Esc was ripped off in his bet – sadly though the bookies are not going to be nice in giving us perfectly round and even bets. They want to keep some (a lot) for themselves.
I think it would be interesting to see how win only punters and each-way punters records compare over a long period of time.
The bookies have the odds in their favour most of the time (nearly all the time i think) because if they didn’t, they’d go out of business!
When you bet on a race you want to come away with more than you started. You can do this with each-way betting.
You’ve shown that each-way punters don’t have much in their favour when it boils down to figures and allsorts which suggests that a lot of the time each-way betting is not value. There are times when it is though – Esc’s example: Yep, he should have recieved better odds than he did (in an ideal world he would have) but the bookies aren’t going to let him get away with that. He still won more than if he’d have backed the winner and he still pocketed a profit.
This game, for me, is about making a profit – i can understand how you feel when you say that each-way bets are a bookies benefit but the bookies make the odds: if a profit is made and money is taken from the bookie’s satchel, i’m happy.
In reply to: Is each way betting a waste of time?
You bet to make a profit do you not DL? You bet because you want to win money do you not? Well Esc’s example shows you that, with e/w betting, you CAN in fact bet to win money.
Why should Esc care if he was ripped off £20 or £60 or whatever….the FACT is he was able to win MORE money by using each-way betting than he would if he’d back the winner to win. So his example shows that each-way betting can be a profitable venture.
Regarding your earlier question – if i was to back a horse and give 10% of my winnings to the bookie – i’d be mad right? yeah i would be. Stir crazy. However, with each-way betting you aren’t giving any winnings to the bookie are you?
If you back 50/50 (and your horse finishes 2nd) you lose half your original stake but gain money from the place.
How about a 7 runner race (1/4 odds) where you find a 20/1 shot to finish second – surely if you’ve done an each-way bet you’ll be getting back more than you put it, which is making profit…which is the whole idea.
What i don’t understand is that you are prepared to lose your whole stake (say £50) by backing a 10/1 shot to win but you could actually make a few quid by going each-way.
At least when you go each-way you get something back if the horse is placed whilst if you go to win and it’s second you lose your whole stake.
That table you put up DL – it seems as though Esc’s example was wrong because he was sure to lose based on those figures because ONLY 16+ runners are good races to back e/w in – but Esc WON on his example. He came back with more than he went in with – THAT is the idea. To make a profit…and he did. Pure and simple.
This winnings thing – you’ll have to explain it to me. You said that you are donating 68% of winnings back to the bookie in a 7-runner race – surely if your e/w horse wins you are getting 100% winnings from the bet and if it loses (out of the frame) you are making a 100% loss?
In reply to: Is each way betting a waste of time?
Hi Escorial,
I have absolutely no problem with the example you quoted. You weighed up the race and found a big priced horse you felt was nailed-on for a place. You also felt it had little chance of winning – so an each way bet was the only option for you. The fact that there were, what was it, 13 runners is irrelevant because you had confidently excluded 10 of them!
Apart from the number of runners, the example is similar to the one I quoted, because presumably Jericho III and The Matrix, two good horses, took out a big chunk of the book, leaving your selection nicely positioned in the market at a fancy price.
I have to admit, though – it’s not the sort of bet I look out for. But it was a good bet all the same. I’d have probably bypassed the race.
Did you consider a buy on the spreads? Especially if there was a 50:30:20:10 index available. Depending on your horse’s quote, you might have made a bit more than the traditional each way terms, which I find woefully unattractive. And with a bet on the spreads, there’s no losing win bet to worry about!
All the best,
RM;)
In reply to: How do I make a book
Not on a horse Esc, but i still feel angry when i think of a football bet i made about a couple of months back.<br>The bet was placed out of greed. After a fairly good spell punting i came across 11/10 Preston to win HT/FT where the biggest i could see elsewhere was 10/11. <br>I know that screams ‘value’ to most punters but it’s just not my way of betting, i try hard not to play at short odds. In truth i find it too difficult to determine a 11/10 shot from a 10/11 shot and even if i found it easy i’m pretty certain i still wouldn’t want to know. Too many winners required at those prices for my liking – and stakes.<br>As you know, i come down on the ‘getting value’ side – but there is a cut off point. Dare say i’ll have another rush of blood sometime though……… and the Preston game,….. 0-0.<br>Nev.
