- This topic has 31 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I think we will always congratulate the likes of
REDRUM77
for finding a 50/1 winner, it is a fantastic achievement and must also be a an incredible feeling to have done so and he is entitled to blow his own trumpet, loud and clear.
What I wish to ask
REDRUM77
is, what conclusive proof can he provide that it is a losers game to back favourites.
My definition of "favourite" is a horse forecast as favourite.
However although forecast as favourite does not always win as SP fav. depite being the shortest early price.I do understand my definition does not comply with the normal understanding of the word favourite but ask for latitude as at some stage is or has been the shortest priced of all available.
Billy's Outback Shack
First I think you mean from a reliable source (Racing Post).
Yes a lot of fav do win, but a lot lose too.
This week is Cheltenham and the as been some shock results with only two favs coming in.
Supposing you go with any at Evens or less.
You would have pick Dunguib (yet Paddy Power was refunding any bets upto £200 if he won). They wouldn’t have offered it if they didn’t think he was beatable. Who also would have thought Master Minded would be beaten today (another odds on chance).I know this meeting is highly competitive but you get the same results at the lower end too.
I think we will always congratulate the likes of
REDRUM77
for finding a 50/1 winner, it is a fantastic achievement and must also be a an incredible feeling to have done so and he is entitled to blow his own trumpet, loud and clear.
What I wish to ask
REDRUM77
is, what conclusive proof can he provide that it is a losers game to back favourites.
My definition of "favourite" is a horse forecast as favourite.
However although forecast as favourite does not always win as SP fav. depite being the shortest early price.I do understand my definition does not comply with the normal understanding of the word favourite but ask for latitude as at some stage is or has been the shortest priced of all available.
The thing is Billion, I took that risk. I know its ancient history, but would it have still been value if it had lost. I think YES!
REDRUM77
says: –
"…. but you’ll certainly lose in the long run backing favourites"
Where does this information come from !!!
I agree stats show if ALL favourites are backed at starting prices there will be small losses.
But, WHO, in their right mind will back every favourite at starting prices?
I say no one.
So from this point on I say it is possible to follow the lower priced end of the market, make an improvement on the win percentages, beat the starting prices and it is possible to make a profit.
With the utmost respect to
REDRUM77
and all those who have read and believe it impossible to make money from the short priced (perhaps not truly the SP favourites) I say not to believe all that you read without putting the theory to the test.
If you were to want to work the multiple bets, Trixie – Yankee & so on, you would not be entering 50/1 shots would you,
or would you
?
I think not, you would be looking for selections with a high strike rate and they would come from the short/favourite end of the market but perhaps this is too much of a digression from the origination of this thread.
Billy's Outback Shack
Here is just one further thought for all those that think there is not a profit to be had at the short end of the market.
How hard is it to get a 50% strike rate from the lower end?
Not too hard I think.
How hard is it to get 11/10 about those 50% winners?
Not too hard I think.
If my math is correct this will make 5% on turn over.
Billy's Outback Shack
Here is just one further thought for all those that think there is not a profit to be had at the short end of the market.
How hard is it to get a 50% strike rate from the lower end?
Not too hard I think.
How hard is it to get 11/10 about those 50% winners?
Not too hard I think.
Hi Billion
Your thoughts there remind me of a system from about ten years ago called The 5/4 system (probably because the selection were shorties at the front of the market.)
The rules were something like must be picked by RPR, Topspeed and Spotlight and must not have any ‘X’s in the Postdata table.
The selections were few, the prices skinny but for a time it churned out a small but relentless profit.
It found a 5/1 winner one day. There was dancing in the streets that weekend, a whole months profit in one day
I wonder if anyone else knows or remembers the proper rules.
Welcome Mark.
Two things could be debatable:
Profit means picking a horse that has better odds than its true chance as long as it wins, long term, at its odds chance. A 10/1 horse you think is a true 8/1 chance is a wasted bet if there are First and Second favourites at odds on and evens.
You mentioned "system". Do you mean "method" as a system has a prescribed recipe for selecting a horse and that is backed whether good or bad value? You need a method approach so that you can compare one horse against another in the race to do what you describe in your post.
Sounds like you’re too scared to take a chance with the 10/1 that should be an 8/1.The always going to be those lower in price and probably just so but we don’t know the result of a race before hand.
Let me give you an example:
1989 Champion Hurdle, I fancied Beech Road at 50/1 because he was regularly beating one of the fancied horses (not the fav who was odds on).
By your logic I should have gone with the odds on fav rather than Beech Road, who won that year, the fav was unplaced.Yes backing the 10/1 you could lose, but you’ll certainly lose in the long run backing favourites.
Like many posters you comment on something you have neither read properly nor understood the meaning nor context of, then give a pointless example that proves it.
Where did I mention anything about backing favourites?
Hiya
DOLUS
I guess you are on the right track with the
old system
and it does in fact hold the key to the point I am trying to make.
It is a well known fact if you were to back ALL the favourites in EVERY race your money would little by little leak away.
This well known fact has had a corrosive effect on the masses thinking and it is now thought impossible to make a profit from lower priced selections.
I believe there will always be good and bad selections at ALL prices and work must be put in in order to eliminate the bad/poor ones, such as the system you have suggested.
Once settled upon your system it is then needed over a period of time to find what is the expected strike rate, from this strike rate it should not be too hard to work out the minimum prices required in order to make a profit.
