- This topic has 190 replies, 46 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
It is implicit that in order to be a "good" value punter you need to be good at assessing the probabilities of horses winning (or placing, or whatever). Surely that is self-evident.
It is implicit that in order to be a "good" value punter you need to be good at assessing the probabilities of horses winning (or placing, or whatever). Surely that is self-evident.
Yes it is, but I don’t believe that the ability to produce a 100% book is the be-all-and-end-all of punting. Taking 6/4 about a horse which you think should be 11/8 is value but the volatile nature of the sport means that there are too many unknowns for anybody to be sure that they have actually gotten value.
The ability to narrow the field to likely contenders followed by a rough estimate of each contenders chances relatiev to the other contenders is a better method than concentrating on using ratings or whatever to produce a full tissue for every horse.
I don’t think that taking 50/1 about a 33/1 chance or even taking 1/2 about a 1/3 chance is any good to the average punter, although we have disagreed on this before.
Yes, indeed, it is self-evident , Prufrock, and results alone will provide the proof.
I suppose the cut-off point for the chosen day of reckoning will show just the temporary positions of the various players – as in the RP tipping charts.
Sean Rua.
Fair enough. My point is that if certain people who describe themselves as value punters are not much good at discerning value – through putting accurate probabilities on events happening – then that no more invalidates value as a concept than, say, would a self-proclaimed time expert invalidate time analysis by spouting nonsense on that subject.
On a related subject there can be terribly bad value at point to points.
Particularly over the Easter period bookmakers can shorten up most horses and still know they are going to do great trade with a huge crowd of novice punters just wanting an interest in every race.
For a couple of meetings at Higham I started working out the total overround to best price – not even to the average price – and started announcing them over the public address. My recommendation was that the punters should know this overround was unacceptable and they should consider backing on the Tote instead.
I thought we were doing the Tote, and therefore the organising Hunt a favour, but we were asked by the Chairman of the hunt to stop doing this because it was annoying the bookmakers who may not want to attend the meeting in future!!
I do think things have improved in this regard but I caution that it is rarely a good idea to bet early at points as many horses are conservately priced – especially in maidens – until the market has got some liquidity.
Quote – “It is implicit that in order to be a “good” value punter you need to be good at assessing the probabilities of horses winning (or placing, or whatever). Surely that is self-evident.”
Agree with DB on this. Being able to produce a tissue or book is not a requirement of being a ‘good’ value punter.
Let’s differentiate between the profitable punter who consciously approaches making selections on what to bet on from a ‘value’ orientated paradigm (we’ll term them the ‘value’ punter) from the profitable punter who doesn’t consciously think about ‘value’ at all as such (but who, by virtue of being profitable is getting value anyway).
The ‘value’ punter will need to somehow assess the probability of his selection winning. Then they will compare with the odds on offer and bet whenever the requisite advantage is ascertained.
The key to their success or failure lies in their judgement, or lack of, in assessing those probabilities. Some ‘value’ punters will use data on the race to compile a tissue but others will base their judgement on a ‘feel’ of whether the price is right.
I’ve seen some very good punters who have a very good ‘feel’ for prices and I believe this comes from experience, leading to the development of an intuitive grasp of what ‘looks right’. I believe most punters, consciously or otherwise, rely on this intuitive feel for prices but I believe many haven’t honed that intuition sufficiently to be successful.
Yes, Adrian, the prices at the trotting racing are probably equally as bad, imo!
On the point of bookies’ prices:
Surely, the odds-compilers are fully aware of Ginger’s table etc. Do we think they deliberately disregard the probabilities in order to promote popular but weak fancies?
I think it’s more than just the overround that provides the so-called value opportunity arising from "ricks" in the market.
Sean Rua.
Let’s phrase it this way then. If you are what is commonly referred to as a "value" punter, you need to be good at assessing the relative claims of a contender(s) in order to be successful. It is absolutely implicit to the concept of value.
In order to be good, you need to utilise form study or some other valid means of determining the likelihood of horses winning (placing, or whatever) and comparing that to the odds on offer.
Some of the earlier posts seem to imply that form study and value seeking are divorced when they are usually inextricably linked.
My 13:32 post deliberately made no mention of making a tissue or a book. As Cormack rightly points out, many people are "good" at assessing the probabilities of horses winning (being placed or whatever) without going so far as pricing up every horse in a race.
I employ a rather broad brush approach to ‘value’, mostly because I have never developed the skill needed to gauge ‘value’ to an accuracy of two decimal places.
