- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Making a 100% book is easier than many people think – given the right tools. I’ve been making my own 100% books on British racing for decades. By studying Timeform. Taking into account: Ratings, both Master ratings (what the horses could do given their ideal conditions)… And Performance ratings: It is possible to form an opinion of what the horse is capable of given the conditions of the day, looking at what it has done previously in those or similar conditions. Going, distance, track (flat, undulating, right and left-handed), jockeyship, draw etc.
Running patterns can be important (eg some horses are better at a particular time of year, some are less effective in bigger fields, etc)… And temperament. Some horses make it difficult for the jockey to win, some don’t want to win (or at least they don’t want to lead) etc.
I pay particular attention to “Pace In The Race”. Who is likely to front run, race prominently, track pace, race mid-div, held up or dropped out… Whether it is likely to have an overly strong pace, strong, good, average, fair, steady, slow, dead slow… And who that likely pace is likely to advantage.
My own “Stable In (And Out) Of Form Ratings”… Which is more about whether the trainer’s fancied horses have been running well and whether they’ve been running to what’s been expected compared to their odds… ie Not a strict win to run ratio rating.
For me, it is NOT a matter of putting points to each form aspect (rating, jockey, distance, going etc). Simply because one form aspect can be massively important for one horse and minimal importance for another. I prefer to take everything together for its overall chance in order to give each horse a percentage chance. Then, keep on looking at them, altering those percentages slightly until the horses look correct and are in a 100% book.
Firstly writing down who I believe has the best chance all the way down to the worst. 1 to however many runners are in the race.
Then allocating percentages to each horse, with all runners together adding up to 100%. Sometimes starting with the best horses, sometimes the worst. eg If I believe two runners combined chance is slightly better than all the others put together, with one having a very slightly better chance than the other, then I might rate one a 27% chance and the other 25% (27 + 25 = the combined pair 52%). Then how much is the third best horse behind that pair? Maybe it has 60% of the 25, so 15%. The 4th best might be considered as having half of the second best chance, so 12.5%. If the 5th best chance is believed around two thirds of the third best that would be 10%. 6th Best might be thought of as having around three quarters the chance of the fifth best and half of the third, so say 7.5%. The 7th best is only just behind the 5th, so 6%, 8th best (worst) a third of 7th so 2%.
27 + 25 + 15 + 12.5 + 10 + 7.5 + 6 + 2 = 105% Too much!
I want a 100% book, so I need to reduce them further. Looking at it again and checking all runners against each other:I may think the best and second best together should still have a better than 50% combined chance, but have probably exaggerated the difference between the two. Bringing the 27 down to 26.5%… And I do believe the second best has a better chance than the third and 5th best combined. Reduce the 15% to 14 and the 10% to 9.
The bottom three combined probably have the same chance as the third best (now 14%). So I could reduce the 7.5 to 7%, the 6 to 5.5% and the 2 down to 1.5%.
The 12.5% horse probably has the same chance as two of the 7th best (2 X 5.75 = 11.5) so reduce that one to 11.5. With the third and fourth best combined having 25.5%, between the best 26.5% and second best 25%.26.5 + 25 + 14 + 11.5 + 9 + 7 + 5.5 + 1.5 = 100%
Sometimes it will take 4 goes before I get it right.Got it to 100% but in order to check things still further I do what a bookmaker would do to a 100% book, adding a “bookies mark up” to each price.
26.5 becomes 28.6% = 5/2
25 becomes 26.7% = 11/4
14 becomes 15.4% = 11/2
11.5 becomes 12.5% = 7/1
9 becomes 10% = 9/1
7.5 becomes 8.3% = 11/1
5.5 becomes 6.3% = 15/1
and 1.5 becomes 2.4% = 40/1.
I seldom Lay horses myself, but if I were a bookie would those odds look right? Baring in mind I’m after odds I believe they SHOULD be, NOT what I think they WILL be. ie Sometimes horses are the prices they are eg because of who trains them, not particularly because of their form.But if I am happy I’ll go back to the 100% book and this time add a margin for error the other way.
So 26.5% = roughly 11/4, I then add a margin for error by adding two prices. So for this horse I would NOT take 3/1, but if 100/30 or greater was available I’d back it.
25% = 3/1. So no bet @ 100/30, only getting involved if 7/2 or greater is available.
14% = almost 6/1 so NO to 13/2, YES to 7/1 or more.
11.5% = almost 15/2, so 17/2 or more would be needed for a bet.
9% = 10/1 so no bet @ 11/1, but 12/1 or more is ok.
7.5% = 12/1 needs 14/1 or more.
5.5% = 18/1 needs 22/1 or more.
1.5% = 66/1 so needs 40/1+Novice odds compilers would need a far greater margin for error.
I often back two, three or more in one race if I consider more than one horse to be value.Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.