The home of intelligent horse racing discussion
The home of intelligent horse racing discussion

Is 'Value' an excuse for racing pundits to hide behind.

Home Forums Tipping and Research Trends, Research And Notebooks Is 'Value' an excuse for racing pundits to hide behind.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 176 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #6403
    Zoso
    Member
    • Total Posts 479

    All of the racing pundits I listen to on TV, radio in the Racing Post etc, all over use the word ‘value’ in my view.

    Surely this word is just a ready made excuse in case the horse runs badly. "Ah well at least we took the value".

    There is no value in backing a loser no matter how you try and dress it up. A winner is value, a loser is not its as simple as that. Every single winner of every single day was obviously value as it won regardles of what price it was. Whatever price that winner was before the race was obviously good value.

    I fully understand the concept of value but I feel that the racing media are guilty of overusing this term. By saying if I back the value in the long term then I will produce a profit is absolute rubbish.

    If you back winners in the long term then this is what will produce you a profit. Value is just a word to hide behind when you have backed a loser.

    The only time true value occurs is when you have two horses that have an identical chance and one is priced bigger. But if the bigger priced horse gets beaten then it was not value and you simply read the race wrong.

    I would love to hear a journo explain this term, as Im just not getting it.

    #138019
    LetsGetRacing
    Member
    • Total Posts 1147

    Take a look at the exhaustive ‘Question for the racing media’ thread started by Gingertipster, Zoso…

    #138020
    Flash
    Member
    • Total Posts 1144

    Zoso I think you are absolutely right.

    The objective is to find the winner of a race. Every race will have a winner. If we all knew the winner of every race we’d all be zillionaires (well we wouldn’t as no-one would lay us but you get my point).

    There is no such thing as value in terms of betting in as much as value is an "individual presumption", in other words an opinion there is no right or wrong answer when it comes to what you term as value.

    As you say any horse that wins is value because you gain from it, every horse that loses is absolutely no value because you gain nothing of it – that is a very funny idea of value.

    Its about picking enough winners and doing your maths right in relation to your staking / potential return / profit&loss column.

    The media are paid to work in the media not to make money betting. Most of them to be honest (and I don’t appear to be rude) talk absolute nonsense and would have a deal of difficulty picking their nose. Look at John Francome for instance. Great guy, I think he’s marvellous but when it comes to analysing a race / picking winners he talks as big a pile of rubbish as its possible to talk. All sounds plausible what he says because he delivers it well but look at the result of what he says – is it right / is it wrong?, its very rarely right.

    If you picked the winner every time you had a bet –

    #138021
    Flash
    Member
    • Total Posts 1144

    Few would argue that Neptune is the better horse, yet was the same price as Our Vic. Baffling.

    .

    Our Vic ran a cracker today and rather like the Ryanair last year at the weights he comes out as the best horse in the race (joint best today on my ratings).

    Our Vic’s stamina may have been coming to the end of its tether but take Knowhere out and you’ve got an emphatic winner and at levels with the winner theoretically it would’ve been a photo finish.

    In last years Ryanair Our Vic carried a penalty for an earlier grade 1 win (someone correct me if I’m wrong) this year he won’t. He’d have won the race last year of levels he has to be on the shortlist again this year.

    #138023
    Flash
    Member
    • Total Posts 1144

    Oooops sorry sorry sorry sorry sorry. Wrote that completely the wrong way round. My apologies.

    I sort of realised what you meant as I posted my reply mate. Understood now. :)

    #138025
    Alderbrook
    Member
    • Total Posts 349

    I fully understand the concept of value but I feel that the racing media are guilty of overusing this term. By saying if I back the value in the long term then I will produce a profit is absolute rubbish.

    I kind of agree.

    If you cannot understand the concept of value (percentage chance of winning compared to price) then you will struggle to win with betting.

    However, I do find some of the pundits examples of "value" hilarious. Without naming names, there is one ATR presenter who seems to think naming the 2nd favourite as a selection equals value simply because she (oops) is not selecting the favourite (for once).