I rarely look at the odds on offer before analyzing a race. After an hour or so of study I usually have one of those big handicaps down to 2-3 horses! If there are three, for example, then typically one of them will be my ‘favourite’, another will be almost equally likely in my estimation and the third is a ‘danger’ if things go its way. I then look at prices and invariably the market has one or more of my three ‘selections’ well different from my expectations. Perhaps I might have expected my two ‘favourites’ to be around the 7/1 mark and find that one of them is 4/1 and the other 20/1. The latter is my bet, because the price on offer is well in excess of my expectation, whereas the former is significantly shorter. Crucially, and this is the main point that needs to be highlighted, I know, because I keep records, that using my judgment in this way leads to profit. Value is only beneficial if you are in the correct ball-park (selection wise) to begin with!
But it isn’t easy, as has already been said, imho there is no substitute for burying the head in the form book and applying hard earned experience.
On a related subject there can be terribly bad value at point to points.
Sweet Jesus, yes. The Laleston point I race-read at last season felt like the bookies’ equivalent of Poundland – “everything in store 4-1”. The likes of the Dingley bookies, however, are usually brave enough to chalk something up at 50-1 if it ought to be a 50-1 shot on all known form. Mind, the presence of plenty of Millington and Ikin animals at many of the Dingley meetings practically demands it.
It’s always worth checking the course descriptions section of Mackenzie and Harris before you set out to a meeting, in order to establish just how rewarding a day you’re likely to have patrolling the boards.
Jeremy
(graysonscolumn)Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
Jeremy,
I’ve never seen 50/1 in East Anglia – when you get a no-hoper ie a Millington they rather biazzarely price it up at 40/1. I’ve never really
understood why.It isn’t really the price of the favourite I moan about – often they are OK value – it is the horrendous overround, especially in some maidens where they won’t price anything larger than 10/1.
I’ve seen some very good punters who have a very good ‘feel’ for prices and I believe this comes from experience, leading to the development of an intuitive grasp of what ‘looks right’. I believe most punters, consciously or otherwise, rely on this intuitive feel for prices
i am not saying i am one of those (not on current dismal form anyway) but, as someone who works with and makes judgements on numbers in my work (no..im not a bingo caller), im a great believer that people often start out with an institnctive opinion (which is not something that should be underestimated) and then adapt the numbers to justify
An "instinctive" feel for a price should not be underestimated. there is a nice term used by many in the finance industry these days…
"death by spreadsheet"
Over-analysis can be counterproductive and i agree with Reet that form has to be first consideration before even thinking about value
I’ve never seen 50/1 in East Anglia – when you get a no-hoper ie a Millington they rather biazzarely price it up at 40/1. I’ve never really
understood why.Very odd. If I end up at Ampton this weekend (it’s all still a bit up in the air for me), I’ll look out for this 40-1 ceiling.
I’ll refrain from suggesting it has something to do with some of the locals only having enough claws on each hand to be able to count in multiples of 10 as far as 40. That would be a Very Bad Thing to say.
I’ll have to check the notes from the Dingley meetings I covered last season (not all of them) for the precise circumstances, but there were certainly one or two odd bits of 50-1 flying about, possibly just not at the off.
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
Jim F and Clive X
If you take a look at page 3 of this thread with my post headed "How to make a 100% book",you can see I agree with you.
There is no substitute for studying form.Value finding must be done as well as studying form.
Value Is EverythingIf the media is listening, or should that be watching (no I have not given up yet). I would like to expand on my first post for a possible explanation of the table of odds and chances to show to your viewers / readers.
(say as well as show in graphic)
For every £1 staked on a 31 chance a punter gets back £4, winning £3 plus his £1 stake returned.
Say he / she has 100 individual bets of £1 all at 31 (staking £100 in all).
If he wins 25 of those 100 bets he has staked £100 and gets £100 back (25 x 4 =100), breaking even.
If he wins less than 25 he makes a loss.
If he wins more than 25 he makes a profit.
Another way of saying 25 out of 100 is 25%.
Therefore the true odds of any 25% chance is 31 (25% = 31).
A punter who believes a horse has a 25% chance is expressing an opinion (not fact).
But the fact is, if he wins more than 25% of his bets at 31 a profit is made and so:
Anything believed to have a 25% chance should only be backed if better than 31 is available.
(say but don’t show)
This simple equation finds the percentage of any given price:
(show graphic and say)First figure + second figure = resultant figure.
Second figure divided by resultant figure = decimal.
