- This topic has 94 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Continuing the lively debate on the International Hurdle thread, I have conducted an analysis of my bets from Sep 28. £10W; £10E/W if 16/1 or bigger. Rule 4 applied. It may be out a penny or two here and there. (Last jumps season, Sep to May, I finished +£2221.15).
Price Bets Win Lose SR% +/-
<8/15 19 14 5 74 – 1.85
4/7 3 2 1 67 + 1.42
8/13 1 0 1 0 – 10.00
4/6 9 4 5 44 – 23.32
8/11 8 6 2 75 + 23.62
4/5 3 1 2 33 – 13.60
5/6 6 3 3 50 – 5.43
10/11 6 6 0 100 + 54.54
1/1 7 3 4 43 – 10.00
11/10 4 0 4 0 – 40.00
6/5 6 4 2 67 + 28.00
5/4 11 4 7 36 – 20.00
11/8 11 2 9 18 – 62.50
6/4 18 5 13 28 – 55.75
13/8 8 3 5 38 – 1.25
7/4 9 2 7 22 – 35.00
15/8 6 3 3 50 + 26.25
2/1 11 3 8 27 – 20.00
11/5 1 0 1 0 – 10.00
9/4 18 8 10 44 + 80.00
5/2 19 7 12 37 + 55.00
11/4 28 9 19 32 + 54.75
3/1 23 10 13 43 +164.00
10/3 15 1 14 7 -106.67
7/2 25 3 22 12 -115.00
4/1 27 6 21 22 + 30.00
9/2 26 6 20 23 + 70.00
5/1 21 6 15 29 +142.50
11/2 21 4 17 19 + 50.00
6/1 15 1 14 7 – 80.00
13/2 14 2 12 14 + 10.00
7/1 12 3 9 25 +120.00
15/2 6 1 5 17 + 25.00
8/1 19 1 18 5 -100.00
17/2 2 0 2 0 – 20.00
9/1 15 0 15 0 -150.00
10/1 13 6 7 46 +530.00
11/1 7 1 6 14 + 50.00
12/1 8 2 6 25 +180.00
14/1 6 0 6 0 – 60.00
16/1 10 4 6 40 +160.00
18/1 2 2 0 100 +251.00
20/1 4 2 2 50 + 40.00
25/1 1 0 1 0 – 20.00
33/1 1 1 0 100 + 72.50
Total 505 151 354 30 +1257.71Total stake: 5250.00 Return less stake: 6507.71 24% profit on stake/turnover.
Breaking these figures down:
Range of odds Bets Win Lose SR% +/-
10/11 & shorter 55 36 19 65 + 25.38
1/1 to 11/5 92 29 63 32 – 200.25
11/5 & shorter 147 65 82 44 – 174.89
9/4 to 7/2 128 38 90 30 + 132.08
4/1 to 15/2 142 29 113 20 + 367.00
8/1 to 9/1 36 1 35 3 – 270.00
4/1 to 9/1 178 30 148 17 + 97.00
8/1 to 33/1 88 19 69 22 + 933.50
10/1 to 14/1 34 9 25 26 + 700.00
16/1 to 33/1 18 9 9 50 + 503.50
10/1 to 33/1 52 18 34 35 +1203.5010/1+ Total stake: 700.00 Return less stake: 1203.50 72% profit on stake/turnover.
Conclusions:
1) By the very nature of the people this forum attracts the investors on the site are likely to be more successful than the average punter. We are more likely to be better at interpreting form and applying the resultant opinion correctly whether in the seeking winners or seeking value camp. I believe the former approach is more conducive to creating what I hope everyone on here achieves – a bigger percentage profit.
2) There is a race, the main purpose of which is to find out which horse is best on the day. The most natural thing to do as an observer is to pick which horse you think will win. The odds are secondary to your choice unless your approach is to bet in reaction to prices but isn’t that a different ‘game’ and missing the point? I am one who backs what I fancy to even stakes, I am not inclined to start backing everything in a race that I perceive to be value (as defined by Ginger and others) because my overall strike rate and percentage profit on stakes/turnover seems high enough to make me doubt better awaits by any other method.