    #138026
    LetsGetRacing
    Member
    • Total Posts 1147

    Has she ever picked anything other than the favourite, Alderbrook, I’m always in two minds as to whether she’s ‘Newsboy’ for that very reason :D

    I’m trying not to get too involved in another value argument, but it’s most definitely a theory I don’t subscribe to. There is a difference between not backing a horse because it is underpriced, and backing a horse because it is overpriced, and to suggest that betting on the basis of the latter is the only way to register a profit is complete nonsense.

    ‘Value’ can only be a consideration following the full (form) analysis of a race, at which point you will have an idea as to who will win the race. If you then use this information to generate a market, indicating what price you think each runner should be, ‘value’ can only stop you taking too big a risk for too little a reward. What it can’t, or shouldn’t, do is force you into backing a horse you didn’t initially identify as the winner simply because the market says it has less of a chance than you perceive it to have.

    #138027
    Fist of Fury 2k8
    Member
    • Total Posts 2930

    I fully understand the concept of value but I feel that the racing media are guilty of overusing this term. By saying if I back the value in the long term then I will produce a profit is absolute rubbish.

    I kind of agree.

    If you cannot understand the concept of value (percentage chance of winning compared to price) then you will struggle to win with betting.

    That’s an absolute crock as far as I’m concerned. The minute I read something like that I think " Another analyst spending hours and hours with tables full of figures trying to find the ultimate solution"

    A horse is either worth betting or he is not there are no percentages involved. That’s the bookies side of thing and doesn’t belong on our side of the fence.

    It takes a punter about 5 seconds to make up his mind whether a horse is value or not.

    Like yesterday my plan was to bet only one horse Nevertika (who I have been shouting about on here for months ye of little faith) but when I seen the price of JP’s Aigle D’or I almost fell of my chair and without even thinking I was on the phone.

    You don’t have to spend endless hours to know value when you see it and I’ll be fooked if you have to calculate percentages against price

    I wish someone would explain to me how do you put an accurate percentage on that. Did Aigle D’or have a 1% a 50% a 90% chance of winning?….what is the point of knowing something that is impossible to work out with any degree of accuracy?……..you either bet them or you don’t in this game.

    #138034
    sberry
    Member
    • Total Posts 1801

    absolutely agree

    as far as i’m concerned value exists when i can get a much bigger price win or place on the exchanges when backing an outsider as opposed to bookies prices – even then it’s only value if it comes in

    all this other tosh about value, i file in the same bin as draw bias

    #138035
    Jamsym
    Participant
    • Total Posts 110

    Seems like a lot of people don’t understand the concept of value.

    Taking a better price than the true odds will result in a profit in the long term.

    Lets take a poker hand for an example.

    Texas Hold em all in pre flop:

    AA vs KK

    AA is 80% to win the hand
    KK is 20% to win the hand

    AA is a 1/4 favourite. If someone offers you 1/2 about it then you have ‘value’ because over the space of 10000 hands the AA will win 8000 times.

    Now if the KK won this time when i had £100 on AA@1/2 i would be slightly annoyed but i know i’d be happy to continue this bet all day long because eventually i’d result in a profit.

    It’s the same with horses. If you can get 3/1 about a 2/1 shot or 10/1 about a 7/1 shot then if you keep doing this you will win long term.

    #138036
    Flash
    Member
    • Total Posts 1144

    Seems like a lot of people don’t understand the concept of value.

    Taking a better price than the true odds will result in a profit in the long term.

    Lets take a poker hand for an example.

    Texas Hold em all in pre flop:

    AA vs KK

    AA is 80% to win the hand
    KK is 20% to win the hand

    AA is a 1/4 favourite. If someone offers you 1/2 about it then you have ‘value’ because over the space of 10000 hands the AA will win 8000 times.

    Now if the KK won this time when i had £100 on AA@1/2 i would be slightly annoyed but i know i’d be happy to continue this bet all day long because eventually i’d result in a profit.

