Coton And Myers Q&A – answers now in

Home Forums Archive Topics Celebrity Q&A’s Coton And Myers Q&A – answers now in

This topic contains 46 replies, has 14 voices, and was last updated by Pants Pants 7 years, 8 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 47 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #387101
    betlarge
    betlarge
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2651

    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 :lol:

    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

    #387104

    Anonymous
    • Total Posts 17732

    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?

    #387111
    Kenh
    Kenh
    Participant
    • Total Posts 739

    and there is no such thing as

    true value

    until the result is known

    Are you achieving value betting? Well, if you’re in front, yes; if you’re behind, no…….if you’re in front, you’re getting value.

    That is just wrong. If a bet is value it is value irespective of the result. Take poker as an example. In texas holdem if there are four cards to the flush with one to come the odds are around 4/1 of getting the flush. If the size of the pot means you are only getting 2/1 to call a bet you should fold because it is poor value. If you do fold and the flush completes you were still correct to fold. If you are getting 5/1 to call you should make the call because it is good value. Even if the flush doesn’t complete you were still correct to make the call and still had value. If someone offers you 4/5 to call heads on the toss of a coin you should decline because it is poor value as evens is the correct odds. Even if it does come down heads your decision was still correct as you didn’t have value. The fact it came down heads doesn’t change the fact that the odds offered were’t value. You may have 100 spins of the coin and back it at 4/5 for heads each time. It might come down heads many more times than it does tails and put you in front but that doesn’t alter the fact that you were still not getting value.

    Of course as said with horse racing value is a matter of opinion and thats where the skill comes is, deciding if a bet is value or not.

    #387118
    tbracing
    tbracing
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1341

    Good post Kenh

    #387131
    betlarge
    betlarge
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2651

    and there is no such thing as

    true value

    until the result is known

    Are you achieving value betting? Well, if you’re in front, yes; if you’re behind, no…….if you’re in front, you’re getting value.

    That is just wrong. If a bet is value it is value irespective of the result. Take poker as an example. In texas holdem if there are four cards to the flush with one to come the odds are around 4/1 of getting the flush. If the size of the pot means you are only getting 2/1 to call a bet you should fold because it is poor value. If you do fold and the flush completes you were still correct to fold. If you are getting 5/1 to call you should make the call because it is good value. Even if the flush doesn’t complete you were still correct to make the call and still had value. If someone offers you 4/5 to call heads on the toss of a coin you should decline because it is poor value as evens is the correct odds. Even if it does come down heads your decision was still correct as you didn’t have value. The fact it came down heads doesn’t change the fact that the odds offered were’t value. You may have 100 spins of the coin and back it at 4/5 for heads each time. It might come down heads many more times than it does tails and put you in front but that doesn’t alter the fact that you were still not getting value.

    Of course as said with horse racing value is a matter of opinion and thats where the skill comes is, deciding if a bet is value or not.

    Sorry Ken, but you’re not comparing like with like. Giving examples where exact percentage chances are known (eg heads or tails) is nothing like attempting to evaluate value odds in an area of opinion (such as horse racing). Your subsequent examples are all correct of course but irrelevant to racing.

    My statement was that if you are in front you are getting ‘value’ whether you are looking for it or not. This HAS to be true, simply because you are clearly backing horses at greater odds than the percentage chance of them winning. For that selection of bets at least, you have obtained ‘value’.

    The whole concept of ‘value’ betting can only revolve around the hard fact of being in front or not. If you win year in, year out at betting on racing, you ARE getting value, you have to be! Whether you choose to name this ‘value betting’ is an irrelevant moot point surely?

    Mike

    #387132
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 26324

    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.

    You are right Reet, in my opinion the "market" is a better guide than it used to be. But the market reflects punters trying to get "value". I now rarely bet on course or in the last hour before the off. Concentrating on Early Odds, trying to seek out "value" before the market finds its level.

