- This topic has 46 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
I’m delighted to let you know that I’ve recieved the answers to the Mark Coton and David Myers questions that you posted.
They’ve provided some fantastic responses to some challenging questions. Well worth a read.
You can link to theme here – https://theracingforum.co.uk/horse-racing-forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=88955
Many, many thanks to them both and very best of luck to them with their new venture.
Mark and David have combined to launch a new betting advisory service for which details are available at http://www.cotonmyers.com
Wish Mark and David well with their venture and thank them for answering.
Must say though, don’t reckon much to their answers, a lot of it does not make sense.
Value Is Everythingha – depends on what you call ‘making sense’ GT
I suspect if you re-read in 5/10 years it’ll all make sense.
I don’t think so Corm.
Anyone would think “Value” punting began with Pricewise. It’s always been there since betting began. David did not seem to know what
True
value is; It’s not about backing outsiders, it’s not the Thommo idea of value (as an alternative to the favourite at a bigger price). It can be
any
price, as I am sure his betting partner knows.
Value punters have to keep their eye in, to account for new aspects of form. eg Trainer form is (I believe) more important in 2012 than it was 20 years ago. However, the beauty of value betting is there will always be value horses. Where as with “Trends”- A good trend may well identify value (show a good profit) with say a 31% strike rate at an average priced winner of 3/1. But once the trend gets well known, with more and more people using it and more money gambled on the selection; the average priced winner will inevitably shorten. Strike rate of a particular trend (31% in this case) does not change (or barely changes), so once the average priced winner gets below 9/4, it is no longer profitable. Trends have a limited shelf life, Value Betting doesn’t.
Once a value selection is shorter than a punter’s price to beat, unless he/she is already on it is no longer a bet. But when one horse shortens another lengthens and may well in turn become value. Whether a gambler gets on a horse in one race or not, there will be “value” to be had in the next race, or the next, or the next. Once a trend has lost its value (becomes too well known) it is no longer profitable Full Stop.
For the same reason, there is very little prospect of a very successful tipping service making a profit at SP. For sure, for a limited time it can show a profit, but not forever. Tipsters like Tom Segal and Hugh Taylor are so successful that bookmakers have no alternative but to shorten their tips. The more a tipster is successful the more money is gambled on their selections and the shorter the SP will be. A tip at 20/1 with Tom or Hugh is probably no longer a good bet once it reaches a 10/1 SP. Ie If the horse is made the tip because it is thought value at 20/1 (because it is thought much better than 4.8% chance), it would probably
not
have been the tip at all had it been only available at 10/1 in the first place (as it would need a better than 9% chance of winning to be value at that price). Therefore it is ridiculous to judge tips at SP. David may well say he does not want to give out “non-existent prices”, but the simple fact is these tipping services are a hostage to fortune (their success). Any popular, profitable tipping line will have their selections shortened. The more successful and profitable they are the shorter the SP will be. Therefore, highly unlikely to make a profit at SP. It would be different if tips were given shortly before off time, but Mark and David’s are to be put up at around 11:00am giving significant time for horses to shorten. If their venture becomes as successful as Hugh or Tom then their SP profit/loss will suffer. I find it very strange for David to suggest if they can do it at SP then no reason why their subscribers can’t do the same.
Unlike what Mark claims, Yes “you (or at least me/I) do back something because it’s value”. Value bets ARE the ones that “make a difference”.
My biggest win is the same as Dave Nevison’s (or up to the time of his first book) biggest individual win.
When I watched Rooster Booster win the Greatwood Hurdle under top weight I thought after a performance like that he probably stands a 20% chance of winning the Champion Hurdle. Amazed to hear Stan James offer 12/1 immediately afterwards (how the …. Nevison got 14’s?). Something I consider a fair 4/1 shot is a bet with a capital B at 12/1. A few days later my Timeform Perspective said “A performance good enough to win 3 of the last 4 Champion Hurdles”. As I saw it, confirmation of my assessment. By now he’s down to 8/1 top price. Still exceptional value, so I went in again. I did not back the horse because I thought it would win or because I thought it would as Mark puts it “just about win”. It had in my opinion a 1 in 5 chance. I backed Rooster Booster because in my opinion it was VALUE to win,The “value thing has” certainly NOT “been done to death”.
David quotes Harry Findlay:
“Harry Findlay mentioned a few years ago, to win at betting, you need to pick winners – if you don’t find enough of them, then you won’t get paid out”.