Billy's Outback Shack
Hi Billion
True what you said about backing favourites. looking at Adrian Massey’s data, backing the favourite blind would return 93% of you bank so it would last a very long time before going bust.
That’s the easy bit. The hard bit is sorting out which ones to back to overcome the 7% deficiency and then some to make a profit.
Welcome Mark.
Two things could be debatable:
Profit means picking a horse that has better odds than its true chance as long as it wins, long term, at its odds chance. A 10/1 horse you think is a true 8/1 chance is a wasted bet if there are First and Second favourites at odds on and evens.
You mentioned "system". Do you mean "method" as a system has a prescribed recipe for selecting a horse and that is backed whether good or bad value? You need a method approach so that you can compare one horse against another in the race to do what you describe in your post.
Sounds like you’re too scared to take a chance with the 10/1 that should be an 8/1.The always going to be those lower in price and probably just so but we don’t know the result of a race before hand.
Let me give you an example:
1989 Champion Hurdle, I fancied Beech Road at 50/1 because he was regularly beating one of the fancied horses (not the fav who was odds on).
By your logic I should have gone with the odds on fav rather than Beech Road, who won that year, the fav was unplaced.Yes backing the 10/1 you could lose, but you’ll certainly lose in the long run backing favourites.
Like many posters you comment on something you have neither read properly nor understood the meaning nor context of, then give a pointless example that proves it.
Where did I mention anything about backing favourites?
You said in the second paragraph that backing a 10/1 shot that should be an 8/1 is a waste of time when there is a 1st and 2nd price fav at odds on and even.
However lets re address the original question Markdbh said, if you can identify a selection whose changes are better than than the selection’s odds you can win over the long run.
In your example Markdbh you give a horse who has been sent off a 10/1 when you think it true chance is an 8/1.
I don’t think it’s foolish to back such a chance, however value for money may also lie with the fav too.Take Big Bucks yesterday touched evens, and according to Big Mac, some punter went 50K, now Big Bucks was clearly a long odds on chance so evens on the day was great value.
To find value you’ve got to make a book of your own, evaluate the horse’s form, long term form, recent form, form at the track, jockey’s form, jockey’s recent form, jockey form with current trainer, trainer’s form, trainer’s recent form, trainer’s form at the track, trainer’s form with that kind of race.
As you can see to really know a horses true value takes a lot of work, but don’t be afraid of backing any and all horses in a race which is beyond true value.
Good tip is to specialist in a certain type of race, or even sport. Get to know it inside out and you’ll start to see the bookies errors better. For example a workmate of my dad used to do 2yo races (not nurseries).
Welcome Mark.
Two things could be debatable:
Profit means picking a horse that has better odds than its true chance as long as it wins, long term, at its odds chance. A 10/1 horse you think is a true 8/1 chance is a wasted bet if there are First and Second favourites at odds on and evens.
You mentioned "system". Do you mean "method" as a system has a prescribed recipe for selecting a horse and that is backed whether good or bad value? You need a method approach so that you can compare one horse against another in the race to do what you describe in your post.
Sounds like you’re too scared to take a chance with the 10/1 that should be an 8/1.The always going to be those lower in price and probably just so but we don’t know the result of a race before hand.
Let me give you an example:
1989 Champion Hurdle, I fancied Beech Road at 50/1 because he was regularly beating one of the fancied horses (not the fav who was odds on).
By your logic I should have gone with the odds on fav rather than Beech Road, who won that year, the fav was unplaced.Yes backing the 10/1 you could lose, but you’ll certainly lose in the long run backing favourites.
Like many posters you comment on something you have neither read properly nor understood the meaning nor context of, then give a pointless example that proves it.
Where did I mention anything about backing favourites?
You also said my example was pointless, well let me spell it out for you then.
In my example which is ancient history. Beech Road was beating I think the second fav that year regularly, yet the horse he beat was still more fancied than BR.
In my mind the was only two conclusions:1) This fancied horse should have been bigger in price
2) Beech Road should have started shorter.I took the second view point and backed him each way, thinking even if he was second it’ll be a good pay out.
We know now he won, which is a bonus, that’s why I thought Beech Road was value.I’ll also tell you this if I observe another one like BR who constantly beats a fancied horse for a big race and yet still friendless in the market, I’ll have my money on it.
This was my case bringing up Beech Road. Not as you call it to blow my own trumpet.
- Total Posts 84
Even the very word "system" makes me nervous, a bit like when I hear the word "statistics". I think both words are often so misleading.
If you think you have got a system, though, it’s only any good if it’s making you money. If it’s losing for you, it’s a rubbish system. Why worry about it identifying "value for money", whatever that means?
Brian
Horse Racings Systems identify value for money – I don’t think they can. You pay your money, you take your chance.
Personally, I’m not convinced with them. After years of trying them, using my own knowledge of bloodlines and form, 90% of them made a loss. Perhaps 1 or two broke even, and 1 or 2 made some profit. So, I went back to the old way of doing things. Taking one race at a time and seeing if there’s something work risking my cash on.
In saying that, I did stumble across this horse
system. Although it doesn’t make the large sums of money advertised, I must admit that it earned a few pounds for me. It made enough to pay it’s own way and put a few extra quid in my pocket each week.Best of luck with your upcoming bets and methods.
If, you just name the system people can "Google" it they want find out more.
Hiya
wfordman
,
Errr? Is there a clue somewhere that I am missing?
Billy's Outback Shack
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.