    So even in your example of the market proving a better guide involves "value" seeking.

    value is everything
    #387138

    gamble
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2617

    ‘The whole concept of ‘value’ betting can only revolve around the hard fact of being in front or not. If you win year in, year out at betting on racing, you ARE getting value, you have to be! Whether you choose to name this ‘value betting’ is an irrelevant moot point surely?’

    Mike

    Seems plausible Mike but someone might argue a difficult corollary and suggest someone had a knack of betting a disproportionately large amount of undervalue horses.

    The value concept.

    There are different views of value. If 3/1 is generally available and someone obtains 4/1 he may say he is getting value, however what we are considering here is the true or real chance of a horse winning a race and the bettering of that via odds.
    A deck of cards is not a particularly good analogy because in horse racing the true value if it can be ascertained has to be opinion based whereas cards are mathematically factual.

    If you had two 2 year old horses that were brother twins and performing identical times on the gallops and you were able to get 11/8 against on one in a match race, most would say that was value.
    There are rarely such obvious examples of value.

    The market particularly a big exchange like betfair will contain a mix of opinions; insider information, various statistical models, experienced opinion, tipster followers, and pinstickers. Unlike bookmakers in the past who were able to hold a false price or manipulate the market, it is much more difficult to do this with the existence of the big exchanges, and although opinion based, many consider the prices represent near to the true or real price near the off (probably more so with the market leaders) negating the possibility of getting a value price.

    On balance I would side with Mike’s assertion that – a profit gained with a 10000 race sample would suggest value has been obtained over and above the ‘true chance or true price’ – but this value concept will always stay in the realms of grey, because it is formed largely from opinion over the facts or stats and although made up of, is not of itself fact

    #387140
    tbracing
    tbracing
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1341

    You certainly can still get value before the off, I’ve rarely have any fear backing a runner on the slide before the off and if I didn’t I wouldn’t get a lot of bets I do get on, the most recent example is Emerald Wilderness on Saturday I had priced at 11/2 but before the off could get 10 on betfair for good money. Wouldn’t have touched him at 11/2 and if I did I wouldn’t get very far ahead.

    When a horse steams and wins there is always a big consensus of the market told you so yet drifters that win and they do fairly often but don’t get mentioned. The market merely tells you where the money is going not whether it’s absolutely correct, with the accessibility to get money on these days with the exchanges people can get on when they fancy something, though of course there are you Shalambars!

    If the market was going to give us all the winners we need and value wasn’t important we’d just lump on these good things right and all the bookies would go out of business….. :lol:

    #387141
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 26324

    Sorry Ken, but you’re not comparing like with like. Giving examples where exact percentage chances are known (eg heads or tails) is nothing like attempting to evaluate value odds in an area of opinion (such as horse racing). Your subsequent examples are all correct of course but irrelevant to racing.

    My statement was that if you are in front you are getting ‘value’ whether you are looking for it or not. This HAS to be true, simply because you are clearly backing horses at greater odds than the percentage chance of them winning. For that selection of bets at least, you have obtained ‘value’.

    The whole concept of ‘value’ betting can only revolve around the hard fact of being in front or not. If you win year in, year out at betting on racing, you ARE getting value, you have to be! Whether you choose to name this ‘value betting’ is an irrelevant moot point surely?

    Mike

    Mike,
    You are right that a punter can only be confident he’s found value if a profit is made over a prolonged time span. However, just because a punter is in profit does not mean he has definitely found value. Some might show an over all profit, but only because of a few (or even just one) big bets come in. It’s easy for a punter to delude himself that because he won thousands on a 50/1 shot in the National that he knows how to find value. But it may well be that one (or few) win/s could be a coincidence and nothing to do with "value". In years to come he may expect to get other big wins, but does not succeed. So it muddys the waters still further.

    But the point I believe Kenh is trying to make is that "value" CAN be "value" without winning. Finding Exact "known" percentages aren’t needed for what Ken says to be correct.

