- This topic has 92 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
For my money betting against Frankel at anything between 5 and 10f is betting Frankel will pull up lame / injured. That is less than a 18% chance, so I disagree with the Ginger numbers man.
And I bet for all your maths saying you believe Frankel is under-priced, you are not backing against, or laying, Frankel. If I’m wrong fair enough.
I have already backed two horses against Frankel on betfair PC. But as both were taken from the blue side of the board (ie I waited for the prices to be taken) and there’s currently poor liquidity. I can hardly say "back …. @ …. when there is just 2 or £3 available at that price. Once liquidity is good I’ll let you know who they are.
No, I am not backing Frankel to "pull up lame" PC. I love Frankel, will be cheering him on and hoping he’s victorious. But he’s going up in trip and with two pacemakers for a stable companion who’s coming down in distance (ie St Nich needs a test at the distance). Therefore it’s sure to be a stamina test at 10 furlongs 88 yards. Frankel shows top class sprinting fractions when racing at a mile. If he’d gone for the Nunthorpe I’d rate him long odds-on too! Any horse with that much speed is not entirely certain of getting 10 furlongs.
People compare breeding, full brother Noble Mission, Galileo etc. But it is temperament that can sometimes effect stamina limitations. Frankel has been free at a mile before now (admittedly this tendency is getting less and less). But settling well enough to be impressive at a mile is one thing. Settling well enough to be impressive over another 2 and a bit furlongs – is quite another.
82% is still a massive chance of winning. For the record, I think Frankel will probably stay the trip well enough to win. However, things are not just black or white. One has to allow for the possibility of not staying and coming to the end of his tether to such an extent as to lose the race (and other reasons). So in my opinion he has an 18% chance of not winning.Fair enough Ginger, thanks for the reply.
A minor point but perhaps one worthy of consideration is that this will be his first race over a generally arcing left-hand trip and around a sharp left-hand bend.
Will Frankel be comfortable on a left lead?
Will the extra energy expended overcoming the centrifugal forces on the turn exacerbate stamina concerns at the trip?
Memories of his ‘all out’ win last year in the 8f St James Palace around a sharp right-hand bend linger, though the Ascot round course is more testing than York’s of course, but the International is over 2.5f further
Perhaps a 19% chance of not winning rather than 18% eh Ginger?
A minor point but perhaps one worthy of consideration is that this will be his first race over a generally arcing left-hand trip and around a sharp left-hand bend.
Will Frankel be comfortable on a left lead?
Will the extra energy expended overcoming the centrifugal forces on the turn exacerbate stamina concerns at the trip?
Memories of his ‘all out’ win last year in the 8f St James Palace around a sharp right-hand bend linger, though the Ascot round course is more testing than York’s of course, but the International is over 2.5f further
Perhaps a 19% chance of not winning rather than 18% eh Ginger?
Indeed, those who usually back horses at very long odds on successfully tend to do so when everything is in their favour.
Tomorrow is not one of those occasions.
Same way as I always do J17. Study the form, including ratings, going, distance, temperament, likely pace (and who it’s going to suit), from that work out what percentage chance I believe each horse has got of winning (so all add up to 100%), convert percentage to odds.
And how is a percent measured? Is there any theoretical numeracy behind it? Do different attibutes have assigned values? Or is the build up of percent for any given horse and indeed the race itself more of an instinctual approach based on opinions/experience.
I don’t doubt you’re profficient in this field (Certainly far more than me), but i always find it bizarre when abritary figures are awarded to something. I mean, and 82% chance, or a 79% chance ; unless this works within a system, are figures that have very little difference and come accross as somewhat pointless measurements.
I mean, all the measurements you quantified, whilst being valid approaches for assesing a race, are not tangible, thus, turning them into accurate percentiles for a horses chance doesn’t seem particularly worthwhile.
A minor point but perhaps one worthy of consideration is that this will be his first race over a generally arcing left-hand trip and around a sharp left-hand bend.
Will Frankel be comfortable on a left lead?
Will the extra energy expended overcoming the centrifugal forces on the turn exacerbate stamina concerns at the trip?
