- This topic has 132 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Ability of the Horse<br>Recent Form<br>Going<br>Distance of the Race<br>Course<br>Trainer<br>Jockey<br>Speed Rating
Hi Wallace
thanks for that mate, but how would you spread the 173 points within the 8 factors?
byefrom<br>carlisle<br>
Looks a professional approach, godolphin, but it wouldn’t suit a lot of people because it produces a limited number of bets.
I don’t know how you arrive at the percentages you mention, so it is difficult to comment on your deductive process.
My own ratings based method, which I have outlined in detail elsewhere on the forum, produces notional value bets and has held its own for several years. The profitability has been restricted by my own preference for using a scattergun approach rather than waiting for those horses that look to be exceptional value. A weakness, perhaps, but enjoyment is as important to me as hard profit, although losing regularly would dampen anyone’s fun.
Godolphin, like Artemis I would like to know how you arrive at your forecast odds/pecentages and also if achieving desired odds is so importnat why do you use Ladbrokes?
<br>carlisle percentage breakdown as follows;
Ability of the Horse30%<br>Recent Form28%<br>Going15%<br>Distance of the Race10%<br>Course5%<br>Trainer5%<br>Jockey5%<br>Speed Rating 2%<br>
(Edited by Wallace at 7:53 pm on Oct. 14, 2006)
Like you Godolphin I calculate percentage chances and then convert these to odds which I require. I don’t like to work with odds at all until I’ve calculated the percentage chance although I know that odds are just percentage chance expressed differently. It could be that I use percentages a lot at work and feel more at home with them. I’d much rather express a horses chance as 20% than 4/1.
Anyway, thats by the by.
Where we obviously differ is that I feel it is necessary to consider all horses in a race before I can arrive at a percentage chance for any one runner. I’m intrigued at how you arrive at, for example, Sleeping Indian having a 20% chance when you don’t appear to have considered anything else.
My method involves calculating the potential performance, arrived at by using a rating for each horse which I modify according to certain factors (distance/ground mainly), each horse has the potential to give. I then apply a formula which calculates all the potential outcomes of the race based on those ratings, the formula allowing for each horse running to plus/minus a certain figure. This generates all the potential outcomes and calculates a percentage chance for each horse.
For example (and this is just an example, not my real figures or constants) – say there are three horses. Horse A I rate at 121, horse B 125 and Horse C 120. Say, for example, my constant is plus/minus 3 lbs (which it isn’t!) then each horse can run to the following –
Horse A – 118,119,120,121,122,123,124 <br>Horse B – 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128<br>Horse C – 117,118,119,120,121,122,123
A simple calculation then calculates all the possible  outcomes based on these numbers and applies a percentage chance to each horse.
This gives me (to a 100% book) the break-even price I need on each horse.
The important bit, I guess, is the way I modify the ratings as otherwise you are just betting to widely available ratings (I don’t compile my own through time constraints). My method stands or falls on that subjective judgement, as that is the point of difference,  rather than the cold calculations but the calcs are important in generating the percentages and, thus, the prices.
However, I can only arrive at those by taking the possible performance of each horse, relative to the others, into account.
Hi there
what I find encouraging, is that cormack15, Godolphin<br>and others feel the need to estimate RISK.
Risk must be balanced against Reward.
To be able to analyse form accurately and view it within a probability perspective is beyond the wit of 99.9% of punters.<br> <br>It’s not that bookies are so clever, it’s just they encourage people to be stupid.  (I am not the finished article yet)
Thanks Wallace, you are right, it would be better to use percentages rather than points.
cormack15 your focus on percentages gives a useful sense of detachment.
Godolphin you must be a hard bugger!
byefornowfrom<br>carlisle<br>
(Edited by carlisle at 3:45 pm on Oct. 15, 2006)
‘detachment’ Carlisle – you’ve hit the nail on the head. Maintaining an emotional detachment is a real asset, one I haven’t mastered.
Sometimes I have a real gut feel about a horse, either good or bad. The numbers tell me one thing and my intuition another. On the whole the numbers are the master and my ‘feel’ is often wroing, although over the years it has improved.
I often think that the most successful punters are those who have honed their study of the game in such a way that they can ‘feel’ value, those people, and I’ve met one or two, but only one or two, who can assess a set of prices from a subjective viewpoint and home in on the rick.
Of course usually you find that the better the intuitive feel, the more hard work that has gone on and continues to go on, behind the scenes.
I need the ‘detachment’ of mathematical analysis to maintain an objectivity about my betting. That reflects the person I am and the way I think. I’d give my right arm to be able to assess racing from a ‘warmer’ perspective though as the numbers game does get excrutiatingly boring at times!
Breakfast time.
Hi Godolphin
I mean you must be tough to be able to wait during all those price fluctuations.
You protest too much! ;)
byefrom<br>carlisle<br>
(Edited by carlisle at 3:43 pm on Oct. 15, 2006)
Re the longshots Godolphin. I too work mainly at the top end of the market, chiefly because that is where the biggest opportunities lie and also because of the issue of losing runs, which are obviously lengthier and more difficult to control with longer priced horses.
"It’s a personal thing, the methods I use will make a profit no matter what"
That’s a bold claim Godolphin!! :o
Hi Godolphin
"form studying and odds compling are a complete waste of time"
I totally disagree.  If a few of us get together and consider the same race, from different points of view, wheres the harm.
Admitedly, I am not betting at the moment because it is too time consuming trying to produce the analysis that I require. However, I am on the verge of a major time saving break through.
I have got chatting with someone worthwhile.  Just like I hope to in this thread.
We can all learn something, I am sure of that.
Bookies are so rich because they rely on the stupidity of 99.9% of punters.  Is that being clever?
byefrom<br>carlisle
<br>(Edited by carlisle at 2:10 pm on Oct. 15, 2006)<br>
(Edited by carlisle at 2:41 pm on Oct. 15, 2006)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.