- This topic has 58 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 22 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Ante-post each-way betting is invariably a waste of time. It is often better to back more than one horse to win. There are exceptions, such as races like the Gold Cup and Grand National where a price is much bigger than it ought to be and when the horse looks certain to run in the race. However big a price is, if it is doubtful that the race is the true target then keep the money in your pocket.
On the day, each-way betting can be part of an effective hedging strategy. Not necessarily hoping to see a clear profit from a single bet, but to limit the downside.
You may weight it so that you have a "free" win bet, by aiming only to get your money back if it is placed.
I would certainly advocate place betting (where you don’t throw half your money away), in this way you could back three (or four) horses in any given race and have three (or four winners). In some races in which you had a good valued even money shot, it might be better to have it all on that one alone (to win) though.
Finally, remember you need to get 16/1 about a horse to ensure a 2/1 return (exclusive of outlay). If you are betting for pure upside (rather than as a defence tactic) you would not want to take shorter prices than this on a reasonably certain each-way bet. These sort of odds are naturally not freely available on many decent prospects.
ESC- your example is certainly a good one where there is the potential of a good e/w "steal", however i think a lot of punters dont just look for those sorts of opportunities and bet most horses above say 4/1 e/w.
now this in most cases is because of the "fear factor" over losing runs.<br>although i`m certainly not sure, i would suggest most pro punters who make the game pay, do so by backing win only and as Steve said quite often more than one horse in a race.<br>i also agree with Steve in that when backing e/w,punters should consider splitting the stake say 70/30 in favour of the win clearly depending on the odds so that if its placed you just get your money back.
the likes of Mel Collier, Henry Rix, Pricewise etc rarely back e/w and are pretty succesful.
Evening Esc Sir,
You would not give 10% to your bookie on your winnings yet you did on that bet, yep it won this time so you don’t care but won’t an extra 10% have been nice as thats appox what you lost out on because this is a bookie bet. 10% sounds alot but on certain each bets you are losing nearly 40% of what you should get! Now tell me that don’t bother you!
£3.60 a place – a £100 place only on the tote would have paid £360 (considerably more than your return).<br>Betabet do place only bets Esc.
Hi Escorial,
I have absolutely no problem with the example you quoted. You weighed up the race and found a big priced horse you felt was nailed-on for a place. You also felt it had little chance of winning – so an each way bet was the only option for you. The fact that there were, what was it, 13 runners is irrelevant because you had confidently excluded 10 of them!
Apart from the number of runners, the example is similar to the one I quoted, because presumably Jericho III and The Matrix, two good horses, took out a big chunk of the book, leaving your selection nicely positioned in the market at a fancy price.
I have to admit, though – it’s not the sort of bet I look out for. But it was a good bet all the same. I’d have probably bypassed the race.
Did you consider a buy on the spreads? Especially if there was a 50:30:20:10 index available. Depending on your horse’s quote, you might have made a bit more than the traditional each way terms, which I find woefully unattractive. And with a bet on the spreads, there’s no losing win bet to worry about!
All the best,
RM;)
How about this then,
Yesterday I backed calling the shots @ 11/4 for £200 each way. The horse came second so I lost £90. My reasoning was quite simply that I thought the horse had a fantastic chance of winning but could possibly get caught by one or two others, to me there was no way it would finish outside the 1st three so, I figured it was a £90 bet to win £660 so giving me 7.33/1, Ok this is the theory, any number of things could have gone wrong & it would have cost me £400 but, as I said, in MY opinion it would not be out of the 1st three, hence the bet. Not everyone will agree with it being sensible but, I don’t do it often & have never actually got it wrong yet (i.e. horse not even placed)
On the other hand, if I was sure that I could have narrowed it down to Calling the shots & Moyne pleasure (which I did, trouble was I had another danger) I would have backed both horses to win.
For me, betting each way depends on the opportunity & how you view it!
Jason
Daylight is almost right. Mathematically, EW betting is only correct in 16+ runner handicaps but it can also be correct in a skewed market.<br>E.g. 4/5, 5/1, 5/1, 16/1 bar, 3 places.
ESC- what do you mean which bookie would take a 70/30 bet?<br>if i wanted £70 win £30 place on a 16/1 shot all the bookies would accomodate, i`ve done it many times.
That was exactly the point I was trying to make on the previous thread, that you do not have to bet 50/50 when placing an each way bet.
My point is why in the first place make an each way bet as 1/4 or 1/5 the odds are not fair odds. Why not back it place on the Tote and win anywhere else if you must place an each way bet.
The place part of an each way bet is a con!
Morning Esc sir.
I just worked out your place bet in your each way bet – would it surprise you if I told you that you had been ripped off £20 (10%) if it was a handicap and £60 (30%) if it wasn’t a handicap?<br>Because you have been!
Carrying on from my last scribble and from a punting point of view (the object of gambling is to win ?….)<br>If the horse is 10/1 (1/4) the odds or whatever…Is’nt it better to only lose some of your stake and not all of it ???we do all know we do all gamble to WIN dont we, and put less money in the bookies pocket ??<br>Or am I missing something ?
Daylight shakes his head in disbelief :(
Hopefully my next post might convince you otherwise (but maybe not).
Below is the scandalous way in which the punter can pay upto 68% in bookie over rounds on your each way place bets, this is off course on top of your price taken which already includes an overround. You may find this hard to believe so here are the maths which were orginally taken from Peter May’s book ‘Forecasting methods for horseracing’ and has been adapted by me to show the percentages of over rounds on you bets.
