- This topic has 23 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
- Total Posts 17716
There you go Ginge!
Didn’t hurt did it, and much easier on the eye than endless repitition of tables or winners after the race.Cormack
I can’t believe that you still haven’t learnt how to alter the forum clock, or is Scotland in a different time zone?.
Hi gang
horse racing data contains too many data black holes. It does not lend itself to painstaking analysis. Therefore producing a tissue of all the runners is flawed.
The big question is "Does the trainer expect his horse to try to win?"
I favour identifying solvable races that seem to contain no more than 5 contenders. Then steadily whittle these runners down using a logical process of elmination. Leaving you with a selection that offers a positive risk/reward ratio.
byefrom
carlisle"any successful process must be sustainable"
My approach is much closer to Dave Jay. For instance there are only 5 or 6 horses I would consider backing in the National no matter what price you offered me. I prefer to eliminate what I consider unlikely winners or underpriced animals then set minimum prices about those I would consider backing.
The 5 or 6? Covered in Lays and Plays but for the record:
Bewley’s Berry (value currently)
Cloudy Lane (not value now)
Slim Pickings (value currently)
Baily Breeze (value Betfair)
Mon Mome (marginal now at 33).There you go Ginge!
Didn’t hurt did it, and much easier on the eye than endless repitition of tables or winners after the race.Cormack
I can’t believe that you still haven’t learnt how to alter the forum clock, or is Scotland in a different time zone?. Reet,
When you have the decency to respond to every poit made or question posed to you about a certain subject, then there will always be someone who is bored with that subject. Tuff.Ginge
Value Is EverythingMy approach is much closer to Dave Jay. For instance there are only 5 or 6 horses I would consider backing in the National no matter what price you offered me. I prefer to eliminate what I consider unlikely winners or underpriced animals then set minimum prices about those I would consider backing.
The 5 or 6? Covered in Lays and Plays but for the record:
Bewley’s Berry (value currently)
Cloudy Lane (not value now)
Slim Pickings (value currently)
Baily Breeze (value Betfair)
Mon Mome (marginal now at 33).You say there are only 5 or 6 horses you consider backing, and eliminate those unlikely winners. But surely these unlikely winners grouped together become a likely winner.
e.g. If I eliminated every horse in this years National I believed has a 4% or less chance of winning, I would be eliminating a group which colectively I believe has a 40% 6/4 chance of winning the race.
Therefore should they not be taken in to account in your calculations? Whether you back them or not.
But as always Carv, if it works for you, don’t change it.
Ginge
Value Is EverythingThe point is that I’m eliminating them because they are likely to be underpriced, because my opinion of them is more negative than the market’s. Therefore even though collectively they have a winning chance, that chance is underpriced. If they win I’m happy to lose.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.