Memories of his ‘all out’ win last year in the 8f St James Palace around a sharp right-hand bend linger, though the Ascot round course is more testing than York’s of course, but the International is over 2.5f further
Perhaps a 19% chance of not winning rather than 18% eh Ginger?
Indeed, those who usually back horses at very long odds on successfully tend to do so when everything is in their favour.
Tomorrow is not one of those occasions.
Anyone backing any horse at odds of 1-7 or more would have to have more money than sense obviously.
Saying that, I think Frankel has one very important thing in his favour tomorrow – he is on a different planet to any other racehorse in the world. He is a cert guys. I will be looking at the wining distance margin again as I think he will put on quite a show.
I would expect SNA to follow him home but one word of warning for any SNA fans. His two runs over 10f have been dismal – last time he couldn’t get past his pacemaker. There is no way in the world he will get near The Beast.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Not really Joni, Frankel over a straight mile on good ground at 1/7 would look a fantastic bet.
As long as his stamina holds out he will win but given the amount of unknown quantities then I expect the layers to take a view.
I suppose what I mean EF is that I would never bet on ANY horse at those sort of odds whatever the circumstances because they are not machines and anything can happen and I am not rich enough! For me there is much more value to be had in working out how far he will win by and I think it will be a long way.
To be honest, other than the trip, I don’t see there being many unknown quantities, and I don’t think they would try the horse over this trip if they were not supremely confident of him staying it. He goes on any ground and has the most perfect action. He handles the undulations of Goodwood and the dip at Newmarket so a little bend at the top of a long home straight is very unlikely to worry him. If they go quick it will help him settle and they can’t go quick enough for long enough to stretch him anyway. They won’t go slow as BT is there. Based on all that I make my percentage 93.63473629333% give or take a fraction.
Remember they have cherry picked this race as the one in which to step him up as it is more forgiving than Ascot or Sandown. It has been the plan for a long time and I think you will see him IMPROVE for the step up as his killer stride will be even more evident against these slower horses. There is not a horse in this field that can take him out of his comfort zone.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Same way as I always do J17. Study the form, including ratings, going, distance, temperament, likely pace (and who it’s going to suit), from that work out what percentage chance I believe each horse has got of winning (so all add up to 100%), convert percentage to odds.
And how is a percent measured? Is there any theoretical numeracy behind it? Do different attibutes have assigned values? Or is the build up of percent for any given horse and indeed the race itself more of an instinctual approach based on opinions/experience.
I don’t doubt you’re profficient in this field (Certainly far more than me), but i always find it bizarre when abritary figures are awarded to something. I mean, and 82% chance, or a 79% chance ; unless this works within a system, are figures that have very little difference and come accross as somewhat pointless measurements.
I mean, all the measurements you quantified, whilst being valid approaches for assesing a race, are not tangible, thus, turning them into accurate percentiles for a horses chance doesn’t seem particularly worthwhile.
How do you think bookmakers work out a book J17? If it is possible/"tangible" for them and/or Peter Martins to work out a book, then it is possible/"tangible" for us. With a race where I know the form/horses so well as this race it didn’t take long.
The difference between 79% and 82% is quite big. If a bookmaker’s odds compiler believed a horse was a 79% chance he’d add a mark up of around 3% and offer 82% ie 2/9. There’s NO WAY he’d think to himself "I rate it 79% but it’s pointless adding the mark up as there’s very little difference between 79 and 82%, so I’ll keep it at 79% (between 2/7 and 1/4) 1/3.76".I have to rate Frankel 82% because of all the other runners percentages adding up to 18%. If I called it 79% the others would add up to 21%, in my book they don’t. If a punter does not bother about 3% difference for one horse he won’t bother about another horse, and another. So he could be working to 120% by the time he figures the race out. The sum of percentages must not exceed 100% for a punters book.