How to read the charts below: <br>Runners | Place % bookie pays (1/4 or 1/5) | Actual Fair % | Places paid | Difference (overround)
For Non-Handicap Races
05 | 25% | 38% | 2 | -13% (152%)<br>06 | 25% | 40% | 2 | -15% (160%)<br>07 | 25% | 42% | 2 | -17% (168%)<br>08 | 20% | 24% | 3 | -4% (112%)<br>09 | 20% | 25% | 3 | -5% (120%)<br>10 | 20% | 26% | 3 | -6% (124%)<br>12 | 20% | 27% | 3 | -7% (128%)<br>14 | 20% | 28% | 3 | -8% (132%)<br>16 | 20% | 29% | 3 | -9% (136%)<br>20 | 20% | 30% | 3 | -10% (140%)<br>25 | 20% | 31% | 3 | -11% (144%)
For Handicap Races
05 | 25% | 38% | 2 | -13% (152%)<br>06 | 25% | 40% | 2 | -15% (160%)<br>07 | 25% | 42% | 2 | -17% (168%)<br>08 | 20% | 24% | 3 | -4% (116%)<br>09 | 20% | 25% | 3 | -5% (120%)<br>10 | 20% | 26% | 3 | -6% (124%)<br>12 | 25% | 27% | 3 | -2% (108%)<br>14 | 25% | 28% | 3 | -3% (112%)<br>16 | 25% | 20% | 4 | +5% (80%)<br>20 | 25% | 21% | 4 | +4% (84%)<br>25 | 25% | 22% | 4 | +3% (88%)
<br>The only posative figures are in handicaps with 16 or more runners so in those races only an each way bet becomes a good bet, so when companies offer each way bets in big runner fields where they pay the first 5 home it is definately worth betting each way as you have a major advantage in your favor and you are betting to a punter friendly market. Next time you hear Big Mac say "bookies should be paying 5 places on +16 runner races" just think how ill informed he is as his efforts should be directed at small field races.  Remember in a 7 runner race you will be donating 68% of any winnings back into your bookmakers bank accout.<br>I hope this highlights to you how each way betting is designed and I hope it will put many of you off punting each way in certain races as you can’t win no matter what you think!<br>
You bet to make a profit do you not DL? You bet because you want to win money do you not? Well Esc’s example shows you that, with e/w betting, you CAN in fact bet to win money.
Why should Esc care if he was ripped off £20 or £60 or whatever….the FACT is he was able to win MORE money by using each-way betting than he would if he’d back the winner to win. So his example shows that each-way betting can be a profitable venture.
Regarding your earlier question – if i was to back a horse and give 10% of my winnings to the bookie – i’d be mad right? yeah i would be. Stir crazy. However, with each-way betting you aren’t giving any winnings to the bookie are you?
If you back 50/50 (and your horse finishes 2nd) you lose half your original stake but gain money from the place.
How about a 7 runner race (1/4 odds) where you find a 20/1 shot to finish second – surely if you’ve done an each-way bet you’ll be getting back more than you put it, which is making profit…which is the whole idea.
What i don’t understand is that you are prepared to lose your whole stake (say £50) by backing a 10/1 shot to win but you could actually make a few quid by going each-way.
At least when you go each-way you get something back if the horse is placed whilst if you go to win and it’s second you lose your whole stake.
That table you put up DL – it seems as though Esc’s example was wrong because he was sure to lose based on those figures because ONLY 16+ runners are good races to back e/w in – but Esc WON on his example. He came back with more than he went in with – THAT is the idea. To make a profit…and he did. Pure and simple.
This winnings thing – you’ll have to explain it to me. You said that you are donating 68% of winnings back to the bookie in a 7-runner race – surely if your e/w horse wins you are getting 100% winnings from the bet and if it loses (out of the frame) you are making a 100% loss?
Full marks Manny!:cheesy:
12/1 shots do win races!
There is a curious mentality in racing about 10/1, 12/1, 14/1, 16/1 shots etc. They can only ever be "each way value" (horrible phrase) because people tend to believe their odds reflect their true chances in the race. This is simply not the case. If you find a 12/1 shot that you really think should be around the 4/1 mark, you owe it to yourself to lump on. On the nose.
DL   Ever get the feeling you’re banging your head against a brick wall ?
I wonder if Escorail and Robb are members of the Flat Earth Society ?
I’m with the each way merchants on this one.<br>I don’t see much point in backing 3/1 shots each way as a single bet but I would do them in each way multiples without hesitation.<br>One type of bet that I often do is 5 x £1 each way fours and a £1 each way accumulator. or sometimes 7 x£1 six’s and a £1 each way accumulator.<br>When placing this type of bet I am looking for horses that in my opinion cannot be out of the frame. I have had some great returns using this method without finding a single winner. I also have a chance of fluking a great win bet at the same time.<br>You cannot relate value to the number of runners in a race, how can 6/4 be value in a 10 horse race? how can 1/2 be value in a 18 runner race?<br>It comes down to your personal selection, if you think there is some value on offer about your selection you will back it, if not you won’t.<br>I understand the point Daylight is making, I just disagree, I think it comes down to personal choice.<br>If I didn’t have a bet on any race because the bookies had things in their favour, I would only have about 3 bets a year, and Irish racing would be a complete no go area.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.