Odds-on favourites to win

[Apprentice]

Hi to everybody who reads this

I recently bought the top-selling US system entitled "How to Place Bet on Favourites for a living", which I read with great interest. In summary, the system help to identify "red-hot odds-on favourites" and then advises the follower to bet on the selection for a place. Thereby, achieving low returns but with a very high strike rate. As far as I can tell, this doesn’t quite work in the UK, as the nearest you can get to a place bet is "each way". However, it did make me wonder if something similar could work – but betting to win?

I developed a system of my own, a few years back, that involved betting to win on short-priced favourites that had also passed through a set of stringent filters. I managed to achieve a strike rate of about 80% but the returns were low and the number of bets were few. Having said that, it did make a small profit consistently over the period of a year that I used it.

Have any of you tried a similar approach – and did you have any success?

When I was using my old system I made a small profit using level stakes. Are there any staking plans that would help to boost the profitability?

I’d be interested in your views.

Apprentice

[billion]

Lots of content for replies here

Apprentice

.

I think each and every one of us will have differing ideas and all you can do is digest them for your own use.

If I may I will point you in the direction of "Rolling Doubles" which for low prices and a high strike rate may be handy.

But earlier in your piece you refer to "place" betting only, which is available on the exchanges, Tote and I think Ladbrokes but also handy for the American system could be 80/20 or similar where 80% of the stake is "place" and 20% is "win" and I hear is starting to be favoured more and more.

Billy's Outback Shack

[Apprentice]

Hi billion

Some very helpful suggestions again here – thanks. I may resurrect my old system and try the "rolling doubles" approach. I’ve never heard of that (although I can guess what you mean) so, I’ll google it for a definition. If my system is still capable of 80% strike rate regularly, I might be able to make it pay.

And, I wasn’t aware that place betting is now available in the UK (things have changed since I used to develop and use my own systems) and the 80 / 20 is new to me too. So, maybe I’ll try to translate the USA system criteria into UK equivalents and give that a try too.

Thanks again.

Apprentice

[billion]

If you look at the ROLLING ON thread

Apprentice

you should find a fair decription of rolling doubles.

80% place & 20% win are struck as 2 seperate bets, however the place element on the exchanges never looks to match its equivalent of the place part of an ew bet, much about because the layer never has the chance to keep the losing part of the win bet. I hope that makes sensible reading.

Billy's Outback Shack

[Apprentice]

Thanks again billion

I’ve checked-out the "rolling on" thread and now understand that fully. Also, understand what you say about the 20 part of the 80 / 20.

Apprentice

[Dolus]

While in place betting the strike rate does indeed go up the returns go down in proportion and tend to cancel out the strike rate advantage.

There may be some mileage in place betting odds on shots as often while the win price on the exchanges may be 1.5 the place price can be 1.2 which seems amazingly good value.

From Adrian Massey’s website
Odds on strike rate.
1991-2009
Less 1/2 win 75% Place 87%
1/2 to 10/11 win 54% Place 77%

There is a wealth of information about

‘The Fate Of The Favourites’

on Adrians site, so a lot of pre-filtering can be achieved before doing any live testing.

[billion]

‘morning

Dolus

Can I ask your opinion with regard to the stats you have posted which quotes the fate of ALL odds on favourites regardless of any further input.

The so called "input" can of course vary so much from one simple filter to perhaps a dozen and therefore does simply rolling out stats just give a generalisation of the overall state of play but here is my question please, by quoting such stats does it not skew your own opinion or bias into never trying such methods?

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

Sometimes I think I really should

get a life

but once again this thread has got the juices flowing and has left me with a dilema.

Last evening I started to search for a low priced (most likely) winner and arrived at two selections.

1) Manor Park 1.10 Wetherby FcSp 11/8

2) Anaya 8.20 Wolv’s FcSp 11/8

For the life of me I cannot remember why but I picked Manor Park as the one for me and if it won I vowed to use to "Roll On".

But the morning dawns and available prices are different Manor Park goes odds on @ 8/11 whilst Anaya remains at the FcSp of 11/8

Open for debate.
I am not an "odds on" better so should I remain true to my selection Manor Park or change to Anaya?

In reality being so indecisive I put my pound on both just to see what happens.

Billy's Outback Shack

[Dolus]

Hi Billion

Yes those stats are for all odds on favourites between 1991-2009 regardless off any other criteria.

Any stat on it own tends to show the horse is more likely to lose than win, which is not surprising as there is only one winner in any race, all the others are losers.

The exception is the price which appears to be the strongest variable and in the case of odds on shots show they are more likely to win.

Backing any favourite blind does not show a profit and as you say other variables have to be included. That is why I said that there is a wealth of stats on Adrian’s site, and using the custom report option, filters can be added and played around with, not only just for favourites.

[Dolus]

Funny that Billion.