One aspect of form, be it going or temperament etc can not have a marks out of 10 approach, ie they can not have "assigned values". As one horse’s over all percentage may be made up of one aspect more than another. It is the positives and negatives that add up. One strong negative might over-ride other aspects of form. For example Sri Putra might have form of similar quality to Planteur. However, although he’s often placed, Sri Putra can appear to shirk the issue and not go through with his effort. Therefore temperament is a major factor in his over all percentage chance. Where as one with just an ordinary character may have little/no temperament aspect in his/her over all percentage make up. Same with going; if it is soft ground and a horse has disappointed twice on the surface before, then going will be a major part of its percentage make up. Where as it will be a lesser part of another horse.
Frankel is of a much higher quality than the rest, but needs to be marked down because of the distance, so must St Nicholas Abbey. However their over all make up still has them first and second best chances.A better way of looking at it is: After studying
all
aspects of form of
every
individual… How much bigger chance does A have than B? If you believe A has 4 times the chance of B then obviously A will have 4 times the percentage chance of B and so on. A punter can (to a certain extent) check he has it right by adding two (or more figures) up.
eg
If B has 15%, C has 10% and D 5%
Does B really have as much chance as C and D put together? If not B is reduced or increase C and/or D.
Does C have twice the chance of D? if not C is reduced or D is upped.
If C is thought to have more than double D then either add to C or drop D… and so on.Might sound difficult J17, but after a while it comes easily and you don’t have to think about it.
Value Is EverythingGinge – I used to sit behind a boy like you in class. Would stab him with a compass.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Ginge – I used to sit behind a boy like you in class. Would stab him with a compass.
Just answering some questions/points put to me, as you are Joni.
Value Is EverythingLove you Ginge!!!
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Just found a book that might interest you Ginge;
The Theory of Infinite Series by T.J.Bromwich. First Edition 1908.
Memories of his ‘all out’ win last year in the 8f St James Palace around a sharp right-hand bend linger, though the Ascot round course is more testing than York’s of course, but the International is over 2.5f further
Yes, but one needs to remember the St James’s Palace is something of an anomaly in that Queally panicked when he thought the pacemaker was slipping the field, and asked Frankel for an effort after only two furlongs and then maintained the high tempo to the line.
He had settled perfectly up until then in about 5th on the rail, and there is little doubt that had Queally displayed more restraint that day Frankel would have won doing handsprings in his customary manner.
In some ways that race probably told us more about Frankel than any of his others – i.e. that he is flexible when it comes to tactics and is as capable of setting and maintaing a race winning tempo as he is of being switched off mid-division to make a later challenge.
How do you think bookmakers work out a book J17? If it is possible/"tangible" for them and/or Peter Martins to work out a book, then it is possible/"tangible" for us. With a race where I know the form/horses so well as this race it didn’t take long.
The difference between 79% and 82% is quite big. If a bookmaker’s odds compiler believed a horse was a 79% chance he’d add a mark up of around 3% and offer 82% ie 2/9. There’s NO WAY he’d think to himself "I rate it 79% but it’s pointless adding the mark up as there’s very little difference between 79 and 82%, so I’ll keep it at 79% (between 2/7 and 1/4) 1/3.76".I have to rate Frankel 82% because of all the other runners percentages adding up to 18%. If I called it 79% the others would add up to 21%, in my book they don’t. If a punter does not bother about 3% difference for one horse he won’t bother about another horse, and another. So he could be working to 120% by the time he figures the race out. The sum of percentages must not exceed 100% for a punters book.
One aspect of form, be it going or temperament etc can not have a marks out of 10 approach, ie they can not have "assigned values". As one horse’s over all percentage may be made up of one aspect more than another. It is the positives and negatives that add up. One strong negative might over-ride other aspects of form. For example Sri Putra might have form of similar quality to Planteur. However, although he’s often placed, Sri Putra can appear to shirk the issue and not go through with his effort. Therefore temperament is a major factor in his over all percentage chance. Where as one with just an ordinary character may have little/no temperament aspect in his/her over all percentage make up. Same with going; if it is soft ground and a horse has disappointed twice on the surface before, then going will be a major part of its percentage make up. Where as it will be a lesser part of another horse.