Decimal x 100 = percentage.For example with 31:
3 + 1 = 4
1 Divided by 4 = 0.25
0.25 x 100 = 25 = 25%
31 = 25%114 would be:
11 + 4 = 15
4 Divided by 15 = 0.267
0.267 x 100 = 26.7 = 26.7%
114 = 26.7%(you can say the rest of the dialogue without showing it)
In a four horse race where each horse is thought by the bookmakers odds compiler to have the same chance of winning, then they all are 25% 31 chances (to 100%).
(show but don’t say)
fig 1
a) 25% 31
b) 25% 31
c) 25% 31
d) 25% 31
100%To be able to make a profit a bookmaker puts his mark up on it and offers early prices of 114 all runners (working to 106.8%).
(show fig 2 alongside fig 1 but don’t say)
fig2
a) 26.7% 114
b) 26.7% 114
c) 26.7% 114
d) 26.7% 114
106.8%But these percentages are not certain, they do not know the percentages are correct, it is only their opinion.
(show fig 3 alongside fig 1 and 2)fig 3
a) 25% 31
b) 20% 41
c) 22% 72 (22.2%)
d) 33% 21 (33.3%)
100%If a punter believes the figures on the right are true percentages, then (d) is a good value bet at 114 as 33% is equivalent to almost 21. 33% being bigger than 26.7%.
(show fig 4)
In a different race, if a punter looks around the bookmakers and exchanges finding these to be the best prices available:fig 4
a) 26.7% 114
b) 25% 31
c) 15.4% 112
d) 10% 91
e) 7.7% 121
f) 6.7% 141
g) 4.8% 201
h) 3.9% 251
i) 2.9% 331
j) 1.5% 661
k) 1% 1001
105.6%If a punter believes (c) has a better than 15.4% chance he should back it at 112. If thinking (h) is better than 3.9% he should back that at 251, and so on. Because if a punter wins more than 15.4% of his bets at 112 he makes a profit (assuming level stakes), (h) at 251 more than 3.9%.
(show fig 5 alongside fig 4)
After studying form for this race a punter may want to make his own 100% book, and then back anything he can get a better price for than his tissue.fig 5
a) 25% 31
b) 23.25% 10030
c) 14.5% 61
d) 13.5% 132
e) 7.25% 131
f) 6% 161
g) 4% 251
h) 3.25% 331
I) 2% 501
j) 1% 1001
k) 0.5% 2001
100%The figure on the right shows the percentages you believe each horse has of winning together with an odds equivalent.
These prices are those that (by your working out) you should be trying to beat. The only value horse in your opinion is (d). Bookies best price being 91 and your price to beat 132.
Horse (d) only has just over half the chance of (a) but despite that (d) is the better bet. Because:
(show the next piece of dialogue underneath fig 4 and 5)
If you have 100 individual £1 bets at 91, a 13.5% strike rate returns £135 and a £35 profit. (13.5 x 10 = 135).
Backing the horse with the best chance of winning, a 25% strike rate at 114 only returns £93.75 making a £6.25 deficit (25 x 3.75 = 93.75).
It does not matter if this 9/1 shot wins or loses, as long as you win more than 10% of your bets at 9/1 a profit is made.NOW SHOW THE TABLE OF ODDS AND CHANCES.
(And say)
Anything thought to have a 60% chance should be backed at better than 46.
42% 11/8, 31% 94, 12.5% 71, 8% 121, 3% 331 and so on.
There is no need to work to too many decimals with your figures especially if putting in a margin for error. Not backing a horse unless it has a price of 1 or 2% more than your tissue price.(I hope to see the table of odds and chances together with an explanation on Channel 4 Racing, BBC, ATR, RUK, Racing Post and every other betting / racing paper / magazine.
If the racing media do not want to explain it, may be they would be kind enough to let us know why, as it is without doubt an important tool in profit making).Ginge
Value Is EverythingI find it very disappointing that no members of the racing media have come on here to defend themselves. May be they do not have the time, may be they know there is no defence. I note that many in the racing media call for racing personalities to talk and be quized by them. But when it is the media themselves being questioned there is silence.
Though I must thank Tanya Stevenson for e-mailing me to give Channel 4’s opinion that their viewers would be lost if given an explanation. And the amount of people that would be interested in the table is very much a niche market.
Do not agree with it, but thanks anyway Tanya.
The niche she talks about consists of just about every professional gambler in the land, what does that tell you about the importance of something so rarely mentioned by the media? I just can not believe that so few punters are interested in making a profit.Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.