The Legacy thread got me looking at favourites again.

What I am doing is going to The Racing Post website and looking at the stats for favourites at each race course.

Any race type where the favourite has won 40% or more are the ones to look at.

Logically the next step would be to just back the favourite blind in a bookies, but if it has any mileage I would want to back on the exchanges.

My option was to look at the market on Betfair and only choose a clear favourite. If it looked too close then scratch that race.

In two days I have had 15 races 6 winners and wait for it a profit of 0.9 points. That’s before commission which at 5% reduces it to 0.41 points.

I need to get out more as well.

[billion]

What a sad pair we are

Dolus

but as long as we remain happy in our own little bubble then I say

to hell with the rest.

As I see it, there are two main criteria with short priced selections: –

1) is the selection criteria and

Apprentice

may well have this angle covered if he can get an 80% strike rate but you are on the button when you make the point which suggests there is a world of difference between long odds on and short odds on. My guess is if

Apprentice

is putting his selections through – was it 8 filters – then the prices will be very much on the short side indeed.
Thus a loser or two can destroy accrued profit. This I guess is the big arguement which opposes this style of betting.

…. and so

2) to improve profit must come down to staking which is yet another "can of worms" because it very much must depend upon the individual aim or expectation. No one person will have the definitive plan to suit all.
Small time players such as myself never expect to make a profit anyway and do it all for the fun of it and therefore can allow any winnings to "Roll" until it is lost or reaches a suitable amount.
Big time players I would think play at the lower or favourite end of the market anyway and may take any profit from any race to suit their own style.
Anyone who has tried recovery plans of any type require a huge bank and nerves of steele . . . . too scary for me!

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

The great thing about sensible forum discussion is it can throw up differing ideas and points of view, sometimes it can take you off track and others bring you back on track. It can revive ideas and targets etc. which have become lost along the way whilst trying to find the ultimate and logical way to bet and spawn talk of "how to . . . "

Dolus

has gone back to the drawing board, so to speak and I improvised what I already have been experimenting with.

Last evening I went to the Sporting Life web site (Racing Post for me has become a different animal these days) and searched through todays race cards looking for the shortest forecast starting price (Odds against) which VERDICT agreed should win.
I do sometimes listen to S/L radio and the studio pundits have earned my respect with their selections and it is these very same pundits that write the race VERDICT below the race card.

Too simple to be any good, perhaps, but it is fun trying to solve the problem.

Billy's Outback Shack

[Dolus]

Billion wrote

Small time players such as myself

Bet I’m a smaller player than you. I only seem to put tiny amounts of money on for live testing, as often this throws up things that are not apparent while paper trading.

Billion also wrote

Dolus has gone back to the drawing board

More like slate and chalk.

It’s Sunday, I’m bored. I’m going to church and pray for divine intervention.

[billion]

Nice one

Dolus

you bring a little sunshine to a very grey day.

It never fails to surprise me how even small stakes can galvanize the mind, as the advert states "It matters more when there is money on it" . . .

so very true

.

Whilst there put a good word in for me as well please.

Billy's Outback Shack

[Apprentice]

Hi Dolus and Billion

Sorry to come back in a bit late on this thread but I’ve been away from my desk for a couple of days. Some really interesting points here that have galvanised me into action.

But first, to answer some of the points you raised:

I’m not sure the increase in strike rate is offset by the lower prices from betting on a place. From what I’ve seen over the last few days paper trialing, there is a clear advantage to this approach. Also, I checked "Manor Park" and "Anaya" – they both lost as you said, but one came 3rd and the other 2nd – so, the place bets would have been winners. And, as you noted, some of the shorter-priced favourites do seem to be surprisingly good value when priced for a place.

My old system still seems to have about 80% win strike rate (although I’ve only paper trialled two weeks so far). And, it is 8 filters I use, which does tend to throw up very short priced favourites.

Again, although it’s only two weeks paper trial so far, the 20% that have lost, were all placed in the top 3. So, I think we could be onto something here.

However, with the low returns and high strike rate, it does suggest the only two ways to make it pay are: large stakes (which are quite scarey) or a staking plan of some kind.

Apprentice

[billion]

For a bit of fun today.

I looked at two possibles: –

RED HARBOUR 2.00 Exeter 1.33 to place (3) Betdaq

BANDA SEA 4.50 Kempton 1.61 to place (2) Betdaq

LOST

As you pointed out

Apprentice

if both had been bet to place the other day they could have been classed as winners (or at least winning bets) and so I have put my hard earned pound on BANDA SEA which I thought was better with 2 places from a field of 7 rather than 3 from a field of 11

Another one to take on the chin!

Billy's Outback Shack

[Apprentice]

Hi billion

Red Harbour came 3rd in the 2 o’clock, so that would have been another winning place bet. Fingers crossed for Banda Sea.

Apprentice

[Author]

Posts