- This topic has 72 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
If only Alan Woods and co had just backed what they thought would win regardless of price, maybe he’d have won double his 100’s of millions.
Is it really any coincidence that any known succesful punter will all have the same thing in common that they’re looking for value at the prices.
Tissue making is a discipline well worth learning, but, you need to understand why you’re doing it in the first place from a mathmatical view point otherwise it won’t make much sense.
If only Alan Woods and co had just backed what they thought would win regardless of price, maybe he’d have won double his 100’s of millions.
Is it really any coincidence that any known succesful punter will all have the same thing in common that they’re looking for value at the prices.
Tissue making is a discipline well worth learning, but, you need to understand why you’re doing it in the first place from a mathmatical view point otherwise it won’t make much sense.
You can find value without compiling a tissue and without backing a horse simply because of its price.
The only way I differ to you is I wouldn’t back a horse I think should be even money at 4/5 or evens even if I think it can’t get beat I would only bet if I consider the price to be better than I think it should be whereas you’d bet regardless.
Backing a horse to win simply because its a bigger price than a its percentage chance but I do not expect to win is not for me at all.
Which is it Ian?
In the first paragraph you expertly describe the principle involved in backing to value. Then in the second paragraph you seemingly say the opposite.
Value Is EverythingHave we reached the point in proceedings yet where someone points out that an odds on winner is better than a 10/1 loser?
The only way I differ to you is I wouldn’t back a horse I think should be even money at 4/5 or evens even if I think it can’t get beat I would only bet if I consider the price to be better than I think it should be whereas you’d bet regardless.
Backing a horse to win simply because its a bigger price than a its percentage chance but I do not expect to win is not for me at all.
Which is it Ian?
In the first paragraph you expertly describe the principle involved in backing to value. Then in the second paragraph you seemingly say the opposite.
I think value is important mate but only on a horse you actually expect to win. I, like Fist, don’t see the point in backing a horse you don’t expect to win simply because its 33/1 when you think it should be 10/1.
I apologise I probably don’t make things very clear.
I completely agree Fist. Those that bet simply because of a price on their tissue are relying on mathematics to earn them a profit rather than on their skill / knowledge of a horse.
You can not rely on mathematics, it is obvious that it is your skill in studying form and knowing the horse, that allows you to form a good opinion of it’s chance.
Value Is EverythingMy advice to anyone going this way is don’t! Spend some cash on the fastest internet connection you can afford and get on to racing replays and start searching for your own Hurricane Fly.
Video replays are the greatest tool a punter’s ever had and will kick a calculators ass any day of the week.
Id say spot on there mate, the old adage
"Let your eyes be the guide and your money the last thing you part with"
I think value is important mate but only on a horse you actually expect to win. I, like Fist, don’t see the point in backing a horse you don’t expect to win simply because its 33/1 when you think it should be 10/1.
I apologise I probably don’t make things very clear.
There are many people who do this mathematically who choose not to back the outsiders, because of the probable losing runs.
It sounds as though you are someone who only backs a horse if you believe it is value. But only at the shorter end of the market. Nothing wrong with that.
As there is nothing wrong with backing the 33/1 shots who are value as well, if that is their choice.
Value Is EverythingI think value is important mate but only on a horse you actually expect to win. I, like Fist, don’t see the point in backing a horse you don’t expect to win simply because its 33/1 when you think it should be 10/1.
I apologise I probably don’t make things very clear.
There are many people who do this mathematically who choose not to back the outsiders, because of the probable losing runs.
It sounds as though you are someone who only backs a horse if you believe it is value. But only at the shorter end of the market. Nothing wrong with that.
As there is nothing wrong with backing the 33/1 shots who are value as well, if that is their choice.
Pretty much but I never back any horse at shorter than 2/1. Most of my betting is done on horses between 2/1 and 10/1. I will back a horse at a bigger price but never at a lower price.
That’s the mentality of them simplified but if they woke up and smelled the roses they would wait for a eg Hurricane Fly going day and have their 60 quid on him at 1/2 and make 30 quid and have plenty spare time on their hands to study for the next Hurricane Fly.