<br>We touched on this topic in the ‘how do I make a book’ topic and I felt it a good enough subject to start a debate. I believe it is a poor bet designed by bookies to give them further advantages and I couldn’t believe the support this bet type recieved. How on earth can this be a good bet as if it were a good bet then surely the bookies would take place bets AND win bets. The bet is similar to the CSF which is heavily in favor of the designers (bookmakers). <br>Keith made a valid point that it is a comfort blanket for people who can’t handle losing runs. <br>I do back each way but only on horses 40/1 or above as a kind of saver although I realise that this is not strictly true as the odds are against me if I use this bet.<br>I no longer back each way on horses lower than 40/1 as I am prepared to wait for the winner and if it gets beat a nose then so be it as there will be others.
In reply to: How do I make a book
<br> it may not have been impressive today but it was a trip on the short side for llt whom should improve for a return to 3m+ hardly a great test for him on paper and with bellator refusing and upgrade performence he didnt really have much to do .
the connections will i suppose be anxious to see how he is tommorrow and all (hopefully) being well he will go to newbury where we can find whether he truly has retained his full ability
the stats say he has a very hard task to win the gc again i just wonder if the fact the fp not staying up the hill in the gc made him look better than he is.<br>
In reply to: EASY System
Hi Hud…. this looks nice and simple and more importantly, profitable……. I saw your mention of a couple of hefty losing runs, these are really not worth worrying about with a strike rate and odds like this….. I do feel however, that there might be more wonga to be made if the staking was to improve….. for instance, how many of your selections were placed and at what prices ???……  the reasoning behind this is the plain and simple fact that if you had 4 placed horse @ 7/1 in a rolling 4 timer, you would make a profit in excess of 30 points…… thats a 30 point profit without having a single winner…..  gotta be worth having a look at, it could be possible that those losing runs might even be WINNING runs……  if you need help to check it out, PM me with the results and I’ll do the donkey work…….  looks good Hud, keep smoking……<br>:smiley:  :smiley:
MrE
In reply to: Sindaar V Galileo
Sure Aidan,
Sindaar, Giant’s Causway, Monjeur, Kalanisi made it a sheer top class season, there were others than contributed but these 4 really made the season for me!
In reply to: How do I make a book
Gosh, I wish my books were 100% accurate.
Value for me is a bit of a holy grail. It’s an approach to gambling that I believe in. But for many years I tootled along successfully beating the bookies pretty much doing as Escorial is doing. I guess the mordin/coton books put me onto value and for a while I actually went backwards hopeless as I was at finding it, but the last few seasons it’s really improved my betting – when I win I win bigger, and I’ve minimised my losses.
But a 100% accurately priced race – I wish.
The two key things in my favour when pricing races are the bookies’ over-round and the fact I don’t actually have to lay any horse we don’t want to.
I view the over-round as my margin of error. I usually price the race to 100%, or a bit less if feeling cautious – (daylight I was interested that you price to 90% – that’s very cautious). In a handicap where the bookies have gone 130% plus, I can be fairly confident that if my horse is at much longer odds with the bookies than in my book, that I am getting value.
I can also oppose horses in my book in a way that bookies can’t. Take Beau – he’s always priced up competitively in these top-class handicaps – but as far as I’m concerned unless he gets his ideal conditions he’s a complete no-hoper – if he was generally priced at 8/1 a bookie couldn’t go 25/1 against him, but I can in my book. It’s the same with Pipe horses, or McCoy and so on – the bookies have to be extra tight on them. We don’t have to.
The key difference in approach for me is that I’m not looking for a horse – I’m looking to exploit the difference between my book and the bookies.
Today for example I priced up the 2:20 at Taunton. In the old days Atavistic would have looked a good bet to me – a lot going for it, and I would have backed it. But pricing the race up for myself made me look at it in a different way.
Lordberniebouffant looked one to oppose (I’d gone 8/1, bookies 3/1) but Sir Frosty looked tempting (I’d gone 10/1, Sporting Odds went 33/1). OK, so I’ve chosen a nice, some would say lucky, example as Sir Frosty duly won me a season’s profit, but my point is making a book led me to the bet, and told me to bet fairly big.
<br>That’s my thing with you escorial – I really think you could be winning even more.<br>
In reply to: How do I make a book
Well said DL much of the back biting here is wide of the mark. The maths is simple if you back at consistentley greater odds than the true price you win if you don’t you lose. The method by which you achieve this is a matter for personal choice if Esc likes to look for the winner and this works for him then good luck to him. If someone else prefers to price up the event and back anything at a bigger price than they make it then GL to them too. Personally I fall somewhere between the two camps and that works for me.
