- This topic has 25 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Little wonder!! there are many many times when weight is thee deciding factor when horses reclash. Look at any form book and you will find indications of hudreds of examples.
Like ROF says though in many cases it may not be as important as some other factors but it’s hardly rule of thumb.
Weight as it stands nowadays couldn’t bring some horses together…Like Denman taking on recent 4 times winner Will Be Done over 3 miles giving him the maximum weight allowance. If however a darkhorse
To back up further to what you are saying: A month or so back stable companions Hurricane Fly and Cousin Vinny met and someone pointed out that the latter came out best at the weights. What they are missing IMO is that Hurrican Fly seems like a totally different class of animal and even if they met tomorrow at levels HF would still more than likely beat him. In cases like that the weight can be totally irrelevant.
Perhaps that example may end up with me having egg all over my face but there have been absolutely thousands of times when weight concessions has been ignored by punters and they have come out smelling of roses.
Do you think the Computer Timeform is worth the extra money?
I have kept with Timeform Perspective.Don’t have the figures to hand but I think CT is about £150 more than Perspective (for each code), so considering CT is the Racecards, Black Book and Perspective rolled into one, then yes I do think it’s worth the extra. And having spent many a year thumbing through the Perspective, CT is a doddle to use in comparison, notwithstanding its propensity to ‘pause and ponder’ rather often.
Wouldn’t put anyone off continuing with the printed Perspective though; it did take me a while to adjust to having it all on a screen.
My brother is in computer software and he does not see why a computer version should be more expensive than the file. He reckons anything computerised would not be as expensive to produce as paper.
Mark
Correct, in fact it should probably be much cheaper if you were simply looking at the cost of producing it.
What you are paying for is convenience and relative speed. I’ve used both the Perspective and now Computer Timeform, and despite CT’s fairly basic nature, wouldn’t go back to paper for anything. Every second you spend leafing through the Perspective looking for the race you want is time that you could spend looking at and digesting actual form instead. And how long would it take to find out the next performance for every horse in a race using the paper version? With CT, it’s one click.
Thanks for that Ginger tipster. I had heard about bookmakers overround and have a table somewhere detailing that but I like your explanation, it makes sense. No way would I want to make a 100% book as frankly I dont have time!
Sounds really simple in theory…just need to assume I evaluate a horses percentage chance correctly! As someone who prefrs to back things at odds of 5-1+ then I must have more margin for error with my percentages!
Don’t encourage him mate. Please.
Are you saying I should not reply to a question Carv?Douginho,
If you memorise the table I think it will help you find those 5/1 + winners. Seeing prices as percentages.Mark
Value Is EverythingCheersw Mark, thats a task for the weekend! Turn odds into percentages! I’ll give it a bash and see what I come up with.
I had a butchers at his (Bishop) site today and it’s basically an upmarket version of what Mounty has been doing for years (as well as us poor imitators).
It’s a method that works for me, in that if you know the foibles of a smallish horse population well pounds and lengths are’nt as important as the conditions of a given race (course, field size, time of year, distance, shape of race etc).
I think his point about Timeform etc is perfectly valid- I’d be surprised if anyone could make a decent percentage profit using only that in this day and age without some other edge- all of the odds compilers read it too.I had a butchers at his (Bishop) site today and it’s basically an upmarket version of what Mounty has been doing for years (as well as us poor imitators).
It’s a method that works for me, in that if you know the foibles of a smallish horse population well pounds and lengths are’nt as important as the conditions of a given race (course, field size, time of year, distance, shape of race etc).
I think his point about Timeform etc is perfectly valid- I’d be surprised if anyone could make a decent percentage profit using only that in this day and age without some other edge- all of the odds compilers read it too.In a way I agree with you Carv, if you are talking about just the Timeform rating. A pound or two here or there does not matter so much as going, distance etc. "Form" (one horse against the next) is often over-rated by the punter and bookmaker.
Indeed, say there is a two horse race where A beats B by a length. Then they meet in another 2 horse race a week later with conditions exactly the same. The horses are just as exposed as each other, weights, ground, jockeys, everything, other than the betting of course. I will be far more likely to back B than A. You’d expect A to win more often, but punters will probably over bet A and make it a poor value bet. Where as B will probably be a good value bet.
So ratings are often over bet too.
But Timeform are about more than ratings, you can find out about every aspect of a horses character, likes, dislikes, probable likes and probable dislikes.
Odds compilers do use Timeform, true. But doesn’t that tell you they are good? So if a punter does not use the best, what chance has he got? Odds compilers use it to form their prices, but it is still opinion. If I look at the same information I will probably come up with a different price. Allowing more for one aspect of a horses chance than another aspect.
Mark
Value Is Everything
Are you saying I should not reply to a question Carv?- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.