- This topic has 97 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
GTD – I would argue the absolute opposite. I can only have value before the race when the nature of the event isn’t binomial.
If for example a horse that I assess as having a 20% chance of winning is available at 9/2 I can make the assessment prerace that, for a £100 bet I have £10 of value or positive expectation (5.5*20%*£100=£110 minus my original stake). After the race we are dealing in absolutes so I cannot make that judgement anymore because it is either a winner or not. Just because it won does not mean that I did not have a negative expectation on the bet ie I would, if I had the same bet 100 times, expect to lose money overall.
I strongly disagree Stuart. If you lost your house to Mister Boyle Sport for example, on an evens shot that you deemed having a 60% chance of winning, you wouldn’t say " ach it dosen’t matter mate, that was still value", as he drives buy in a Ferrari and waves at you whilst you stand outside a homeless shelter with your cup of chicken soup.
Value when associated with money becomes value for money. There is absolutely no value in your money if there is a loss.
Whether you pick winners or prices if your ahead after 12 months your a value punter (like it or not).
Carv
Have a word with yourself!
"There are 2 factions, those who understand" –and those who don’t???
Value is an opinion; whether it’s a horse race or a pound of apples, and varies greatly from person to person, the only true arbiter being the final result which, by your own admission, cannot be known until after the race.
If, as some do, I were to make my living backing in handicapped matches (at 10/11 either result), would you still maintain I was "getting value", or would you actually consider that maybe I was better at picking winners than the person setting the handicaps.
And if not, why not?Reet
Firstly, I never accused people of not understanding. I consider the second group are guilty of wrong thinking, not failure to understand. I’m quite sure that I’m guilty of wrong thinking in many areas myself!
Secondly I don’t see how the handicap match example is any different: The person who is ahead after a significant number of bets is obviously betting at value prices, so the true price of his 10/11 selections is less than that. You call it picking winners, I call it value betting!Is it possible for a person to profit by not backing ‘value’ horses, if they win enough in the long run?
Well we know where we’re goin’
but we don’t know where we’ve been.
And we know what we’re knowing’
but we can’t say what we’ve seen.
And we’re not little children
and we know what we want.
And the future is certain
give us time to work it out.
Nobody can say what a "significant" number of bets is though so unless somebody can come up with a mathematically sound figure as to how many bets are required to ABSOLUTELY ENSURE that your profit is SOLELY as a result of a mathematical edge then anybody in profit is just better at picking winners than those who show a loss!
For example
If you go to a casino and there is a single-zero roulette wheel which is paying 37/1 on every number, IN THEORY, you will be in profit IN THE LONG RUN by playing on that wheel because you have an edge in that you are getting 37/1 about a 36/1 shot
But after 100, 1000, 10000 bets there is no guarantee that you WILL be in profit DESPITE having a blatant edge over the house.
So my question is, how long is the long-run?
Admittedly the ’10/1 shots at 7/4′ was a poorly thought out example (although there are three opinions involved – yours, mine and the bookmaker’s – and there’s no proof as to who is correct), but where do you draw the line?
Maybe now we have discovered the technicality, and we are all sitting on the same side of the fence. when backing them at 7/4, it is your opinion that they should be shorter than 7/4?
Then we are all happy
Let’s take an eight-runner race, where you have assigned probabilities which all but match the odds offered about seven of the horses. The one which doesn’t correlate is perhaps seventh or eighth in the betting, but is priced up at 20/1 against your perceived chance of 8%. The favourite is 5/4, which ties in (more or less) with your 11/8.
Which do you back? If the favourite was well supported and reached a price significantly shorter than your perceived 11/8, would you lay it?
Yes of course I would back the 20/1 shot and lay the favourite. With all due respect this is a really silly question. In fact it’s not a question of opinion, it’s like asking "If you thought a £5 note was worth five £1 coins, but someone would sell the note for four £1 coins, would you buy it?"
Or some such question where you have just offered someone a clear profitable opportunity and want to see will they turn it down.I might apply the ‘value’ concept the next time I decide to go shopping. I know what bottle of wine I want to buy – I’ve had it before and it’s like Charlize Theron in a jecuzzi, great to look at and extremely pleasurable once you dive in – but there’s been a small price increase and the £24.95 seems a little steep for the complex and elegant Californian white. There is however a riskier proposition, a Netto own-brand, which looks reasonable at £2.95 for what is described as ‘soft and fruity, and full of flavour’. Perhaps more of a Dawn French in a chocolate fountain.