Recently however I started a little experimental betting bank starting with a free 17.50 first bet offer thingy I decided to bet at 25% of my bank. The criteria for my selections is they must be priced between 1/2 and 1/20 and that is it.No horse racing though they are all sports bets and as of last weekend my bank stood at £280. Then this week sadly I managed to back for the first time ever a 1/12 loser !!! so bank now back to £210 but still pretty good from a 17.50 start in around 2 months. Maybe it has just been luck maybe all these heavy odds on bets are value maybe something else still I continue for now. Generally I bet at around 2/1 to 10/1 so this has been an interesting experiment.
I did once also analyse SP’s over 3 national hunt seasons 1990-1993 I think but not 100% sure and basically the rule was the bigger the price the more you lost backing every runner to level stakes and in fact if you backed simply all odds on runners you made a profit actually quite a healthy one if you avoided novice chases.So more food for thought there.
In reply to: Ballydoyle ratings
escorial
although we differ somewhat on what galileo beat  your remarks about what he beat  and benchmarks  can be directed at others  <br>for example  what did inthikab beat  in the queen anne  a grp 2 race not a lot really  and got  beaten by  a lower rated horse on his return
 why does the winning of a grp 3 diamond stakes (a shadow of its formerself)  and a  weak grp 2  rate so highly
 what exactly did  dubai millenium beat  behrens  (on the decline and well beaten  througout the rest of the seasoin)  sumitas  (never won a group race )  beat all (never won a group race)
 why doies the beating of 2 horses whom had not won above listed class rate so highly
 i am sure if u we were on the forum then  u would be tearing into the form :biggrin:
  a little more consistency  could  be called for  admittidly the person (s)  who made dm  or intikabs rating may not be the same  person (s) whom made this years ratings
not that i am saying galileo has been under rated but more consistency in the matter could be used.
interesting points made by the rp international handicapper on the last page in rp today re tiznows rating for example
ÂÂÂ
(Edited by prince regent at 4:59 pm on Jan. 17, 2002)
In reply to: How do I make a book
many of these points have already been made but here is what i think:
many people think that the only way to make a profit from gambling is to be very selective, and have a high % of winning bets.
the way to make it really pay is to consistently get a bigger price than the true winning chance. Simple.
the difficult part is to recognise when these opportunities arise.<br>this is VALUE.
to make the most profit, ALL betting opportunities should be taken. if you only bet when the chance of a winner is high this may keep the srike rate up, and losing runs short, but it will inhibit profitability by refusing the more speculative (often lucrative) bets.
i believe that those that worry about losing runs and strike rates are usually LOSING GAMBLERS, or at best make a miniscule profit not worth the effort.<br>it is a SHORT SIGHTED APPROACH !
In reply to: How do I make a book
Hi Escorial…..<br>You make your points with great passion and if they work for you I won’t knock them.
With regards to the analogy I gave, this is very simple business sense and believe me that certainly applies to racing.
I think any serious punter who disregards this does so at his peril, however we will have to agree to differ on that one. In answer to your question "why baulk at prices offered?" Many years ago I thought all that was necessary to win at racing was simply a matter of backing winners. Although this was naive at least I had the sense to record my bets including the prices I took and the returned s.p’s. Some years I made a little but generally lost over a year. As a result of being in the fortunate position of having some advice from a very good judge, I poured over my books, one of the things I did was list all the horses I had backed at better than s.p. I also listed the horses backed at worse than s.p. and guess what! a nugget of gold appeared. Those horses I backed at better than s.p. showed a good profit, the others ate up any profits. Backing winners of course is very important but so is avoiding losers. I am quite happy to pass over a winner that I believe is the wrong price as I know from experience that a number of such bets will most certainly produce losses.
Please disregard this advice as I also lay horses on Betfair.
All the very best<br>ron b
In reply to: How do I make a book
I’ve been biting my tongue and sitting on my hands on this one during the last few posts but the comment "If you think a horse should be 8/1 and its 4/1 – so what? If it wins you have a smaller profit than you’d think ideal but you’d have a profit." has made me respond!
Rob,<br>If you are prepared to back a selection 4pts under your estimated value price then good luck to you as you are really going to need it backing bad value consistently will lead you to the poor house at 100mph! That is like saying if you thought Istabraq would win this years Champion Hurdle this year you would gladly take 1/2 – No you wouldn’t because it’s just not a good price!
"Almost everyone can bag a 6/4 winner and some can get 16/1 winners – get on all your winners (be them 6/4 or 16/1) and in the long run, you’ll be in profit." If only it were that simple! Are you forgetting losing runs? As they happen to the best, if you only back 2/1 shots lets say, that means you HAVE to get 1 winner in every 3 bets to break even otherwise you lose! It may sound simple to you but you try it!
