- This topic has 41 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Mr Deering,
Is this to write a "betting forecast" for a paper? Or is it for your benefit, to work out the value bet. If it is not the former then suggest ignoring Irish Stamp’s (Sorry IS)posts; as they will be confusing.For working out value bets:
I have tried betting to 90% and it just did not look right. (Respect to people that do). So much different to bookmakers prices, it was difficult to know if I’d done the book correctly.
I suggest working to 100% on every race. But don’t bet if it is only marginal value.e.g. Something I believe to be a true 33% 2/1 shot I’d want 9/4 (Not 85/40). A 20% 4/1 shot I’d want 5/1 (Not 9/2), 9% 10/1 I’d want 12/1, 5% 20/1 want 28/1,etc. The amount of mark up could change depending on how difficult the race is to work out.
This way you don’t have to worry about working to different percentages for different sized fields. Also you are doing a similar thing to a bookmaker adding a mark up, but in reverse.
Value Is EverythingNo offense taken Mark.
We’re thinking along the same lines in terms of value just doing it in a slightly different way – rather than create a pure price and add a bit extra as you do yourself I’m factoring in the bit extra to the price, and some more so that the prices that I back at I’m 110% sure that they are value.
No offense taken Mark.
We’re thinking along the same lines in terms of value just doing it in a slightly different way – rather than create a pure price and add a bit extra as you do yourself I’m factoring in the bit extra to the price, and some more so that the prices that I back at I’m 110% sure that they are value.
Hmmm,
Don’t quite understand what you are trying to do there mate. Surely working out your book to over 100% means getting no value at all, rather than more. Higher the percentage, the less value there’s likely to be.
I must have got that wrong somewhere.
Value Is EverythingGingertipster wrote
I suggest working to 100% on every race
That’s what I said
Gingertipster wrote
Hmmm,
Don’t quite understand what you are trying to do there mate. Surely working out your book to over 100% means getting no value at all, rather than more. Higher the percentage, the less value there’s likely to be.I must have got that wrong somewhere.
No you haven’t, I don’t understand what IS is doing either. If I make a book to a higher percentage than the bookmakers then more of the bookmakers prices will look like value, when in fact they are not.
Unless we are both missing something here.
respect to anyone attempting tissues, but my prices fluctuate dramatically after paddock inspection and moving to post.
how can you factor this?
Barry,
When making a 100% book for Early Prices, we are using everything we can to find value at that time. Like off course bookmakers; we need to try and allow for the probability of running to form. That includes how likely each horse is of ruining it’s chance by sweating up / on edge / keen to post etc. A good form book will tell you if any horse has done so before.
A shiny or woolly coat can tell you on course how likely a horse is of running to form. However, an off course Early Price punter can look for something similar; trainers in or out of form.
Not as accurate as being there I grant you. But it is pointless waiting to bet and seeing the value evaporating when other form buffs take the price.
I do find with maiden races it is usually best to wait until I am there. Looking for those green and on edge etc.
Value Is EverythingGingertipster wrote
I suggest working to 100% on every race
That’s what I said
Yes Dolus, I agree. But after working out a 100% book, I do think it is advisable to add in a margin for error.
Very few gamblers are accurate enough to only keep to that 100% book without one.
Value Is EverythingSurely working a book to 100% in a field of say, 24 runners will constitute an extremely unrealistic market?
We’re talking about a field where if every horse had an identical winning chance, each runner would be priced @ 25/1. I’m assuming a 100% market in such a large field would not discover a single value bet whatsoever.
Or am I missing the point of compiling tissue for, as you say, "my own benefit"?
I made a (rather casual) attempt at my own tissue a couple of years ago, and the markets really put me off. We’re talking about a 14-runner field where the favourite was 5/1 and there were 10 runners under 20/1.
Am I being a bit too pedantic?
Thanks Mark.
Surely working a book to 100% in a field of say, 24 runners will constitute an extremely unrealistic market?
We’re talking about a field where if every horse had an identical winning chance, each runner would be priced @ 25/1. I’m assuming a 100% market in such a large field would not discover a single value bet whatsoever.
Or am I missing the point of compiling tissue for, as you say, "my own benefit"?
I made a (rather casual) attempt at my own tissue a couple of years ago, and the markets really put me off. We’re talking about a 14-runner field where the favourite was 5/1 and there were 10 runners under 20/1.
Am I being a bit too pedantic?
Thanks Mark.
Mark,
you will find this easier if you use specifics. My gut reaction is that you are experiencing the same problem that many amateur odds compilers face – that is that your ratings, or scores (such as they may be)are accurate on the whole, but their relationship with the projected prices are flawed. Most tissues produced using a scoring system produce a very narrow range between the best and worst runners because they give too much credence to minor factors and are badly flawed as a result.
respect to anyone attempting tissues, but my prices fluctuate dramatically after paddock inspection and moving to post.
