- This topic has 50 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
So how does that work NV if the place book comes to 250%, shouldn’t it be 200%, or are you using the first column ‘True place odds’ to say what the price should be ?
I’m pretty sure there used to be a place price calculator freebie somewhere on the net, your spread sheet has got me thinking though .. I’m going to have a play with some of our software at work tomorrow
There is no real solution to working it out, so horses can be big in the win market but short in the place market for numerous reasons, some horse can be quirky at goin past so people push them out in the win market but they reamain very short in the place market as they know they will be bang there.
Dave,
At 4/1 the field, and 1/4 the odds (as would be the case in a 5-runner race), the potential place return on each runner is Evs.
Assuming you could back each runner just at these place odds, there will be two successes from five bets, and the % return equates to a book overround at 250% rather than 200%.
The ‘available’ place odds column is a little misleading, given that this is based on an unrealistic 100% win book, but I included it for illustrative purposes, as you can easily see when the place book is more in your favour as a punter.
NV
The 4:30 at Ripon is a nicely skewed market and I would suspect that getting more than a £5 each-way on the Easterby runner could be pretty difficult!
:)
<br>As an approximation of the market (to 100%, with poetic licence taken with the price of the favourite), put odds onto the spreadsheet of 1/8, 18/1, 40/1, 40/1,100/1 and see what happens to the price book percentage…
(Edited by non vintage at 11:35 pm on June 4, 2007)
There’s a chance this will get more complicated than the Computer Straight Forecast calculation but surely we need an entirely different formula for when Richard ‘eased down fourth’ Hughes is riding in an eight-runner race? :biggrin:
Indeed Andrew, or a Barney Curley all-or-nothing merchant trading at shorter odds for the win than the place…
- Total Posts 17716
Quote: from Mounty on 12:02 am on June 5, 2007[br]There’s a chance this will get more complicated than the Computer Straight Forecast calculation
Mounty<br>From little acorns do great oak trees grow!;) <br> <br>  Place % ready reckoner here
Hi all
The way I see it, in a 5 runner race with all the horses of seemingly equal chance of winning.  The odds of any of them finishing 2nd is 3/1.
sberry why do bookies hate the place market?
byefrom<br>carlisle<br>
As a legendary pointy-eared sci-fi character would have said, that is illogical carlisle.
If each horse has an equal chance, i.e. they are all accurately assessed as 4/1 shots, the chance of a particular horse coming second is also 4/1.
In this situation, you are better off not thinking about it as a race, but as a simple probability question.
If they were five numbered balls drawn from a lottery machine, they would each have an equal chance of being 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th. The probability of Ball(Horse) 1 filling a position is 100%, made up of 20% x 5 for each of the possible outcomes.
Clearly, in a race or in a lotto draw, once the ‘winner’ is known, the remainder of the field have a 3/1 chance of finishing second to it, but this is not a known at the outset of the event.
nv
Hi non vintage
Kirk says thanks, you’re right.  What I should have said, instead of finishing 2nd, was for the horse to meet the minimum requirement for a successful place bet.
What is known is the fact that you would receive no greater reward if your horse wins the race.
byefrom<br>carlisle<br>
Quote: from non vintage on 9:07 am on June 7, 2007[br]As a legendary pointy-eared sci-fi character would have said, that is illogical carlisle.
If each horse has an equal chance, i.e. they are all accurately assessed as 4/1 shots, the chance of a particular horse coming second is also 4/1.
In this situation, you are better off not thinking about it as a race, but as a simple probability question.
If they were five numbered balls drawn from a lottery machine, they would each have an equal chance of being 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th. The probability of Ball(Horse) 1 filling a position is 100%, made up of 20% x 5 for each of the possible outcomes.
Clearly, in a race or in a lotto draw, once the ‘winner’ is known, the remainder of the field have a 3/1 chance of finishing second to it, but this is not a known at the outset of the event.
nv<br>
Using the lottery ball analogy is wrong here though…you’re making an (unstated) assumption that each of the 5 draws is unbiased. Consider a lottery machine that isn’t working properly, and, for the first ball drawn, gives each ball an equal chance, but for the second draw is weighted (somehow) to favour high numbers. Still think the odds of each ball (horse) finishing second is 4/1?
To further the example, consider a horse race of 5 horses, 4 of whom we know their ability (rating) to a high degree of accuracy, say a handicap mark of 95, which they’ve run to within a point of in their last ten or so races (i.e. low variance). Now consider a fifth horse, the wild card, which runs like a dog most of the time (low 70s) but every once in a while, pulls out a 100 plus performance. His average rating may be 90 (lower than the other four) but he has a high variance. This race could easily end up with all being 4/1 joint favourites, but the wild card horse’s place odds are likely to be way higher than the place odds of the other 4, as the wild card horse is much more likely to run like a dog and finish last.
I think NV is trying to illustrate the point from a purely theoretical view though Psych. I’m sure we all realise in reality it’s nothing like that simple.. Which is why I don’t bother thinking about it and back whatever I think is going to win or place (I don;t bet each way anymore)
Psych,
I did make the point of stating that all the horses were accurately assessed as 4/1 chances.
As Aragorn indicated, it is a theoretical principal, rather than a real world one.
Sadly, we never actually know the true chances of each horse prior to a race, otherwise we would probably have retired to pursue more blissful lives of leisure and luxury somewhere far closer to paradise.
Your wild card horse would probably end up with form figures along the lines of 000100001000010. It might very well have a 20% chance of winning, but wouldn’t be one to bother with backing each-way, as the chances of it placing would be not much (if at all) greater than its chances of winning. It’s not trained by Barney Curley is it?
nv
Quote: from non vintage on 12:51 pm on June 7, 2007[br]
Your wild card horse would probably end up with form figures along the lines of 000100001000010. It might very well have a 20% chance of winning, but wouldn’t be one to bother with backing each-way, as the chances of it placing would be not much (if at all) greater than its chances of winning. It’s not trained by Barney Curley is it?
nv
No – but it’s probably ridden by Kieron Fallon…
Although if a horse only won every fifth race, I wonder how long it would take for folk to argue about whether this 0000100001000010000100001 represented a pattern to follow.
One of my projects at some point is to look at laying horses in the place market at Betfair, and trying to link this with the Dr Z place/win market anomaly theory. Is this something anyone has explored?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.