3) My strike rate seems to hold up well whatever the odds. As expected, backing anything under 9/4 is for fun and a loss leader! There is currently a strange anomaly at 8/1 to 9/1, but I suspect it’s just that, and my 9/1 and under is harmless because it ain’t making a loss! Not surprisingly virtually all the profit is made at 10/1 and above (especially the E/Ws at 16/1+). That means that 90% of my wagers are pointless swings and roundabouts, however, having done the work I’m buggered if I’m not going to have an interest!
4) In reality it’s actually very hard to find the winner of any given race. When the horses are milling around at the start they all think they are best! Therefore, by definition, the greater a horse’s price the more the likelihood is that the bookies have got that one wrong. So, if you’re good enough evaluating form, when study leads you to fancy a 10/1+ horse those bets are going to make you a massive percentage profit. When trying to work out a race, trying to succeed in finding the winner, the price to me is largely incidental , I don’t have a price in mind for a horse. It’s the person who sets the odds who is saying this horse or that one has x % chance of winning and losing.
5) However, as Ginger says ‘nobody actually knows what chance any horse has of winning, it’s all opinion’. The consistency of my strike rate shows that it is wrong to favour my fancy in one race over my selection in another regardless of their respective prices. The odds, compiled by somebody else, have no bearing on an investor’s own level of skill in finding winners. A shorter price serves only to create a false sense of security that one is not a blithering idiot to fancy the horse! The thrill, it’s not the money, comes from backing a 10/1+ winner largely dismissed by pundits, fellow punters and odds compilers.
6) As strike rate and percentage profit improve, through learning, practice and experience, it produces more confidence and belief that your opinion is correct enough of the time. I understand the concept of value and how the strike rate at each price relates to it, however, if you’re good enough at finding winners you’ll find the value without trying specifically so to do! What I don’t get is why someone with experience and talent would back against themself and back horses they don’t fancy for an even return (i.e. risking uneven stakes) when by using the same skilled opinion and selectiveness they could lump on the one horse in a race they really fancy. Surely not to do so is restricting strike rate and percentage profit? I know all the above may be an anathema to those of you who approach from the value seeking angle but I hope my figures prove the seeking winners approach can be more rewarding.
Define “fancy”, GM?
Does “fancy” mean only backing the horse you believe has the best chance?
Value Is EverythingNot one to be too dogmatic GM and each to his own of course, but Id say any thoughts you can maintain a strike rate of 35% on a meaningful amount of 10/1 plus bets over an extended period of time is utterly delusional.
The right horse at the wrong price is what your looking for long-term.
I respect your opinion Cavelino but what is an extended period of time? I have managed it for a season and a half which must be about 150-175 bets.
Ask a simple question! Basically yes Ginger. The horse I think will win is my fancy, my selection, the one I believe has the best chance. I arrive at which horse I think has the best chance by trying to predict in a figure how each horse in the race will run. When that produces a clear outcome I back the top rated regardless of its price and regardless of whether I might think the price is stingy or generous.
Naturally in a number of races the figures are very tight so in the vast majority of those races I just have to make a decision and one determinate is which horse is the bigger price. But again whether I think that price is stingy or generous is immaterial. Occasionally I will back 2 horses I cannot separate, especially if I have them clear of the rest, but only if they are both about 7/1+. In the huge field handicaps at Cheltenham, Aintree, etc. I may back 3 or 4 especially when 5 or 6 places are offered.