Strange that, Barry – after many years observation there I was thinking that your prices fluctuate dramatically according to those on Betfair!
Surely working a book to 100% in a field of say, 24 runners will constitute an extremely unrealistic market?
We’re talking about a field where if every horse had an identical winning chance, each runner would be priced @ 25/1. I’m assuming a 100% market in such a large field would not discover a single value bet whatsoever.
Or am I missing the point of compiling tissue for, as you say, "my own benefit"?
I made a (rather casual) attempt at my own tissue a couple of years ago, and the markets really put me off. We’re talking about a 14-runner field where the favourite was 5/1 and there were 10 runners under 20/1.
Am I being a bit too pedantic?
Thanks Mark.
Mark,
you will find this easier if you use specifics. My gut reaction is that you are experiencing the same problem that many amateur odds compilers face – that is that your ratings, or scores (such as they may be)are accurate on the whole, but their relationship with the projected prices are flawed. Most tissues produced using a scoring system produce a very narrow range between the best and worst runners because they give too much credence to minor factors and are badly flawed as a result.
Sorry, I was thanking Mark (aka Ginge) in advance for his input. I’m Myles, for future reference.
The "rating system" is the only system I know in order to define a winning chance. The system I aim to use will give a score between 1 and 100 in increments of 5 (IE. 1, 5, 10, 15 etc). The highest rated runner will always be given a score of 100.
In order to curb the possibility of an unrealistic market, I will rate each runner as a group and not as individuals e.g. Horse A might be a 4/1 20% winning chance on his own but comparing against other runners he is more a 10/1 9.1% winning chance.
This new approach will be going live on Saturday so I will report the findings on here for those interested.
Mdeering
In a 100% book all the horses will not have the same price. All it means is that all the percentage chances of each horse will add up to 100%
1/1 (2.0) =50%
3/1 (4.0) =25%
4/1 (5.0) =20%
19/1(20.0) =5%This is what is called a fair book as it offers no advantage to backer or layer and represents
in the backers opinion
the true chance of each horse winning.
The bookmaker will offer odds that are below those listed to make a profit regardless of which horse wins. As the price goes down the percentages go up so the bookmakers prices converted to percentages and totaled would exceed 100% I.E. 120%.
As a backer you are looking to back your selections when
in your opinion
the bookmaker has made a mistake and is offering odds that are better than your fair odds.
As it is just
your opinion
versus the
bookmakers opinion
there is no guarantee that either of you are right.
shadow leader,
if you attended as often as claimed previously,you would hear my very loud gob telling every punter in the ring which horses I am bigger than betfair " NO COMMISSION NO PREMIUM CHARGE "
happens every race, most frequently about the fav.
Thanks to all for their input.
I will be working out markets to 90% for Saturday because after all, I am a debutant and probably need that margin of error to be safe.
Regards.
shadow leader,
if you attended as often as claimed previously,you would hear my very loud gob telling every punter in the ring which horses I am bigger than betfair " NO COMMISSION NO PREMIUM CHARGE "
happens every race, most frequently about the fav.
Can’t let you get away with that Barry, not every race Barry.
I calculated the percentages four bookmakers were working to for the Goodwood Cup this year. You were worst of the four and (as I recall) worst price on all runners bar Yeats.
That did not stop unsuspecting, once a year punters from cueing up to bet with you Barry.
Is it not what you can get away with that matters?
Value Is Everythingprecisely, at different stages I was bigger than betfair about 1 horse,
OBVIOUSLY, I cannot offer top odds every horse,
I’d be overbroke, WOULDN’T I.
Surely working a book to 100% in a field of say, 24 runners will constitute an extremely unrealistic market?
We’re talking about a field where if every horse had an identical winning chance, each runner would be priced @ 25/1. I’m assuming a 100% market in such a large field would not discover a single value bet whatsoever.
Or am I missing the point of compiling tissue for, as you say, "my own benefit"?
I made a (rather casual) attempt at my own tissue a couple of years ago, and the markets really put me off. We’re talking about a 14-runner field where the favourite was 5/1 and there were 10 runners under 20/1.
Am I being a bit too pedantic?
Thanks Mark.
Not unrealistic at all Myles. I do find the bigger the field the less value is there. Even less for ante-post races where betting has been found (roughly) the right level already. But you do find some value bets in big fields. Stick with it.
Value Is Everythingprecisely, at different stages I was bigger than betfair about 1 horse,
OBVIOUSLY, I cannot offer top odds every horse,
I’d be overbroke, WOULDN’T I.
You were working to a far bigger percentage than the other on course bookmakers mentioned. So giving the WORST value over all to the punter. And with Yeats there were others who had the same price, you were not a "STAND OUT price".
Believe me, you were in NO danger going "OVERBROKE".
Don’t want this to turn in to a witch hunt. So think I should say that over all, looking at every race, think you are "fair". Without being over generous.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.