- This topic has 139 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
A bit late busy at work<br>5.05 Southwell<br>Wolfman 57<br>Blakeshall quest 53<br>Shava 49<br>Ask no more 47<br>Astorygoeswithit 46<br>Jabbara 44<br>Piccleyes 39<br>Vlasta weiner 37<br>Blythe spirit 33<br>Inca warrior 29
Wolfman may need the run<br>
Its less than half an hour to race time and we have got 5 sets of ratings for the same race. There are a few ways to combine these selections to make a group selection .. <br>Method 1<br>Look at the top 3 from each rating and select the horse which is picked the most .. <br>Jabbara
Method 2<br>Use a ranking method, give 1 point to the highest rated and 10 to the lowest. Write the scores from 1 to 3 from each rating against each runner
Wolfman 3, 1<br>Blakeshall quest 2<br>Shava 2, 3, 4<br>Ask no more 1, 4, 4<br>Astorygoeswithit 1, 1<br>Jabbara 2, 1, 3, 2<br>Piccleyes 1, 4<br>Vlasta weiner 2, 3, 4<br>Blythe spirit <br>Inca warrior
.. and then make of that what you will !<br>The way I am reading it is this,<br>2 out of 5 think Astorygoeswithit will win and 3 out of 5 think it will not even place.<br>4 out of 5 think Jabbara will place and only 1 out of 5 think it will win.
Method 3<br>Use the Colin Davey form ratings with the above numbers and make a book.
Anyone ?
Hi everyone
"what a shower of sheight".
Early days though.  What about scoring our methods as follows………
Top rated winner = 20 points<br>2nd top        = 12 points<br>3rd top        =  6 points<br>4th top        =  3 points
I think I am right in say we are currently all dead level on nil.
byefrom<br>carlisle
(Edited by carlisle at 5:30 pm on Feb. 28, 2007)
I am absolutely stunned .. even though none of us had the winner top rated Formath makes a profit, unbelievably good.<br>:biggrin: :cool:
… I am thinking something along the same lines Carlisle, maybe we just use the Formath method of pricing up the rating and staking in accordance with that?
Hi dave
I wouldn’t fancy laying out 81pts on that race profit or no profit. No offence.
byefrom<br>carlisle
Carlisle,<br>I note that you don’t support my way of betting coupled odds but I assure you it can be very successful. The principle is taken from that espoused by Morton Coles, a successful pro-backer in his day, and endorsed by Ken Hussey who was the outstanding Split Second IMO. The following is an article published in the defunct SCHB that gives an explanation. It mentions a table to identify seletions which I don’t have on file but I do possess a hand-written copy which I could type up and email to anyone interested. I should add that this relates to SF but it is just as valid for form ratings:
SPEED FIGURES AND SENSIBLE BETTING
The principles of using Speed Figures by Morton Coles<br> and advised for consideration by Ken Hussey, Split Second.
THE ONLY THING THAT REALLY MATTERS IS THE ODDS
The whole essence of the matter is value for money and by backing horses at higher odds than they are entitled to be on the SF.
1.Ignore all races where the majority of runners are having their first outing, unless there are outstanding Speed Figures for one or more of the remaining horses. In practical terms this means do not bet until after the Guineas meeting on the flat and until after October over the jumps.<br>2.Avoid all races where the Speed Figures of several runners are within a few points of each other. This is to reduce as far as possible the elements of chance, bad luck in running and so forth, and allows the backer to concentrate on those races where the relative merit of the horses predominates over chance or luck.<br>3.Concentrate on races where the probable starting prices, as indicated in the Racing Post, show there is likely to be a false favourite, false that is, in terms of the SF.<br>4.Having completed your table of SF in a race pay attention to: – <br>a.Distance of the race and distances at which the participants SF were obtained.<br>b.Where the most recent SF is the highest, or at least a high one.<br>c.Always give preference to a horse whose SF was returned over the distance, or even better at a furlong or so further, even if it’s SF is not top-rated, and especially the most recent one.<br>d.Study race comments and remember that the SF of a winning horse could possibly have been increased if ridden out.<br>e.Place extra emphasis on a high SF obtained very recently, say within 7 days.<br>f.Read very carefully the comments on the most recent race – hampered, started slowly, ran wide, finished well etc.<br>g.From last season’s form book check every runner’s top SF and the distance at which it was obtained that year.<br>5.Be guided only by SF when seeking selections.<br>6.Take notice of the draw in races of up to a mile on those courses renowned for favouring one side of the track or the other – Chester, Warwick, Epsom are good examples.<br>7.Look for sudden changes in the going, which might not suit some of the runners.<br>8.Betting – wait for the betting show and take prices if they are at or above your estimated value odds. Bet to the Field Money Table backing up to 3 horses in a race, but never more.<br>
Regarding my latest post I wish to assure everyone I am not on an ego trip or trying to hog the boards here, but just trying to help the less experienced punter in a spirit of fellowship.
Re the post if you had used the Pattern Form site as a quick SF check against the race conditions:
Highlight: Going – std, Race Type – hc, Course -sth, Class -cl6, Prize -2k and then ‘re-run’ the result under the column heading ‘Speed’ was:-
Blythe Spirit<br>Piccleyes<br>Blakeshall Quest
Formath,
Some wisdom in that dated article.
The title says it all:
The only thing that really matters is the odds. I think we forget that at our peril.