A good working example of a tight call is the first at Ludlow tomorrow. I have the following predicted adjusted performance ratings: River Wylde 132, Brahms De Clermont 131, Woodfort 128, Melrose Boy & Uncle Percy 124. My ratings are likely to be relatively low on the scale of accuracy because the majority of the field are lightly raced and hurdles debutantes. Therefore, I considered my top 3 for my bet (whereas if they were experienced handicappers I would have considered only the top 2). However, I can find no angle on knowing how any of the 3 will take to hurdles and, based on my figures, Woodfort would have to get it right and rely on both the others not to so I dismissed him (although he’s 11/1, much the bigger price of the 3). In this race I can find no other determinate than price to separate BDC (11/10) & RW (4/1) so RW becomes my fancy and I backed him. RW happens to be rated 1 higher than BDC but in this type of and tight a race I would have backed BDC if it were the bigger price of the 2. (And, in this perhaps not very good example if RW is a non runner then Woodfort would have to get it right and only need 1 horse (BDC) to get it wrong so would come back into play, and as the bigger price of the 2 be backed (despite being rated 3 lower because of the difficulty in rating this type of race accurately)).
If I lose I’m -10, big deal, and so onto the 1.05…
I wonder what your approach would be? I’m not sure how you weigh up a race but if similarly and if using my figures I’m guessing you would back Woodfort with maybe a saver on RW – possible chance of a greater return but risking more outlay as we both watch BDC or something else romp home!
P.S. In the 1.05 my figures come out as: Kilcrea Vale 166, Westren Warrior 155, Zamdy Man 147… So I immediately backed my clear fancy KV at 5/2 (and would’ve backed it at 2/5!) In the 1.35 the prediction is: Going Concern 156, Sizing Platinum 152, Festive Affair 151, Gardefort 151j (j = fairly serious concern re jumping), Baltimore Rock 149… So again I simply back GC whatever the price, I got 15/2. If it becomes a non I’ll take FA over SP because in a tight call it is double the price.
You have some unbelievable results there GM.
Freakish results can skew profits in a small sample.
eg You’ve got a strike rate on 10/1 shots that most TRFers would be glad of on their 6/4 shots… strike rate on 12/1 shots most TRFers would be glad of with 4/1 shots etc. All probably because it’s a small sample. As Cav rightly says, you can not expect a lot of those strike rates to continue. It’s obviously encouraging to have stats like that, but really needs thousands of bets to tell.Although profits and losses may be correct, 16/1+ results look a bit strange where placed each way bets are included as “wins”.
In my experience, can not ever remember working out something that imo has the best chance – or even close to best chance – where it’s been available @ 12/1+. It appears to me your best results have come when allowing “value” to sneak in to your thoughts/analysis.
Value Is EverythingA good working example of a tight call is the first at Ludlow tomorrow. I have the following predicted adjusted performance ratings: River Wylde 132, Brahms De Clermont 131, Woodfort 128, Melrose Boy & Uncle Percy 124. My ratings are likely to be relatively low on the scale of accuracy because the majority of the field are lightly raced and hurdles debutantes. Therefore, I considered my top 3 for my bet (whereas if they were experienced handicappers I would have considered only the top 2). However, I can find no angle on knowing how any of the 3 will take to hurdles and, based on my figures, Woodfort would have to get it right and rely on both the others not to so I dismissed him (although he’s 11/1, much the bigger price of the 3). In this race I can find no other determinate than price to separate BDC (11/10) & RW (4/1) so RW becomes my fancy and I backed him. RW happens to be rated 1 higher than BDC but in this type of and tight a race I would have backed BDC if it were the bigger price of the 2. (And, in this perhaps not very good example if RW is a non runner then Woodfort would have to get it right and only need 1 horse (BDC) to get it wrong so would come back into play, and as the bigger price of the 2 be backed (despite being rated 3 lower because of the difficulty in rating this type of race accurately)).
If I lose I’m -10, big deal, and so onto the 1.05…
I wonder what your approach would be? I’m not sure how you weigh up a race but if similarly and if using my figures I’m guessing you would back Woodfort with maybe a saver on RW – possible chance of a greater return but risking more outlay as we both watch BDC or something else romp home!
You won’t find me having a bet in a maiden hurdle, GM.