Frankel is of a much higher quality than the rest, but needs to be marked down because of the distance, so must St Nicholas Abbey. However their over all make up still has them first and second best chances.A better way of looking at it is: After studying
all
aspects of form of
every
individual… How much bigger chance does A have than B? If you believe A has 4 times the chance of B then obviously A will have 4 times the percentage chance of B and so on. A punter can (to a certain extent) check he has it right by adding two (or more figures) up.
eg
If B has 15%, C has 10% and D 5%
Does B really have as much chance as C and D put together? If not B is reduced or increase C and/or D.
Does C have twice the chance of D? if not C is reduced or D is upped.
If C is thought to have more than double D then either add to C or drop D… and so on.Might sound difficult J17, but after a while it comes easily and you don’t have to think about it.
Apologies if I have asked this before, but do you have a formula you use to arrive at your percentage for each horse? I remember quite some time ago a friend gave me a formula for creating tissues. As I recall it required a reliable rating such as timeform or raceform (adjusted according to the race conditions), and then arrived at percentages which could be compared with the odds in the "village" and value could be identified accordingly. I only used it a few times but it once got me a forecast up in a 5 runner race!!!
I am guessing your arrival at value follows a similar mathematic sequence and this is why you will often back more than one horse in a race if those horses are offered at prices that the formula indicate as "value".
It would be useful to have an alternative formula (assuming you use one and don’t mind sharing it on here) to test against the one I was given especially given your success rate on your tipping thread.
If memory serves Dave Nevison "promised" to reveal in his second book the method of creating tissues which Eddie Fremantle had taught him – but he didn’t, he just waffled a bit. Similar to Chris Dxon on RUK a couple of months ago, leaving the viewer with no greater depth of knowledge on the subject than when he began (excusing complete novices whom I doubt would subscribe to RUK in the first place!).
I don’t believe there is any "formula" that works Ivanjica. Purely because the percentage chance of winning is made of the positives and negatives of every horse. One horse will have different positives and negatives. As I said to J17, temperament (or any other aspect) might be the reason for
most of one horse’s percentage
, yet
not having much at all to do with another horse
.
There is no "mathematical sequence", it is just a feel of how much chance a horse has of winning after studying the form. "Form" as in everything and anything that could change a horse’s chance.
My 100% book of the Voltigeur is:
Main Sequence 32.5% 85/40, Thomas Chippendale 20.25% 4/1, Encke 16.5% 5/1, Noble Mission 14.5% 6/1, Energiser 9% 10/1, Thought Worthy 7.25% 13/1.
It’s just that I believe Thought Worthy over all chance is half the of Noble Mission (or to put it another way I’d want two Thought Worthy’s to one Noble Mission).
Encke and Noble Mission’s combined chance would (imo) be slightly less than Main Sequence on his own. Where as Noble Mission plus Thomas Chippendale slightly more than Main Sequence.
Energiser plus Thought Worthy slightly less than Encke on his own. etc etc.I write down what I think each individual’s chance is, then see if they all add up to 100%. If not I change the figures until they do.
Although a lot of the time I don’t need to form a book, the value shouts at me. Something that probably only happens because of years of experience doing 100% books.
Thomas Chippendale and Encke are backed because I believe they are value, it’s purely an opinion of their chance; not because of any mathematical sequence/formula. I may even save on Main Sequence. Any formula would take far too long to use anyway, even if (and I believe not) it was possible. There’s too much to take in to account, much easier and quicker to do it by a feel/experience.
Dave Nevison did reveal how he comes to working out his tissues, by working out the percentage chance of each horse.
Sorry if it wasn’t the answer you’re looking for Ivanjica.
Value Is EverythingHow do you think bookmakers work out a book J17? If it is possible/"tangible" for them and/or Peter Martins to work out a book, then it is possible/"tangible" for us. With a race where I know the form/horses so well as this race it didn’t take long.