This whole game is about maths and by backing what you consider value gives you a better return long term and will only increase profits. If things aren’t right (price included) then why play? There will always be other days! The main thing I have learnt since my time of being here is those that tend to do well are the patient ones.
"How about each-way betting? Is this value? I have to say a resounding YES to this – but what do you lot think?" Each way betting is a bookmakers bet, as why don’t they let you do a place bet? reason is that they want your win bet! A common mis-conception over each way betting is the place return people instantly think a 20/1 will pay a nice 5/1 for the place – not true, it’s only true if it wins and at 20/1 you have a 5% chance of this! So presuming it loses would expect 5/1 return? You put a £10 bet on each way and it finishes second which you will recieve £50 back.
So you staked £20 to win £30 in reality – those odds equate to 6/4, not so generous eh! Whereas if a place bet existed other than at the Tote you could have had 5/1! I personally think it is a bet the bookmakers want as it carries little risk.
Of course this is only my opinion and an opinion I feel strongly about as a while back I decided each way betting is not for me and I’m the type that regularly backs double figure odds horses.
In reply to: How do I make a book
I am interested in long term profits rather than one horse winning or losing. <br>If I miss a winner because of the price, the question I must ask myself will the win cover defeats on losers which have not met the price criteria. <br>I am in search for big price selections which should be approx around that price range. Long Term I will not make a profit from backing below the price ranges I set. <br>Before the time in my life when I would be at Perry Barr in the morning, football match in the afternoon then onto Wolverhampton evening meeting it dawned on me it was no longer profitable backing in every race. <br>I am now backing one horse at the most each day so why take below what I feel is value.
"The scenario I want you to imagine is of three people walking into a room where different bets are on offer.<br>The first person sees a table where you can bet on the spin of a coin. The odds on offer are 10/11 for a correct choice.<br>He feels lucky and bets on heads, which comes up. So he has another bet, and this also wins. "I’m feeling lucky", he says, "I’m going to stay at this table all night".<br>The second person sees a table where you can bet on the correct number thrown with a dice. The odds on offer are 11/2.<br>He has a bet on ‘3’, which loses, then on ‘5’, which loses. But he’s not deterred; "I’m staying on this table", he says, "see you later".<br>The third person sees a table where you can bet on predicting a playing card randomly chosen from a pack. The odds on offer are 66/1.<br>He likes the prospect of a big win, so he has a go. In fact he has 10 goes, and none are correct. Luckily, he has brought plenty of cash with him, so he says "I’m staying here for the night".<br>The three agree to meet up again in 8 hours time, when they will compare how each has done.<br>Eight hours passed, and it was time for the three to go home.<br>The coin man was not happy: "I seemed to be winning regularly", he said, "I didn’t have any long losing runs, but I’m out of pocket!"<br>In fact he’d had 1,000 bets, and 500 of them had been correct. He’d been betting at £20 a time, as he knew he wouldn’t have long losing runs. So over the night he’d staked £20,000, and from his 500 winners paying £38.18 a time, he’d received a total of £19,090. He had lost £910 when he seemed to be doing so well. People had been remarking at how many winners he was having, but that didn’t matter to him now. He certainly wouldn’t play that game again.<br>The second arrived, with a smile on his face; "I started slowly", he said, "and my strike rate was not good all night – I had many losing runs well into double figures. I didn’t feel as if I was winning, but now that I’ve counted up I realise that I’ve done well."<br>In fact, he too had placed 1,000 bets over the night at £20 each. He had picked 166 winners and 834 losers. At his quoted odds of 11/2, each winner had paid him £130 – a total return of £21,580. He had won £1,580 on the night and was happy.<br>The third returned laughing; "I can’t believe it", he said, "I chose those cards terribly – I had massive losing runs which I thought would never end. In fact I had 1,000 bets at £20 each and only won 19 of them – good job my bank was big enough for the evening!" But at 66/1, the 19 winners had returned a total of £25,460, making him £5,460 – enough for the cruise he’d been planning.<br>Simple enough, and we can see why the coin man was attracted by the prospect of regular winners – it made him feel like he was doing well. The dice man had a strike rate of 16.67%, which was more than enough, given that he was offered the value odds of 11/2 each time. The odds were only quoted half a point too high, but that was enough for him and he took advantage. The card man was fortunate to have a big bank behind him – his losing runs were massive, only 19 winners from 1,000 at a strike rate of 1.9%. But the 66/1 he was given was far too high, and he made a lot of money.<br>If these people were to return every night for a year, betting on the same games and with the same stakes, the coin man would lose £332,150, the dice man would win £576,700 and the card man would win £1,992,900.