Do you have an edge?

[Mtoto44]

How can you possibly predict or explain the processes that go into horses leaving the stalls and taking up positions – possibly on slower or faster going, chasing a slower or faster pace, or finding themselves blocked in or getting a clear run – in a Flat race?

Prufrock,

Answering your question would be more fun than accepting your invitation.

First I never back in any sprint races giving horses time to take up their positions. If the horse I’m considering has a reputation for playing up, or being slowly away I take that into consderation when measuring its chances. I usually leave the going aspect to the trainer (as I only back good horse the trainer isn’t likely to take risks) UNLESS the horse has shown a marked preference for a particular going. The pace in the races I back in is usually a good to fair one, but even then I do look to see where its drawn and who is drawn around it. I never back in really small fields unless there is a proven front runner who has the class to lead well into the closing stages. As for horse not getting a clear run this does happen in some of the big hcps, but even then with attention to the running syle, jockey, and field postition likely to be taken the instances of this can be cut to a minimum. For me one of the most important factors I look at is the course type, often you can eliminate horses, some of them very short priced favourites because the course isn’t suitable.

Agreed, even after taking all this trouble things can go wrong. Instead of looking for bad luck or randomness I go through the race again to see if the mistake was MINE, after watching the race again I can make the decision. I very seldom excuse bad luck in running unless the incident is obvious. Many "unlucky" horses are repeat performers, same as unlucky punters, with the punters in many cases is it luck, or other reasons?

I can only think you are either backing far to many horses (if you have backed thousands in recent years) or you are not choosing your races with enough care.

Be Lucky, but do your homework first. You can’t have one without the other.

[Prufrock]

I can only think you are either backing far to many horses (if you have backed thousands in recent years) or you are not choosing your races with enough care.

Thanks for the advice. I have made a decent living on and off from punting in the last 6 years (only breaking off to pursue other remunerative ventures) and have never done better than when pressing my advantage by being prepared to back/lay win/place every horse in a dozen or more races a day.

But, clearly, I could do even better.

[Hensman]

Mtoto

"… and have never done better than when pressing my advantage by being prepared to back/lay win/place every horse in a dozen or more races a day."

If you hadn’t taken your mother’s advice and eaten your greens as a child, that could be you.

[arkle55]

But DJ class, used properly, does give an edge over randomness, despite what your earlier table suggests.
Using the 1st 3 in the market, all races past 7 years, shows the following:

Dropped in class

class 1
class 2 26.3%
class 3 25.0%
class 4 25.6%
class 5 24.8%
class 6 22.4%

Raised in class

class 1 18.8%
class 2 17.9%
class 3 24.2%
class 4 22.1%
class 5 21.6%

There are many other ways too, to reduce ‘chance’ in one’s betting, but it is fortunately still an art, rather than a science, to combine them effectively on a race by race basis, and will always confound those that believe horse racing to be unpredictable.

REET HARD
would you happen to know the win % figure for horses that run in the same grade next time out.
Thank you Paul

[Anonymous]

Paul

As you ask so nicely :

Class 1 24.05%
Class 2 19.3
class 3 20.2
class 4 24.8
class 5 22.9
class 6 19.8

[Mtoto44]

Thanks for the advice.

My pleasure.

I have made a decent living on and off from punting in the last 6 years (only breaking off to pursue other remunerative ventures) and have never done better than when pressing my advantage by being prepared to back/lay win/place every horse in a dozen or more races a day.

I now understand why luck and/or randomness is important to you.

But, clearly, I could do even better.

I certainly think with a little hard work you could cut down your expenditure. If you selected your races/bets with greater care would you really need so many bets? I have no doubt you and others that work like this make money. Although when I see Mr Nevison and his like it does cross my mind they operate like this because in truth they know little about racing and are just playing a numbers game. Of course I have no idea of the sort of profits made but I’m 100% sure I could match them for a far smaller out lay.

Randomness not all its cracked up to be.

[JimF]

reet hard,

A quick clarification about your table(s). My understanding is that you record the first three in the market for a given race, and the class of that race. When each of the same three next run, you take the ‘new’ class of race they are in and whether or not they have won it. Is that correct?

If so, what is the rationale for chosing the first three in the market in the first place?

[Anonymous]

reet hard,

A quick clarification about your table(s). My understanding is that you record the first three in the market for a given race, and the class of that race. When each of the same three next run, you take the ‘new’ class of race they are in and whether or not they have won it. Is that correct?

If so, what is the rationale for chosing the first three in the market in the first place?

