- This topic has 175 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 24 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote: from jjimps on 6:46 pm on Jan. 28, 2002[br]Interesting post Nore the problem I see with this system is that once you make an error eg in your choice of horse to be a 6/1 shot middle marker then the mistake is compounded into the odds for all the other runners. One error and the whole book is wrong.
<br>Can’t agree with that, jjimps. My point is that in a handicap you have to give the handicapper his dues – he knows the form better than most and his ratings will be fairly accurate. After you have taken out "dead wood" (those too far out of the handicap, out of form, returning from a lay-off etc.) there should be a correlation between the number of runners with a chance and the average odds against a runner, by definition. You then use things like most recent form, going and distance preferences etc. to separate the runners. BUT this being a handicap there shouldn’t be that much of a deviation from the average. In my example, I may pick the wrong horse to be a 6/1 shot or there may not even be a 6/1 shot but that does not matter, the point is that given the conditions of this example race the odds of the runners should converge towards this figure of 6/1 as an average.
(Edited by nore at 11:07 am on Jan. 29, 2002)<br>
(Edited by nore at 11:08 am on Jan. 29, 2002)
Yep makes sense Nore I agree with the maths.
Is the premise that the handicapper gets it right a good one ?? When was the last time you saw an Eight horse photo finish ?
Well, jjimps, the handicapper certainly knows more about it than I do! Maybe you are more confident of your own subjective assessment of form.
The book does not tell lies Esc it merely translate your ratings into odds that your ratings should determine as value.
If it came out at 9/2 then your ratings are saying you had it that far clear you would have backed this at 11/2 and it still be value so 14/1 according to your ratings was an amazing bit of value!
Esc, you certainly got good value about Streamstown but if your ratings put him as clear top-rated then what difference does producing a book make?
Streamstown was top-rated and 14/1 – don’t need a book to tell you that the value there is excellent. That’s how i see it anyway.
Rob,<br>The more you create a book the less you will need it as some just jump out as value! This was obviously the case due to his ratings in this tight handicap, as it was so far above everything else according to his ratings.
The point of creating a book rob is to ensure you are betting at the right prices to your ratings – why bet something at 2/1 when your ratings give it a 4/1 chance? Thats the point!<br>
Fascinating Esc.
Yes, on YOUR ratings (we’ll ignore the big outsiders for a moment) I would have backed:
Guns and Roses 15 points<br>Harfdecent 7 points<br>Nosam 9 points
10 points Moor lane<br>Tresor De mai 4 points
Storm damage 6 pints<br>Mister One 5 points
Streamstown 9 points<br>Garruth 5 points (at 16/1)
Strangely enough I did back Nosam (as we know higher up the thread), and Streamstown (10 points – I had 5/1 favourite in my book), and Garruth (3 points). I also backed In the Rough (4 points) even though in your terms I rated it 5th best horse in race.
Your ratings don’t seem to conclusively transfer into odds though – unless you’re really saying you thought It’s Himself, Frenchman’s Creek and Ryalux were 40/1 and 66/1 shots? Safe to say I’d have been backing them at your odds
Hell I may even have put some on each way.
Escorial …….
Nice to see you still putting so much effort into your argument. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with what you are doing, but I am utterly convinced that you would be able to increase your profits if you were to incorporate a staking plan where you have bigger stakes on bigger value selections. Just think what you might have had on Streamstown mate !!
In all seriousness I am trying to be helpful.
Nick  ;)
Hi Esc, why back a horse to win that I think is 5th best?
‘Value’, pure and simple.
I’ve just gone through all my bets for the season, trying to find some successful ones which were way down my pecking order. There aren’t that many bets, but there are a few winners.
A while back at Taunton I had Sir Frosty as a 5th best 10/1, so I backed it at 33/1
back in December at Chepstow I had Arctic Camper 6th best at 8/1, so I backed it at 12/1.
And just before that at Newbury I had Marble Arch 4th best at 9/1, so backed it at 14/1 (SP 8/1).