There aren’t many more crazy quotes around. Because it tries to criticise Value by describing in exact terms what “Value” actually is. Of course any punter “needs to pick winners”, because…
“If you don’t find enough winners” (to make a profit) then you’re NOT getting VALUE. ieIf a punter tries to find value but does not “find enough winners” to make a profit – Then he/she has failed to find that “value”.
The fact is (at level stakes):
If a punter has a 75% strike rate at an average priced winner of 2/7 he/she will make a loss.
If he/she has a 75% strike rate at an average priced winner of 2/5 he/she will show a profit.
If he/she has a 5% SR at average priced winner of 14/1 he/she shows a loss.
If a punter is good at identifying value at big odds, a 5% SR at average 33/1 shows a profit.
Those arefacts
, not opinion.
So you don’t need to pick
many
winners to make a profit. But it is true, you do “need to find
enough
winners”. It is NOT the number of winners that is important, it’s the
number of winners compared to your average priced winner
. As the above shows, a 5% SR at average price of 33/1 is a lot better than a seemingly brilliant 75% SR if the latter’s average price taken is just 2/7. Although obviously, any punter with just a 5% SR must expect an exceptionally long losing run, you see my point.
It is true that something backed at 10/1 is not necessarily value, even if it shortens to 5/1. Some 5/1 shots do not have a better than 9% chance of winning. Although it is a good sign of a punter could be getting value, only in making a profit for a sustained period can a punter know he/she gets enough value.
Like David, I am no longer looking for the very best price (don’t usually get up that early these days). But it is still vital to take a price I believe to be “value”. I also don’t often lay off a bet. It’s not a question of being “
hypnotised
” or “
impressing mates
” as David claims Value betting to be. It’s a question of finding
value
and so
PROFIT
. Even a
Trends
man needs to find value to make a profit.
There are some good points made by both Mark and David, but the stuff about SP’s and anti-value don’t seem to me to have any basis in what actually happens in practice.
Value Is Everything
- Total Posts 17716
If Corm’s mission was to fill the forum with more tripe, then he’s been 100% successful, from a quarter which you’d bet your eye-teeth on supplying it.
Value
is an abstruse concept, and there is no such thing as
true value
until the result is known – even the erstwhile
value guru
MC has come to appreciate that, and mindless repetition of the former mantra is not only a waste of time and space, but also an insult to the intelligence of other members.
FFS, Ginger – give it upAnd an entirely predictable response from Reet.
You don’t have to read it.
Value Is Everything- Total Posts 17716
I didn’t – nor should others be constantly subjected to it.
I suspect if you re-read in 5/10 years it’ll all make sense.
It made sense 5, 10, 25…years ago though has been lost on the bandwagon-boarding ‘value is my all and everything’ generation, most of whom evangelise the concept but fail to grasp its subtleties and nuances, and perhaps above all fail to realise that it’s just another betting strategy – no more no less – that having been utilised by too many for too long in all likelihood is unlikely to result in the ‘edge’ it once provided…
…in Coton’s apt words – "We might say Pricewise value was once a beautiful, quiet beach and now it’s overrun with revellers and worshippers"
‘Twas ever the case
Ginger,
Mark well Coton’s words in reply to your question. ‘Pro bettor with no other source of income’ and ‘part time bettor with other income’. Worlds apart psychologically speaking. Best wishes
I used to think that tipsters were bastions of bluster, waffle, non-sequitors (see below) and faux-philosophy. Now I know better..!
Think this was Mr Myers’ quote:
"As Harry Findlay mentioned a few years ago, to win at betting, you need to pick winners – if you don’t find enough of them, then you won’t get paid out."
WHAT??!
Mike
I suspect if you re-read in 5/10 years it’ll all make sense.
It made sense 5, 10, 25…years ago though has been lost on the bandwagon-boarding ‘value is my all and everything’ generation, most of whom evangelise the concept but
fail to grasp its subtleties and nuances, and perhaps above all fail to realise that it’s just another betting strategy – no more no less –
Is value betting really "just another betting strategy" Drone? Don’t even Trends men need to find "value"?…..
(Know you know the percentages etc Drone, but I have to use them to make my case).
Say a Trends man finds a trend that gives him a
31%
strike rate at an average price of 3/1;
will he make a profit?
Answer
Yes
, a good one. With a 31% SR he only needs an average priced winner of 9/4 to make a profit so 3/1 is very good.
Say this particular successful trend gets well known. Bookmakers inevitably get to know too. Do you think Bookmakers will keep prices the same? They shorten the average price. Also, with so many punters trying to back this "successful trend" it forces the average priced winner down even further so the average priced winner this Trend punter can get is 15/8.
Is it now a successful trend?