Not only is there no knowing how they jump, there’s also River Wylde’s breathing problem to consider.
If forcing me in to a bet there are two alternatives.
One is backing Melrose Boy @ 3/1 (bet365) and save on BDC 11/10, but there is a better bet.
With half the field @ 50/1+ and only three below 14/1 it’s a race ideal for each way betting. So instead, I’ll go for Melrose Boy each way @ 3/1.Value Is EverythingYou have some unbelievable results there GM.
Freakish results can skew profits in a small sample.
eg You’ve got a strike rate on 10/1 shots that most TRFers would be glad of on their 6/4 shots… strike rate on 12/1 shots most TRFers would be glad of with 4/1 shots etc. All probably because it’s a small sample. As Cav rightly says, you can not expect a lot of those strike rates to continue. It’s obviously encouraging to have stats like that, but really needs thousands of bets to tell.Although profits and losses may be correct, 16/1+ results look a bit strange where placed each way bets are included as “wins”.
In my experience, can not ever remember working out something that imo has the best chance – or even close to best chance – where it’s been available @ 12/1+. It appears to me your best results have come when allowing “value” to sneak in to your thoughts/analysis.
Yes, I suppose adding last season to this I must’ve had about 1750 bets so it will be interesting to see what the strike rates look like in a few years time. The thing is I’m learning all the time and becoming ever more familiar with the form book so logically I should improve! My weaknesses are a dislike of horses having second quick runs and sometimes misjudging stableform.
I wasn’t sure how to count the E/W bets. Technically the SR is correct but I guess it would be 25% if I had counted Win and Place separately doubling the total bets from 18 to 36.
Honestly Ginger many of the 12/1+ have been my top rated, e.g. The Jugopolist (16/1) at Huntingdon, Dec 4.
We’ll see what happens. High for this season was +1295.16 on Dec 10, -83.23 since! However, fell up to 250 off my high at times last season, just carried on the same and before long reached a new high. :)
A good working example of a tight call is the first at Ludlow tomorrow. I have the following predicted adjusted performance ratings: River Wylde 132, Brahms De Clermont 131, Woodfort 128, Melrose Boy & Uncle Percy 124. My ratings are likely to be relatively low on the scale of accuracy because the majority of the field are lightly raced and hurdles debutantes. Therefore, I considered my top 3 for my bet (whereas if they were experienced handicappers I would have considered only the top 2). However, I can find no angle on knowing how any of the 3 will take to hurdles and, based on my figures, Woodfort would have to get it right and rely on both the others not to so I dismissed him (although he’s 11/1, much the bigger price of the 3). In this race I can find no other determinate than price to separate BDC (11/10) & RW (4/1) so RW becomes my fancy and I backed him. RW happens to be rated 1 higher than BDC but in this type of and tight a race I would have backed BDC if it were the bigger price of the 2. (And, in this perhaps not very good example if RW is a non runner then Woodfort would have to get it right and only need 1 horse (BDC) to get it wrong so would come back into play, and as the bigger price of the 2 be backed (despite being rated 3 lower because of the difficulty in rating this type of race accurately)).
If I lose I’m -10, big deal, and so onto the 1.05…
I wonder what your approach would be? I’m not sure how you weigh up a race but if similarly and if using my figures I’m guessing you would back Woodfort with maybe a saver on RW – possible chance of a greater return but risking more outlay as we both watch BDC or something else romp home!
You won’t find me having a bet in a maiden hurdle, GM.
Not only is there no knowing how they jump, there’s also River Wylde’s breathing problem to consider.
If forcing me in to a bet there are two alternatives.
One is backing Melrose Boy @ 3/1 (bet365) and save on BDC 11/10, but there is a better bet.
With half the field @ 50/1+ and only three below 14/1 it’s a race ideal for each way betting. So instead, I’ll go for Melrose Boy each way @ 3/1.That’s cautious!
Breathing problem? Last time? They’ve had 2 months to fix it.