    It’s the same with horses. If you can get 3/1 about a 2/1 shot or 10/1 about a 7/1 shot then if you keep doing this you will win long term.

    No don’t agree.

    What is defined as value comes down to personal opinion. At the end of the day its finding winners that counts ultimately.

    We all understand the concept I for one just don’t agree with it. ANYTHING can be "value" depending on your interpretation.

    #138037
    the welsh wizard
    Member
    • Total Posts 352

    Seems like a lot of people don’t understand the concept of value.

    Taking a better price than the true odds will result in a profit in the long term.

    Lets take a poker hand for an example…..

    I totally agree with you, Jam, most people on here don’t understand the concept of value, that is obvious from the content of their posts. However, the key difference between racing and poker is that the poker hands have a pure, mathematical, stonewall percentage of winning – the horses only have what chance my opinion tells me.

    Even after the race, one still cannot say with confidence what chance the winner had beforehand, as how much depended on how the race was run (or how the cards were played to use Jim McGrath’s one apposite phrase) one can only surmise.

    The key component to understanding value lies in understanding percentage chance, and the key to understanding percentage chance lies in this rub – that winners are not pre-ordained. If Nevison came out with one precise truth in his book it was this; that ALL horses, no matter how poor, have some sort of chance of winning.

    #138038
    Jamsym
    Participant
    • Total Posts 110

    Seems like a lot of people don’t understand the concept of value.

    Taking a better price than the true odds will result in a profit in the long term.

    Lets take a poker hand for an example.

    Texas Hold em all in pre flop:

    AA vs KK

    AA is 80% to win the hand
    KK is 20% to win the hand

    AA is a 1/4 favourite. If someone offers you 1/2 about it then you have ‘value’ because over the space of 10000 hands the AA will win 8000 times.

    Now if the KK won this time when i had £100 on AA@1/2 i would be slightly annoyed but i know i’d be happy to continue this bet all day long because eventually i’d result in a profit.

    It’s the same with horses. If you can get 3/1 about a 2/1 shot or 10/1 about a 7/1 shot then if you keep doing this you will win long term.

    No don’t agree.

    What is defined as value comes down to personal opinion. At the end of the day its finding winners that counts ultimately.

    We all understand the concept I for one just don’t agree with it. ANYTHING can be "value" depending on your interpretation.

    Lets say we flip a coin for money.

    I put my £50 on heads
    You put you £100 on tails

    The true odds of this event happenening are 50/50 so the odds should be even money.

    You are giving me 2/1 though.

    So if tails comes in are you happy with your bet?

    I’d happily flip with you forever under these circumstances in the knowledge that as long as i’m getting value i will come out on top in the long term.

    I agree it’s more difficult when it comes to horse racing because the same event never occurs twice so we don’t get a recurring 50/50 scenario like the coinflip or a recurring 80/20 like the poker hand.

    However the concept is still the same but just more difficult to appreciate.

    #138040
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    • Total Posts 17716

    Jamsym

    Poker cards, like tossing coins, are predictable over a long run, and lend themselves to probability percentages.
    Horses however aren’t, which is why the real art is in predicting, not pricing.
    Also the real reason, imo, why so many TV pundits (and quite a few on here :) ) opt for the ‘value’ call; they haven’t the nous for the former, so try to compensate/obfuscate with the latter

    #138041
    Jamsym
    Participant
    • Total Posts 110

    Just because you can’t repeat the same event over and over like coins or cards dosen’t mean value dosen’t exist.

    In every race each horse has some % chance of winning. This is a fact. The skill is your judgement of what that % chance of winning is vs the bookmakers judgement.

    Personally i think Kauto Star will win the Gold Cup. If he was 1/4 on though i wouldn’t back him because i don’t believe he has an 80% chance of winning. I think more of a 50% chance. If Denman was offered at 100/1 i’d have my largest ever bet on him even though i think Kauto Star will win.

    This is because i know every horse has some % chance of winning and personally i believe Denmans chance is more than 1% and actually somewhere around 35%.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 176 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.