Answer
NO
. At an average priced winner of 15/8 the trend now needs a
35%
SR to make a profit, but it
only gets 31%
. The trend is no longer VALUE.
There are more ways than one to find "value", including trends
. But "Value" is not "just another betting strategy" Drone.
Whatever the aspect of study a punter chooses
he
NEEDS TO FIND VALUE to show an over all profit
.
Value Is EverythingI suspect if you re-read in 5/10 years it’ll all make sense.
that having been utilised by too many for too long in all likelihood is unlikely to result in the ‘edge’ it once provided…
…in Coton’s apt words – "We might say Pricewise value was once a beautiful, quiet beach and now it’s overrun with revellers and worshippers"
‘Twas ever the case
Is value betting utilised by too many for too long Drone?
Well Tom Segal and Hugh Taylor are still two of the most successful tipsters and they’re both value orientated. And they don’t work out (tip) in all races. There may well be thousands of people who try to emulate them by picking what they believe is value, but many aren’t capable of finding the elusive V word. As Reet might say, one mans value is another mans poor price.
Many might want to follow Tom and Hugh over a cliff. But if they alter a market to such a degree (shortening up dramatically); then even if there wasn’t any other value to be had at Early Odds, other horses lengthen to a value price. And Tom and Hugh are not always right in their value selection.
In most races there are value bets, and even if one value horse is missed another one might be value, or lengthen to a value price, or there’s always the next race. So it does not really matter how many value seekers are out there with so much of it to go around and so many wrong choices.
Where as with so many people looking for those elusive trends and only so many things to look at. Once a trend becomes well known it is no longer value / of use (unless used within form study to find an over all value selection).
Value Is EverythingI’m with Ginger. I’m not saying Value is the best betting strategy, but for individuals who trust their own judgement, are willing to oppose the herd and are happy to bet big at big prices, there’s profit to be made.
- Total Posts 17716
On the contrary, SC, the
herd
are now seen to be chasing
value
, whereas the market proves a much better guide, now, moreso than ever.
Not sure I understand where this discussion is going. VALUE isn’t a specific hard n’ fast way of betting is it? It’s just a word. Call it what you will. The FACT is if you don’t bet horses that win more often than the price you take repays you you won’t make money end of story….It’s not about betting big prices, you could quite happily find profit (Value) in backing short prices – as long as the requirements above holds true. It doesn’t matter how you do it (trends, market watching, figures, form etc etc), if after a large number of bets (100 for arguments sake) you are in the black – you have unwittingly found VALUE in your bets whether you like it or not. The assertion that all you have to do is find winners is
All those punters who appear totally against the concept of value tell me which punter would you rather be?
Punter A – an egomaniac regaling his pals in the boozer about his punting prowess having backed 6 winners in his last 10 bets.
Or
Punter B – at the end of his tether with 8 straight losers since his last two winners.
Which would you rather be?
and of course it’s not possible to answer the question unless you know at what price the winners came. You cannot back winners without any consideration for price and not expect to do your onions.
Not sure I understand where this discussion is going. VALUE isn’t a specific hard n’ fast way of betting is it? It’s just a word. Call it what you will. The FACT is if you don’t bet horses that win more often than the price you take repays you you won’t make money end of story….It’s not about betting big prices, you could quite happily find profit (Value) in backing short prices – as long as the requirements above holds true. It doesn’t matter how you do it (trends, market watching, figures, form etc etc), if after a large number of bets (100 for arguments sake) you are in the black – you have unwittingly found VALUE in your bets whether you like it or not. The assertion that all you have to do is find winners is
All those punters who appear totally against the concept of value tell me which punter would you rather be?
Punter A – an egomaniac regaling his pals in the boozer about his punting prowess having backed 6 winners in his last 10 bets.
Or
Punter B – at the end of his tether with 8 straight losers since his last two winners.
Which would you rather be?
and of course it’s not possible to answer the question unless you know at what price the winners came. You cannot back winners without any consideration for price and not expect to do your onions.
Correct. There is no such thing as ‘Value’ betting as a dogma. Are you achieving value betting? Well, if you’re in front, yes; if you’re behind, no.
Whether you make quasi-precise calculations such as Ginge or just back the jockey with the nicest rear-end like Aunty Eileen across the road, if you’re in front, you’re getting value.
Whether you are ‘seeking’ it or not is quite frankly irrelevant.
Mike
- Total Posts 17716
It’s 100% tripe Reet – but you haven’t even read it. Good stuff.
Do you have to read the Sun every day, to know it’s not a very good newspaper?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.