Fist,
There were plenty of punters who believed Hurricane Fly was going to have a “going day” on reappearance; but were wrong. No punter “knows” whether a horse is going to have a “going day”, he can only make an educated opinion whether the 1/2 fav is value to win. Has it got a better than 67% chance of winning?
If you back it because it has a better chance of winning than losing (above 50%), then of course it has. But the bookmakers (and many exchange punters) have studied the form and also know it will “probably win” but come to a price they are willing to offer.
You say after one Hurricane Fly you should wait for the next Hurricane Fly and presumably the next one and the next one after that and so on. So let us say you had 100 bets on 100 Hurricane Fly 1/2favs. With level stakes, unless you win more than 66.67% of those bets, it does not matter if that first Hurricane Fly 1/2 fav wins or loses. And please don’t shorten that last sentence.Yet with level stakes, if someone backs a 9/1 shot against your Hurricane Fly 1/2 fav. If the punter wins more than 10% of his bets at 9/1, then it does not matter if his first 9/1 shot he backs wins or loses. And please don’t shorten that last sentence either.
In the two cases, the figures of 67% for 1/2 shots and 10% for 9/1 shots are important.
Value Is EverythingI can barely believe what I have read here this morning, I almost went into the kitchen and started to make my porridge again.
What do you mean ETW?
Value Is EverythingTAPK
You basically have the same aim, you just have a different way of approaching it. If you are as happy with your method as I am with mine then all power to you!
I’ll stick to the Kleenex!
Rob
No disrespect directed at you personally Rob,but what on earth do you achieve by doing it! Surely you have favourite horses that will bias your opinion? If i was to make a book on the Champion hurdle it would be something like this-. 4/1 Binocular, 11/2 Zaynar,6/1 Celestial Halo,,6/1 Go Native, 10/1 Solwhit,12/1 Punjabi! Nothing like the Bookmakers prices who go 4/1 Solwhit, 9/2 Zaynar,5/1 Go Native, 8/1 Binocular,10/1 Celestial Halo, 12/1 Punjabi, so according to my opinion,i should be backing Binocular with the Bookmakers as he is the Value bet! No thanks!Then when i compare my prices with the Bookmakers i see i"m a mile out with Sowhit,perhaps i should be backing him then as he is far more fancied than i thought!No i will stick with Celestial Halo as i know given his ideal set of circumstances he will be bang there again as will Binocular and Punjabi!All tissues would do for me is cloud my judgement and i cant have that! Another thing whilst i"m thinking about it,what happens when you do your tissue,you make your selection,you back it at the price your tissue tells you is value and the bloody thing drifts like a barge before the race,do you have to do it all again and when you do another horse proves to be better value than the first what happens then? You thought your horse had a 20% chance of winning so you took the 5/1,its drifted to 10/1,its only got a 10% chance of winning now according to your tissue,do you back it again or would that be a contradiction to your tissue loyaltys? What about this one too-. you have done your tissue and you think your horse is good value at 5/1,you go to back it but its been cut to 7/2,Oh no its not value anymore,i cant back it,but it goes and wins at 3/1 what happens there? Whats up with just looking at the board price for any race that has been compiled by a Professional Odds compiler and saying yes Celestial Halo 10/1 Get on!If you know your horses the only time you need a tissue is when the bloody thing is pulled out of its intended target and your Ante-Post bets lost!I needed a boxful with Age of aquarius in the St Leger!
I can not speak for Rob TAPK but….
Eh?
Don’t understand your point, not a lot of your post makes any sense to me. Might help if it is divided up a little.
Value Is EverythingI don’t usually stray on to this kind of thread as I get roundly abused
, however, the formula given is mathematically correct. If you don’t aim for advantageous odds you must concentrate on improving your strike-rate and be consistent (you know the kind of thing a VDW strike-rate of 80/90% per annum, then who gives a flying fek about odds? 
).MATHEMATICAL FORMULA OF EXPECTED VALUE
Example: EV = ½ (1) – ½ (1) = 0 advantage
Let me share a secret with you. Unless you accept and implement the principle detailed in the following article it is impossible profit by betting on horses in the long-term. Without adopting this strategy you must resign yourself to losing in the end.