<br>They were all winning as often as they were entitled to do – nobody was luckier or unluckier than the others. It all came down to the value their bets offered.<br>In that example, the value was easy to see. Mathematically, it could be determined exactly. But how do we know what value is in horse-racing? How do we know we won’t end up like the coin man?<br>The answer is that we need to determine, first of all, what the actual odds are of our horse winning. We can’t do this exactly, of course, but we can get fairly close.<br>Say for example the race we are studying has 10 runners, and we have decided that 4 of them have no chance whatsoever. We can confidently cross those 4 through, but we must be absolutely sure they can’t win. That leaves 6 runners, and we may decide that 3 of those can’t be dismissed completely even though we don’t think they can win. Maybe they have half a chance. Fine, that’s 3 runners with half a chance each, and the other 3 are the serious contenders (of which one is obviously our selection).<br>So our selection has 1 chance in 4.5 (3 serious plus 3 half chances). Its actual odds, as far as we can see are 7/2.<br>If we can get better than 7/2 for our selection we bet. The bigger the price above 7/2, the more we stake. It makes sense – if the dice man went back the following night he would stake much higher at that price. If our horse, however, is quoted at less than 7/2 we cannot bet – not ever.<br>It may well win, but if we continually take chances like that we will come unstuck eventually. If the odds are 3/1 we have to leave it alone and come back another day.<br>Again, that’s a simple example, and I’m sure most punters think along those lines. To get more of an exact figure we need to break our fractions down further – down to percentage chances.<br>If we say that the total chances of all the runners in a race is 100%, we need to then determine how much of that 100% is made up of our horse’s chance. In the above example the 100% was split between 6 runners that had either a chance or half a chance. There were a total of 4.5 chances, each one 22.22% of the overall 100%.<br>A 22.22% chance is equal to 7/2, so if we are right in our judgement (and we must stick to our judgement, as that is the whole point of betting), anything better than 7/2 offers value.<br>A friend of mine has the same approach, although he tackles it slightly differently. He allocates 100 points to a race (each point is a 1% chance). From those 100 points, he allocates to each horse a number, which he thinks represents it’s chance of winning. The important thing here is that all the points must come back to 100 when added at the end.<br>He may analyse a race like this: His selection 27pts, horse ‘B’ 20pts, horses ‘C’, ‘D’, ‘E’, and ‘F’ 12pts each, and horse ‘G’ 5pts.<br>He has given his selection a 27% chance, which equals just over 11/4. So if my friend can get 11/4, or preferably 3/1 for his bet, he will be on. If not, he won’t.<br>To convert the points out of 100 you have awarded to each horse into odds, do the following:<br>Say you gave 28pts : divide 100 by 28 = 3.57, then deduct 1 = 2.57.<br>Those are the odds to one – 2.57/1. Given that 2.5/1 is the same as 5/2, you would need better than 5/2 for a horse to which you had awarded 28pts.<br>Please make sure you don’t totally discount a horse and give it 0pts unless you are sure that it can’t win. Make sure all your points figures total 100 exactly. You will have to change them many times before they do – and don’t bother if the points awarded are strange numbers, like 27 or 41. it doesn’t matter as long as you work out the true odds correctly afterwards.<br>You will find that you suddenly spend less time actually picking a winner, and more time picking a horse that is likely to run at a value price".
Quite a famous strategy, wo what I am saying why should I back a horse which in my view is 7/1 at odds of 4/1 ? Long term I will not make a profit I have already tried this and proved it to myself. I spent one year backing every horse I feel should win , spending weeks studying trainers and their ways , looking at jockeys merits etc.
Won or lost long term this would not remain profitable of my way of punting
In reply to: How do I make a book
The only way to make money in the long run is to bet at an offered price greater than the real odds of the event occuring ie getting value. However in the real world maybe it is easier to pick winners than detect which horses are value ???? At least I am sure this is true for some people.
Smithy came up with the classic description of value then ruined it with an awful example 2-1 Fujiyama Crest was value 1-2 would have been value the horse won and that is that those people who backed it who ‘ must have been mad’ went home with cash spilling from their pockets.
The coin toss is an interesting example the odds are evs tails ev heads we all know that. Imagine then this scenario the bookie offers 4-5 heads 11-10 tails you of course back tails he tosses it is heads he goes again again heads and again and again he changes his prices 4-6 heads 5-4 tails he tosses heads again and again and again he reprices 4-7 heads 6-4 tails. Punters are lumping on tails right left and centre. What do you back ??
Incidentally blue square recently offered 11-10 the toss of a coin in the recent England tour of India !!
Search Results for 'ar mad'
Viewing 17 results - 41,753 through 41,769 (of 41,807 total)