If the Netto bargain turns out to be a bum deal, I know who to blame.
Blame yourself for not putting a higher value on Charlize Theron in a jacuzzi.
Whether you pick winners or prices if your ahead after 12 months your a value punter (like it or not).
Almost true Cav,
If a punter had 1000 bets, 999 single bets lost, yet his one scoop 6 came up; then it is just luck. Also, if a punter’s profit comes from one or two big wins, with most other bets being small, then it is probably luck. But I know what you mean.
Mark
Value Is EverythingDavidBrady – there are plenty of statistical ways of assessing whether the number of bets is statistically significant based on the spread of results, strikerate and average price taken along with the profit/loss so far. I can go into it in detail if you are interested but it involves calculating something called a T statistic and checking to see whether your results fall within x standard deviations.
Let’s take an eight-runner race, where you have assigned probabilities which all but match the odds offered about seven of the horses. The one which doesn’t correlate is perhaps seventh or eighth in the betting, but is priced up at 20/1 against your perceived chance of 8%. The favourite is 5/4, which ties in (more or less) with your 11/8.
Which do you back? If the favourite was well supported and reached a price significantly shorter than your perceived 11/8, would you lay it?
Yes of course I would back the 20/1 shot and lay the favourite. With all due respect this is a really silly question. In fact it’s not a question of opinion, it’s like asking "If you thought a £5 note was worth five £1 coins, but someone would sell the note for four £1 coins, would you buy it?"
Or some such question where you have just offered someone a clear profitable opportunity and want to see will they turn it down.No, it wasn’t a silly question at all.
You would back the 20/1 shot because you believe it should be trading at less –
that is your opinion
.
I would buy the £5 note for four one pound coins because it is worth more than £4 –
that is fact
.
Lee
Let’s take an eight-runner race, where you have assigned probabilities which all but match the odds offered about seven of the horses. The one which doesn’t correlate is perhaps seventh or eighth in the betting, but is priced up at 20/1 against your perceived chance of 8%. The favourite is 5/4, which ties in (more or less) with your 11/8.
Which do you back? If the favourite was well supported and reached a price significantly shorter than your perceived 11/8, would you lay it?
Yes of course I would back the 20/1 shot and lay the favourite. With all due respect this is a really silly question. In fact it’s not a question of opinion, it’s like asking "If you thought a £5 note was worth five £1 coins, but someone would sell the note for four £1 coins, would you buy it?"
Or some such question where you have just offered someone a clear profitable opportunity and want to see will they turn it down.No, it wasn’t a silly question at all.
You would back the 20/1 shot because you believe it should be trading at less –
that is your opinion
.
I would buy the £5 note for four one pound coins because it is worth more than £4 –
that is fact
.
Lee
Whether my assessment of the prices are correct or not is another matter, but the way the question was framed – there is a 100% correct, indisputable and obvious answer.
DavidBrady – there are plenty of statistical ways of assessing whether the number of bets is statistically significant based on the spread of results, strikerate and average price taken along with the profit/loss so far. I can go into it in detail if you are interested but it involves calculating something called a T statistic and checking to see whether your results fall within x standard deviations.
Yes this is what I do too. Although believe me David – it’s not the most thrilling of topics
DavidBrady – there are plenty of statistical ways of assessing whether the number of bets is statistically significant based on the spread of results, strikerate and average price taken along with the profit/loss so far. I can go into it in detail if you are interested but it involves calculating something called a T statistic and checking to see whether your results fall within x standard deviations.
I knew I should have paid more attention in "Mathematical and Statistical Analysis" when I was at University!!
The arguments in this post are all correct! Anyone who has more money at the end of a set period than the beginiing of a set period, must be considered a successful punter. Whether they look for value or certainties or jackpots or scoop6 or there sons name, anyone showing a yearly profit cannot be considered anything other than successful in my eyes. But the key phrase in that whole post is "in my eyes". Success for me might be something completely different to success for other people.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.