Melrose Boy, down 4f & on less testing ground surely won’t be quick enough however ridden.
BDC, no claimer, seems very best on Good.
Wonderful how a Ludlow maiden can be so fascinating :)
I’d say any thoughts you can maintain a strike rate of 35% on a meaningful amount of 10/1 plus bets over an extended period of time is utterly delusional
It’s a staggering achievement. The sort of strike-rate I would be deliriously happy with were I punting 9/4 shots.
I have to say GM that these figures are unparalleled in my experience in horse racing betting. They place you as the greatest horse racing punter I’ve ever heard of (and by an absolute distance).
Mike
I’d say any thoughts you can maintain a strike rate of 35% on a meaningful amount of 10/1 plus bets over an extended period of time is utterly delusional
It’s a staggering achievement. The sort of strike-rate I would be deliriously happy with were I punting 9/4 shots.
I have to say GM that these figures are unparalleled in my experience in horse racing betting. They place you as the greatest horse racing punter I’ve ever heard of (and by an absolute distance).
Mike
Or a porkie-pie teller
3) My strike rate seems to hold up well whatever the odds. As expected, backing anything under 9/4 is for fun and a loss leader! There is currently a strange anomaly at 8/1 to 9/1, but I suspect it’s just that, and my 9/1 and under is harmless because it ain’t making a loss! Not surprisingly virtually all the profit is made at 10/1 and above (especially the E/Ws at 16/1+). That means that 90% of my wagers are pointless swings and roundabouts, however, having done the work I’m buggered if I’m not going to have an interest!
Why is it expected? Surely with your strike rate at backing those at a larger price, you’d could confidently expect to win backing shorties as well?And isn’t the price largely irrelevant, it’s all about whether it represents value after all?
5) However, as Ginger says ‘nobody actually knows what chance any horse has of winning, it’s all opinion’. The consistency of my strike rate shows that it is wrong to favour my fancy in one race over my selection in another regardless of their respective prices. The odds, compiled by somebody else, have no bearing on an investor’s own level of skill in finding winners. A shorter price serves only to create a false sense of security that one is not a blithering idiot to fancy the horse! The thrill, it’s not the money, comes from backing a 10/1+ winner largely dismissed by pundits, fellow punters and odds compilers.
Surely I can’t be the only one not to understand any of above
Judging by his photo and stream of consciousness writing it’s possible that Golden Miller is some kind of mad genius that is winning on a level that puts most professional gamblers to shame
GM, you need to start posting your selections for people to believe you.
Together with analysis that tells us why the 20/1 shot should actually be the 3/1 fav.
Plenty of room in the Daily Lays And Plays section, GM.
Value Is EverythingHonestly Ginger many of the 12/1+ have been my top rated, e.g. The Jugopolist (16/1) at Huntingdon, Dec 4.
So your “top rated” was a horse 10 lbs out of the handicap, who’d run 28 times without a win over fences, who usually does not go through with his effort. Who, last time out struggled over the first fence, given reminders by the third, had no chance from 4 out and went past the post 41 lengths last of three finishers… And on his previous start had also been beaten 41 lengths and had no chance from halfway… I know those two races were technically better class, but come on – “top rated”?
Am afraid your stories are far too fanciful to believe, GM.
Value Is EverythingThe Jugopolist was also clear Racing Post top rated, had put up consistent figures several times in better company, the trainer/jockey had had a winner the previous week and there were big question marks over all the other runners.
I am seriously considering opening a thread in Daily Lays & Plays for the 10/1+ selections. Meanwhile, finishing off Ludlow today:
2.10 Brillare Momento 3/1 clear top rated.
2.40 9 out of 10 for difficulty but plumped for narrow top rated King Of The Wolds E/W 18/1.
3.10 Very tight, taken a shot on Un Prophete 7/2.One day (today) or one week doesn’t prove anything but the strike rates are true. Perhaps the point is that price has far less bearing on SR than you all think.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.