The difference between 79% and 82% is quite big. If a bookmaker’s odds compiler believed a horse was a 79% chance he’d add a mark up of around 3% and offer 82% ie 2/9. There’s NO WAY he’d think to himself "I rate it 79% but it’s pointless adding the mark up as there’s very little difference between 79 and 82%, so I’ll keep it at 79% (between 2/7 and 1/4) 1/3.76".I have to rate Frankel 82% because of all the other runners percentages adding up to 18%. If I called it 79% the others would add up to 21%, in my book they don’t. If a punter does not bother about 3% difference for one horse he won’t bother about another horse, and another. So he could be working to 120% by the time he figures the race out. The sum of percentages must not exceed 100% for a punters book.
One aspect of form, be it going or temperament etc can not have a marks out of 10 approach, ie they can not have "assigned values". As one horse’s over all percentage may be made up of one aspect more than another. It is the positives and negatives that add up. One strong negative might over-ride other aspects of form. For example Sri Putra might have form of similar quality to Planteur. However, although he’s often placed, Sri Putra can appear to shirk the issue and not go through with his effort. Therefore temperament is a major factor in his over all percentage chance. Where as one with just an ordinary character may have little/no temperament aspect in his/her over all percentage make up. Same with going; if it is soft ground and a horse has disappointed twice on the surface before, then going will be a major part of its percentage make up. Where as it will be a lesser part of another horse.
Frankel is of a much higher quality than the rest, but needs to be marked down because of the distance, so must St Nicholas Abbey. However their over all make up still has them first and second best chances.A better way of looking at it is: After studying
all
aspects of form of
every
individual… How much bigger chance does A have than B? If you believe A has 4 times the chance of B then obviously A will have 4 times the percentage chance of B and so on. A punter can (to a certain extent) check he has it right by adding two (or more figures) up.
eg
If B has 15%, C has 10% and D 5%
Does B really have as much chance as C and D put together? If not B is reduced or increase C and/or D.
Does C have twice the chance of D? if not C is reduced or D is upped.
If C is thought to have more than double D then either add to C or drop D… and so on.Might sound difficult J17, but after a while it comes easily and you don’t have to think about it.
My tone may not come across well, but i am interested in the theory behind your assessment. I also find you one of the more knowledgeable and personable characters on this forum. Now that i have given you a viral job …
Initial pricing of course, however your market isn’t influenced by anything other than what you think.
The example of temperament is a definitive example of intangible. We cannot measure such, and can only guess what its influence may have on the result, or the percentiles of any given outcome. I imagine i would agree with nearly everything you have to say regarding each horse and their chance in this race. Yet, to then determine that a horse has an exact percentile more chance of succeeding than another horse is something i myself A) Cannot truely understand how it can be particularly accurate B) Question the true merit of such a system for ourselves (I.e it’s truely usefulness given after a certain point, the numbers become a little arbritary). I think i would need to see an exact formula of how the percentiles are truely broken down for any given race.
It’s an interesting method, and it probably does work for you (You often give excellent analysis of form/races), but i guess myself i find such a system redudant, or rather, it would become like a giant bureaucratic system stuck in my head.
Much of the above text probably looks like somewhat disjointed ramblings, but i’m an idiot in daily existence, so altering one’s ways on the internet seems pointless.
Don’t give up J17, try it for yourself.
However, it’s probably impossible to do without a good form book, Timeform or Raceform Interactive. Racing Post alone is (imo) probably not enough. Which could be why people see it as impossible.
It took me time to get it right, made a loss the first couple of years. It’s not something that needs great intelligence, I’ve only one O level (Maths). Think you’ve got to have a methodical mind.I was once told I should put in for a job writing a few Stopwatch columns, but of course a newbie would be doing the poorer races. Class 6 doesn’t really interest me. I usually keep to the better classes for punting. When I tried working out a few dry runs my percentages were way out, so didn’t proceed. Unless a punter is interested in doing books there’s little chance of succeeding in making a profit.
Even if you don’t work out 100% books J17, it helps enormously just to know/see prices as percentages and vice versa. ie When
contemplating
backing a 7/1 shot, knowing it should only be backed if you believe it to have a better than 12.5% chance – should help in
decision
making.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.