Another crucial point which has always been central to my own approach is emphasised in the article. It is the value of a good recent speed figure as evidence of the strength of the form. I would go back as far as 60 days with this figure because modern thinking is that horses do not usually run two very fast races in succession, except perhaps sprinters.
You are putting a lot of work in, and I’m enjoying following these threads.<br>
I’m glad we didn’t get it right first time as it’s never that easy and we would have settled with that,anyway going by what Formath stated in the last post is correct when you look at where the winner was drawn from 3 in the paper it stated low drawn numbers are best at the distance so we could have got rid of at least those drawn high say 6-10 which would have made it easier.<br>the next one we do can we have it earlier as only saw it at work so could not go through it more thoroughly say about 8pm if poss
have fun
Hi Formath
thanks for the extra information.  The two authors that you mentioned are new to me, so I will look them up.
The race that was chosen was one in which the shorter priced runners were only so-so and therefore vulnerable.
I completely agree with your emphasis on value.
It was a no bet race for me, but I can see why the winner was backable.
byefrom<br>carlisle<br>
(Edited by carlisle at 7:56 pm on Feb. 28, 2007)
Formath – Ken Hussey is the person soley responsilble for my interest in speed figures and ratings. I remember fondly walking to the paper shop every Thursday Morning ( in those days) and the first page I turn to was Split Second.
We ignore such wisdom at are peril.
Van Der Wheil method
name,form,ts,rpr,fcp,class,=score
Astorygoeswithit  10    6   9   10  0  =35<br>Shava         9    8   0   10  6  =33<br>Piccleyes       0    6   8   10  8  =32<br>Jabbara        0    10  10  10  0   =30<br>Blythe Spirit     7    0   0   10  10  =27<br>Ask No More     0    10  8   0   9   =27<br>Blakeshall Quest  7    0   0   10  7   =24<br>Vlasta Weiner    6    8   8   0   0   =22<br>Wolfman       0    0   0   0   0   =0<br>Inca Soldier     0    0   0   0   0   =0
This makes me think that ratings should be interpreted differently in low class races. ie expect an upset.
byefrom<br>carlisle
(Edited by carlisle at 8:17 pm on Feb. 28, 2007)
Hi everybody
I was out of the office today so couldn’t look at anything.
Let me know what race we’re having a look at for tomorrow. I would prefer the cl3 Hcp at Ludlow but if you guys want to stick to the AW, then that’s fine by me.
I think we should stick to the low grade AW david .. and I’ll try and get a decent race later on in the day and give everyone a chance to participate.
If you can get a profit on the AW you would be laughing .. !
<br>4.00 Lingfield<br>1(1) 92212-8 Kabeer Course and Dist winner A J Mccabe 9 9 2 S Donohoe (3)<br>2(2) 022-737 Arctic Desert Course and Dist winner Miss Gay Kelleway 7 9 1 J Quinn<br>3(3) 565-781 Samuel Charles Course and Dist winner C R Dore 9 9 1 T P Queally<br>4(8) 689-385 Ivory Lace Course winner S Woodman 6 9 0 J Doyle (3)<br>5(6) 90165-9 Littleton Telchar (USA) Distance winner S Hall 7 8 13 Liam Jones (3)<br>6(9) 04-3421 Dapple Dawn (IRE) Distance winner D Carroll 4 8 13 D Tudhope<br>7(4) 0/922-21 Lopinot (IRE) P J Makin 4 8 11 S Sanders<br>8(7) 72410/9 Certifiable Course and Dist winner Miss Z C Davison 6 8 6 R Brisland (5)<br>9(5) 00-6075 Wheelavit (IRE) B G Powell 4 8 4 Hayley Turner<br>This should be easier than yesterday, but still tough.
Here’s mine
CERTIFIABLE .. 185<br>WHEELAVIT .. 182<br>IVORY LACE .. 177<br>ARCTIC DESERT .. 177<br>KABEER .. 173<br>DAPPLE DAWN .. 167<br>LOPINOT .. 162<br>LITTLETON TELCHAR .. 159<br>SAMUEL CHARLES .. 162
Good Luck !!
have fun .. I’ll try and get the race up the day before, but I’ve a bit on at the minute at home.
I like all of this old stuff that Formath is posting, its not new to me .. well most of it isn’t. I’ve been punting seriously, on and off, since 1986 .. but its only in the last 4 years or so that I’ve actually started doing okay. I havent spent a penny on racing for the last 4 years and I’ve taken quite a bit out of it, not enough to kick my job in (which I wouldnt anyway) but enough to keep me interested.
What has changed things around for me is betting exchanges .. the 100% book.
A friend of mine, who has done his own speed ratings for the last 10 years or so, once said that … ‘all you have to do, is back the ratings and take 50% of the book. In effect use the ratings to have a bet at even money and let the maths take care of the rest.’ The modern description of this is ‘Dutching’ .. there are plenty of free calculators on the internet for anyone who wants one.
There is loads of wisdom in this, because if you dont have an edge you wont lose much and if you do have an edge you will win plenty. Additionally, you can get more money on.
I had my first account with the bookies closed about 15 years ago .. and its happened a couple of times since then. To be honest, it put me off punting for years but the likes of Betfair have changed that.
Anyway, I’m rambling a bit .. carlisle, Formath didnt stake 81pts, only 43 for a return of 64 .. that’s a 6/4 shot (1.48/1). No offense taken btw, we wont learn anything at all if we all go around agreeing with one another. Its good to disagree !
Artemis .. any chance of you joining the party?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.