    Say there is a four horse race where (after studying the form) a punter believes horse B has ¾ the chance of A, C has ½ the chance of A and D a ¼ of A. Only way it is possible those figures can be fitted in to a 100% book is:

    A = 40% = fair odds of 6/4
    B = 30% = 9/4 (almost, 9/4 = 30.8%)
    C = 20% = 4/1
    D = 10% = 9/1
    40% + 30% + 20% + 10% = 100%

    Obviously he/she can check those percentages by also asking whether C (20) has 2 thirds of B’s (30) chance, D (10) has 1 third of B and ½ of C’s chance? And if you truly believe horse B and D’s chance combined are equal to horse A (30 + 10 = 40)? And if C + D (20 + 10) would equal the same chance as B (30), and A + D (50) = B + C (50)? Also if you think 2 of C (20 + 20) would have the same as A (40)? I could go on. Only if you believe all of those things to be true, do you leave the percentages / prices as they are.

    The punter then looks at the best prices available in a fairly competitive market which are:

    A 11/8 (a 42.1% strike rate is needed at 11/8 to break even)
    So at the punter’s estimation of its chance a 40% strike rate @ 11/8 would result in a loss. Therefore it is not (in the punter’s opinion) a good bet.

    B 15/8 (34.8% strike rate is needed to break even)
    Punters estimation of 30% is not enough to be a good bet.

    C 100/30 (23.1%)
    Punters estimation of 20% is not enough to be a good bet.

    D 12/1 (7.7%).
    Punters estimation means a 10% strike rate @ 12/1 would result in a profit. If a punter wins 10 out of 100 bets at 12/1, at level stakes he/she returns 130 points to his 100 points over all stake.

    Win or lose, this 12/1 shot is/was a good bet in the opinion of this punter; despite in the punters own opinion D standing the worst chance of winning. Quarter the chance of A, a third of B and half of C… D is the obvious "Value" bet. Of course if he/she is a poor judge then it may well not be "value" at all.

    Of course a punter does not have to do 100% books to find value. Sometimes a price shouts value at you. Trends can be used to find value. But anyone who does not take any notice of value is deluding themselves if they believe a profit can be made without it.

    * NB Had the punter’s estimation of (A) been bigger than 42.1% then it would’ve been a good bet @ 11/8. Short priced horses can be value. It is their price compared to chance that makes fair (or as it is sometimes confusingly for Reet called "True") value, NOT the price alone.

    value is everything
    #387149

    tooting
    Member
    • Total Posts 379

    Ginger,

    looking at how you bet, you concentrate on betting "value" odds – ie longer than your tissue – on early prices on decent races. And you are good at it. So good you’re considering going full-time.

    Full-time would require you to bet in considerably more events to considerably larger stakes. The bookmakers will limit you, or close you down, as soon as you start increasing your stakes, and you’ll be left with betfair prices, an area you said recently you struggled to make a profit. You’ll also have to play in races where the form isn’t as readily analysable, nor the horses so consistent, nor always trying. That’s without coping with the fear of it being your only income, when the losing runs hit.

    I wish you well whatever you do. I gambled full-time for 6 years, having started from a similar position to the one you find yourself in now. But I lost the "value" somewhere along the line.
    Now, back part-time, snaffling best odds off ultra-competitive bookmakers in high profile races, I truly appreciate how much easier that is than grinding out a living.

    Mark Coton has probably forgotten more about betting than you or I will ever learn. Your evangelism for "value" and disregard for him and similar people on here over the last few years hasn’t always read well. And I don’t suppose I’m the only one who has drifted away from the forum accordingly. Can’t fault your persistence though…

    #387151

    Anonymous
    • Total Posts 17732

    Ginger,

    Mark Coton has probably forgotten more about betting than you or I will ever learn. Your evangelism for "value" and disregard for him and similar people on here over the last few years hasn’t always read well. And I don’t suppose I’m the only one who has drifted away from the forum accordingly. Can’t fault your persistence though…

    And that’s the real rub,Tooting.
    Such as Drone have probably forgotten more about racing and its arithmetic than Ginger has ever known: yet he is addressed as some schoolboy, a special needs one to boot, that has to have points emboldened before he fully comprehends them.
    This just cannot be right, and the sooner it stops, the better.