JimF

It isn’t near as complicated as you make it sound.
All I have done is punch the information into the free query tool on Adrian Massey’s website:

http://www.adrianmassey.com/db3/dbaccess.php?flat=-1

It is possible to choose from numerous categories. I chose first 3 in the market because;
A/ Dave Jay had used favourites in his original table, and I thought 1st 3 would give a truer picture.
B/ I know from experience that first 3 in the market gives around 60% winners, so I had a readymade check against the resulting figures.

I should point out that I don’t store, or use, stats or trends at all in my betting, but have been at the game long enough to know instinctively whether something is fish or fowl.
Try that site, mess around with it a little. It is pretty useful, even to we non-believers.

[Prufrock]

when I see Mr Nevison and his like it does cross my mind they operate like this because in truth they know little about racing

Really? How fascinating.

[maggsy]

I think it was Alan Potts that said when he checked back over his bets for the year it was only a matter of 5 bets that had made the difference between winning and losing. Which added up to only a few lengths. he said that the rest of the year he was just treading water. I’ve also heard others say this and that theres no way of knowing which few bets will make the difference at the end of the year so they have to back them all.
I personally like to be selective, but that might not be the best way for everybody.To me confidence is everything to me and that means backing alot of winners.

[Artemis]

I thought it was obvious that if you have an edge, the more bets you have, the more likely it is that you will profit.

It’s called ‘spreading the risk’ and is one of the fundamental principles of bookmaking. In this case, you are spreading the risk over a long series of bets rather than leaving profits to the vagaries of our (now) old friend, random chance.

It is no coincidence that the most successful players in this game are bookmakers with facilities to handle vast numbers of bets on infinite numbers of events. As with casinos, the percentages working in their favour are as relentless as the march of time.

I’m sure Prufrock can speak for himself, but was he not acting substantially as a bookmaker when making a decent living from betting?

[dave jay]

Truth of the matter is, it’s quite easy to make money from racing, when you know how. The difficult part being, no-one is going to tell you how to do it and when you do find out how to do it, margins are so small, you HAVE to have lots of bets. You need to turn over lots of capital to make it worth your while, because you won’t get enough matched having two or three bets a week.

Reet .. I don’t disagree with your figures or what you are saying. My point was that the myth that betting in higher class races gave you some sort of advantage was false. Not that horses going up and down in class didn’t do better or worse generally speaking.

Anyway, I’m pretty well convinced that none of you can quantify randomness and most of you don’t really understand or care what it is. From my own point of view, being an engineer, racing is an academic exercise for me and the betting side of it gives me a bit of pocket money for fags and holidays. The idea of making a living from gambling doesn’t appeal to me personally, I’ve got a good job and quite an easy life, there’s no reason for me to change anything. I admire people like Prufrock, AP and Glenn for doing what they do, but I wouldn’t want to swap their lot for mine. I noticed that my reference to the Skiena book hasn’t been picked up by anybody, which is quite disappointing, seeing as your all supposed to be experts ..

[Prufrock]

I tried ordering it from Amazon yesterday, dave jay (lost log-in details, will try again today).

What is there to say about a book I haven’t yet read?!

[maggsy]

Doesn’t get very good reviews on Amazon. His book on Algorithms looks more interesting.

[Mtoto44]

I’ve also heard others say this and that theres no way of knowing which few bets will make the difference at the end of the year so they have to back them all.

Maggsy,

But does that mean go looking for them, and/or back just because a race happens to be taking place? I don’t think so.

Interesting you should mention Alan Potts as I would like to think it is his method of working/betting I have tried to follow. He said he tries to keep to the better /classier races. After reading his books I didn’t get the impression he was backing numerous horses in the same race. However I did get the impression he was looking for the most likely winner, he is looking for value about his seleted horse, so why am I an imbecile? What am I doing apart from disagreeing with Prufrock that makes me an imbecile, and completly wrong with my approach?

Perhaps I did word my post incorrectly (that could/would explain the semi literate jibe) when I said Mr Nevison knew little about racing. I should have said he knows more about figures and theories. I do know when I listen to him as a racing pundit I’m not overly impressed with his logic. However after reading about his exploits at Plumpton I do get the feeling he does relish meetings, and races where randomness is more likely to happen.

Be Lucky

[dave jay]

http://www.bearcave.com/bookrev/calculated_bets.html .. this is a fair write up of what the book is about, I’m interested in this.

[Hensman]

Mtoto

"semi-literate"

Historically, a term often used by the semi-educated in an attempt to establish an aura of general superiority in respect of those who were usually inferior solely in respect of their command of grammar. (A typical 1950s white collar comment vis-a-vis blue collar workers.)

It is one of those phrases that always told one more about the user than the object of the comment. And of course it still does.

[Author]

Posts