Every bet made must be subject to the winning mathematical formula of expected value: –
EV = P (G) – P (L)
Where P is the probability of the event, G is the potential gain and L is the potential loss.If the expected value is positive you have an overlay sound bet, conversely if the expected value is negative it is an underlay unsound bet. For example on tossing a coin strictly heads or tails that is evens as a return on your stake the EV = 0 and is a fair bet with no advantage to either party. Neither an overlay nor an underlay: –
EV = ½ (1) – ½ (1) = 0
If offered 4/5 the probability remains the same but G is now 0.8 and thus EV is negative. Naturally after one toss of the coin you are as likely to win as you are to lose but in the long-term over a number of spins: –
EV = ½ (0.
– ½ (1) = – 0.1This is what happens for example at the roulette wheel. Forget about staking plans etc., in the long-term at roulette both the probabilities and the potential gains/losses are certain so you must lose.
Horseracing offers a different scenario as the potential gains/losses are certain but the probabilities of events are subjective phenomena. For example if you believe Opera House had a 20% chance of success in the King George at odds of 4/1 the EV would be 0: –
EV = 0.2 (4) – 0.8 (1) = 0
However, at early prices Opera House was available at 8/1, therefore: –
EV = 0.2 (8) – 0.8 (1) = + 0.8
This indicates a positive return of 80% in the event of a winning run.
In the same race we may believe that Commander In Chief has a 30% chance of success, available at odds of 2/1, therefore: –
EV = 0.3 (2) – 0.7 (1) = – 0.1If the probabilities were correct Commander In Chief would win a race more often than Opera House, but if only overlays are supported in the end they win.
Most people can accept the logic and validity of the argument presented (if you do not then you are mistaken because they are mathematical facts). However, it is alien to back anything but a major fancy in a race, which is natural and acceptable, so long as it is only backed if it is an overlay bet.
Someone said: “You can beat the races but you cannot beat the race.” Meaning that there is no such thing as a racing certainty? However, profitability is inexorably linked with the law of expected value. The probabilities assigned must be a function of statistical fact rather than subjective views.
- Total Posts 17716
Mate you’re so dumb at times please don’t treat me the same way. Do you think every punter thinks like you?
I gave an example. Where did I say every horse someone spots or jots down as there next bet will be 1/2
If the value punter is true to his word his stakes will be the same for every 8/1 shot he backs or he’s simply not playing the %’s and breaking his own rules. If he is going to do that he’d be as well tossing the lot in the bin would he not?
My Hurricane Fly could be Get Me Out Of Here at 5/1, or Khyber King at 20/1 or Deep Purple at 6/1 or Kauto Star at 8/11, my bets could vary from 1 pound to 5000 pounds. Not everything I back is the same price and I vary my stakes on how much I fancy them.
On the question of value: You preach about value but I fail to see you getting a price that doesn’t stand up. I must have a hundred posts where I have backed horses at ?/1 and by the next morning or later the same day he’s dropped dramatically. While some I have backed heavily not all the sudden changes in price are down to me. The prices drop because because others saw the value in taking an early price.
Your idea of value is tossing a dice and saying the law of averages say I must be right x amount of times as you clearly point out in your example.
Difference is when a Galaxy Rock 8/1 to 7/2 comes along I make a lot of dough but to you he’s just another 8/1 shot that the law of averages came up with.
No disrespect directed at you personally Rob,but what on earth do you achieve by doing it! Surely you have favourite horses that will bias your opinion?
I have favourite horses but that makes diddly-squat difference to how good they are. I do my calculations on figures alone based on form factors. Effectively I don’t see a horse’s name when working out figures, only what it has achieved. As I said I have a different approach to northern chasers but any tweaks are based on my observations of patterns and preferences of each horse. If anything that’s my indulgence!
As I said the method works for me and I’ve not had a losing year since adopting the approach. I’m only too willing to admit that the way I do things suits me and may not suit others. Bottom line is it’s my approach, it works me, and if others don’t like it then fine because they will be backing different horses. In fact the more dissenters the better!
It suits me. Each to their own.
Rob
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.