    #387153
    betlarge
    betlarge
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2651

    Mike,
    You are right that a punter can only be confident he’s found value if a profit is made over a prolonged time span. However, just because a punter is in profit does not mean he has definitely found value.

    Well of course it doesn’t, but it surely depends on the number of bets does it not? The more and more bets one has which continue to show a profit (particularly at the sharp end of the market) the more likely one has found ‘value’ whether one sought it or not.

    I maintain that anyone who has a winning strategy over the course of thousands of bets is getting ‘value’ whether they seek it or not.

    Mike

    #387156

    gamble
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2617

    A good post from Tooting about
    the practicalities of the betting pit
    and good to see his pig whiskers
    grown so long white and wise.

    So long lost friend, as well as the honourable
    Ian Davies hard book on how to fix the world
    I will add the ginger coated betting stick
    as the two main constituent reasons for your
    evacuation plan

    #387161
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 26324

    Ginger,

    looking at how you bet, you concentrate on betting "value" odds – ie longer than your tissue – on early prices on decent races. And you are good at it. So good you’re considering going full-time.

    Full-time would require you to bet in considerably more events to considerably larger stakes. The bookmakers will limit you, or close you down, as soon as you start increasing your stakes, and you’ll be left with betfair prices, an area you said recently you struggled to make a profit. You’ll also have to play in races where the form isn’t as readily analysable, nor the horses so consistent, nor always trying. That’s without coping with the fear of it being your only income, when the losing runs hit.

    I wish you well whatever you do. I gambled full-time for 6 years, having started from a similar position to the one you find yourself in now. But I lost the "value" somewhere along the line.
    Now, back part-time, snaffling best odds off ultra-competitive bookmakers in high profile races, I truly appreciate how much easier that is than grinding out a living.

    Mark Coton has probably forgotten more about betting than you or I will ever learn. Your evangelism for "value" and disregard for him and similar people on here over the last few years hasn’t always read well. And I don’t suppose I’m the only one who has drifted away from the forum accordingly. Can’t fault your persistence though…

    You describe the pitfalls of betting for a living very well Tooting. I put foreward some of those worries in my questions to Mark and David.

    Don’t see what you mean by

    "disregard for him and similar people on here over the years"

    . I have great respect for what Mark Coton has done in the past. It is just a few comments on these pages about SP’s and value I have a problem with. So please don’t exaggerate. Fair enough, this is his opinion now; but we should not accept everything Mark says without any questioning. It is precisely because of my regard for those "similar people" in Tom Segal and Hugh Taylor that I’ve defended their way of doing things in this thread.

    I suggest you either quote these places where I’ve had a "disregard for similar… in the past" so that I can defend myself. Or delete those accusations Tooting!

    :evil: As far as I can remember, I’ve seldom (may be never) shown a disregard of "similar". Indeed I can remember

    defending

    Lydia Hislop (which got me in to trouble with certain members at the time), Mike Cattermole, Tanya Stevenson, Jim (C4) McGrath, Lee McKenzie and even the BHA in the past!

    value is everything
    #387169
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 26324

    Mike,
    You are right that a punter can only be confident he’s found value if a profit is made over a prolonged time span. However, just because a punter is in profit does not mean he has definitely found value.

    Well of course it doesn’t, but it surely depends on the number of bets does it not? The more and more bets one has which continue to show a profit (particularly at the sharp end of the market) the more likely one has found ‘value’ whether one sought it or not.

    I maintain that anyone who has a winning strategy over the course of thousands of bets is getting ‘value’ whether they seek it or not.

    Mike

    I would not say it is "the number of bets" a punter has. It’s the number of bets responsible for showing that profit. Don’t want to repeat myself Betlarge. But if a punter has had thousands of bets with little to show from those small bets, yet also one or two massive wins – then it MAY not be because he’s found "value".

    But you are right that most people who make an over all profit do find value. I don’t think there is much between you, me and Kenh’s opinion.

    value is everything
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 47 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.