Obviously there’s quite a few losers, but these big-priced winners certainly help the profits along.<br>
The ONLY bets I strike are ones I consider ‘value’, whether they are my ‘top-rated’ horse or much more lowly rated horses, so without going through my records (I’d love to, but I am supposed to be working!), I couldn’t tell you a split strike-rate.
Overall my strike rate where I back only one horse in a race is between 15 and 20% season after season, and where I back more than one horse the strike-rate is a pretty solid 20%. The odds I get for those strike-rates have meant a healthy profit to modest stakes for the last few years.
The fund is building and the stakes slowly increasing. It wasn’t always thus – only since I became a ‘value punter’. And especially since I stopped looking for the winner, and started acting on price differentials.
When you went each way on Streamstown (wrong thread I know – but that’s criminal!), did you split your usual stake, or double the overall stake, or what?
Hi All <br>I was originally involved in this debate back on page 6 and I couldn’t believe it when I logged on and saw that it was still going strong, with old Escorial still giving it plenty of wallop and bloody good luck to him, he should have been a writer!
I don’t have much to add to what I stated earlier except for some simple observations. Bookmakers will always tell you "Don’t worry about the price son just get in there and punt it" I wonder why?  If you bet for pleasure and just want to make a few bob, you don’t need to get too worked up about it, but for those of you who either aim to suppliment your income through betting or indeed inspire to become professional the prices that you except become extremely importance.
In MY experience over many years I have never met a professional who LASTED who did not take the price that he was willing to back at extremely seriously, neither have I read of one!
I am now going to take a month or so’s break to do some painting (as in pictures) and generally enjoy life while preparing for Cheltenham and the start of the 2002 flat season. I am able to do this because apart from other things which apply to racing I am able to walk away when the price is not right. (Smart arse or what!)
<br>
Hi everyone
I consider estimating a horses price to be vital, otherwise you don’t know what you are buying.  However it’s difficult and time consuming to make a book. I am currently creating a database of results, that will feed analysis programs that<br>I am writing.  Any help would be welcome.
In a nutshell the essence of this discussion is……..<br>"I fancy this 3-1 shot, but has it really got a >25% chance?"
bye4nowfrom<br>carlisle
(Edited by carlisle at 9:49 pm on Feb. 4, 2002)
Hi carlisle,
if you like, for me the essence of the discussion is the other way round –
This horse seems to have a 25% chance, why isn’t it 3/1?
Escorial<br>Imagine you were forced to lay all your bets with me. This would be a dream for me, for while Mr Hill and Mr Ladbrokes and the rest were going 3/1 or bigger I would only give you 1/1 money. In the end you have got to loose, even though you may not believe this. However if you were not forced to bet with me, you would then go to one of the others and get better odds, you would then infact be finding the best value you could, even though it hurts you to admit it.
Unfortunately I’m eleven years older than you (gutted) but your name is Ron and you are a punter and a painter so you must be ok!
HAPPY BIRTHDAY<br>
<br>But if all the bookies went 3/1 and Esc’s book told him the horse he liked should be 8/1, would he bet?
Esc,
what price makes a horse a ‘winner’?
Odds-on is the only time they’re more likely to win than lose ? And I hardly ever price a horse up at odds on – so, they’re all losers in my book.<br>
Hi
I am all for looking at form from a scientific approach.<br>Wanting to be able to quantify and measure the important factors.
Dealing with ratings and number data builds a sense<br>of meaning and gives the analysis a direction & ultimate<br>purpose.  ie  an estimated probability figure<br>           (which is converted into price)
Although I do not like the idea of a single rating that<br>cannot be viewed alongside the component ratings<br>that make up the overall figure….  In this way problem<br>areas can be sighted,  such as poor Distance Rating for<br>example.
My significant factors are:  (with max scores)
Going =30, Distance =25, Course =23, Speed=20<br>RecentForm =20, Ability =25, Trainer =15, Jockey =10.
Added together equals Overall rating. (168)
If this rings any bells, not alarm ones, let me know.<br>Because I need help, god knows I do……………..
Making a book is the only serious way forward.
bye4nowfrom<br>carlisle<br> <br>
(Edited by carlisle at 9:14 pm on Feb. 8, 2002)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.