- This topic has 64 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 14 years ago by
.
- Posts
And few trainers bother using pacemakers or other such trickery in a race worth chump change.
I take it you don’t take in much British all-weather racing during the winter. Pacemakers have become commonplace in class 7s and sellers.
WHY? It costs enough to keep one slow horse in training-to keep another in training that won’t even win back any money itself is nuts. And in claiming races there’s the chance of the rabbit getting claimed and then you’re SOL. And UK purses are so much lower than US purses at all levels, it makes no sense to me to go through all that trouble for a cheap race.For the flat I liked to look at the shape of race, try and predict who will lead, will it suit hold up horses or those held up for a turn off foot. Will they go a good gallop.
I wish I had your talent. Show me a NH race (not maidens)and I’ll tell you at a glance who trains what how it’s likely to run etc., but the flat I find impossible for the most part.
Looking at yesterday cards, it was like looking at racing for the very first time. So many horses in almost every race Einstien would have problems working the form out.
These are horses who have been around for a couple of years even longer but keeping track of them is near impossible.
So I agree with David probably the best guide is the betting but the minute you think they must be right and lump on to would be good things your ass is grass.
Yesterday I had one big bet on Bated Breath but I decided to have a go yesterday and have a bet in each race. By the time the race came round I had lost half my winnings backing one loser after an another…..By the end of the day I had lost everything I won.
Don’t get me wrong I am not complaining it was a fun day, I am just pointing out how dangerous the flat can be.
These guys who make up the prices don’t often get it right in the sense not too many favourites win and no one forces you to look at them before making your selection.
Maybe it would be an idea to make your selection using all the paper and video form you can find before looking at prices made up by others.
As Corm has pointed out HGM, the guys doing the pricing up are very good at their jobs, they
do
"get it right". When seeing an outsider has won, punters tend to think those pricing it up have
got it wrong
… But that is in fact rarely the case.
Fact is the odds-compiler is
NOT
saying a 100/1 shot
"won’t win"
… All he’s saying is (in his opinion) "It stands (roughly) a 0.3% chance of winning. ie Anything they rate as a fair 0.3% (fair 300/1) chance, they put a bookmakers mark up on it to offer 100/1.. And 100/1 shots win the percentage of races they’re
expected
to win… Roughly 0.3%. Therefore, even when a 100/1 shot wins, the odds compilers can be said to have "got it right".
NB If the odds compiler thinks the 0.3% horse might be able to improve or its form is difficult to weigh up… He/she might add a little more mark up and offer eg 80/1. Or if the horse is exposed / easy to weigh up the 0.3% horse may have less of a mark up and eg offer 150/1. How competitive the market (how many bookies are offering prices) will also affect prices.
It is up to us (in whichever way we want to do it) to identify when the bookmakers have under-estimated a horse and step in.
Considering 70% of favs are beaten I’d say the majority of times the compiler gets it wrong. You can say all you want they got it right but the fact is they never.
Sure you can identify when they get it wrong……everytime you back a winner that wasn’t favourite they got it wrong and you got it right.
The fact is the best guide we all have in the majority of races are the odds and most people back only one horse per race.
You do things a bit different and back horses you think won’t win but the percentages say they can.
It seems to pay it’s way for you and I admire that but it doesn’t stop you spouting mathematical nonsense which has bog all to do with picking actual winners on a one to one basis.
The odds compiler has a very important job but it has very little to do with helping the punter. They will use the form etc to help but their only concern is to make the race as profitable as possible for their employers. It is only since the advent of increased competition and more firms offering early prices that has seen greater instances of the compilers getting things wrong.
When I first started working in the industry the most reliable guide was the Sporting Life forecast. Though when one of the Captain’s was well over-estimated compared to first show then it was time to form an orderly queue. Now there is too much information, most of which is misleading, the art is to learn what information is worth consideration.
Yes GT – I wasn’t suggesting AP said to ignore the form book, just that he said you need to look at things differently to everyone (or almost) everyone else.
HG – you’re confusing ‘picking winners’ with ‘compiling odds’. Odds compilers aren’t tryingto find the winner, they are simply assessing the probabilities.
Glad to read this thread. I thought it was just me. I’ve given up the Flat, cancelled my saturday Post until October. I ran the white flag up. I am sure it is all above board and I’m just no good at it any more. This season has been a diaster for me with a capital D, my worst ever, to the point where I’ve lost interest: you see, I’m one of those odd people who need a decent winner occasionally in order to remain interested and engaged with horses running around in circles.
At this stage of proceedings I can perfectly well see how the bitter resentful mug punter is formed. Form is meaningless, the handicapper appears incompetent and much happens that is only explicable in terms of concealed information. Suddenly sticking a pin in seems as good as anyother method and when you see some serial loser yelling crooks at the screen in Corals you don’t finding yourself strongly disagreeing, just feeling pity for the poor bloody infantry of losers who finance this rather shameless industry.I’ve found two ways to get ahead these days.
Firstly concentrate on a limited group of horses and know more about them than the majority. For all that prices are generally accurate, they only reflect the opinion of ‘the crowd’. THe layers price up all races, backers can pick and choose.
Secondly, endeavour to get on at the best terms possible. Looking at the exchanges, if I can get on at a price within the top 20% of money traded then the selection method need be no more than reasonable to have a very good chance of finishing in front.
Note to the ‘Prof’:
Surely if ‘the handicapper appear incompetent’ then surely you shouldn’t be binning the Racing Post, indeed the exact opposite, should you not be taking advantage of your ‘superior knowledge’ to benefit from his incompetence?
Rob
What is it we are trying to profit from? Hundreds of horses run every day; they’re made of muscle and blood and bone and inbred to be mentally unpredictable. If something is hurting which is not physically obvious they have no way of telling their trainer.
If they could talk, how much would the trainer listen? He/she, apart from suffering from humanity’s ‘normal’ foibles, is probably also under significant financial and emotional pressure trying to make a business out of a passion. That business relies to a great extent on how well a jockey performs.
The jockey’s probably struggling too from food deprivation, dehydration, injuries new or old, money worries, travel exhaustion . . .
Should I move on to the owner and how his/her ambitions/demands/circumstances affect what the trainer and jockey do? How about the groom whose influence on the horse must be substantial?
The there’s the clerk of whichever of the multitude of different courses that horse is due to run at? Does he/she declare the going accurately or is it declared to best serve the commercial interests of the course?
Once the race starts, who misses the break or stumbles or takes a bad bump or gets boxed in . . ?
If you bet horses at all you are an optimist at best, crazy at worst. If you bet every day you are crazy at best and certifiably so at worst.
Good luck
Some good posts on here and I agree with a lot of points raised.In my opinion the Formbook is Gospel but only when it comes to Top class racing,I always form my opinion from what I see with my own eyes,then confirm it through form and times etc.
Power
yesterday confirmed his Dewhurst form was the Real MCcoy and his Guineas run was all wrong but I’ve said it before Aiden O’Brien doesn’t give a monkeys about form and figures so I take his comments with a pinch of salt as you have to with virtually every trainer,they dont get up at 5am day after day to let ‘the cat out the bag’ they do it for themselves and their owners.Lower grade racing is still the most corrupt but the whole system is exploitable to do just that,so they do,we just have to accept it as part and parcel. What I will say though is this,in the past 30 yrs of studying horseracing,I would always be ready for the ‘Changeover period’ from National hunt to flat and vice-versa but in the last couple of years I find I miss the jumps and almost dread the flat,So somethings changed,I cant really put my finger on what it is but its definately harder to find winners on the flat than it is the Jumps imo anyway.
Punters have to enterprate the form book correctly. Fact is most punters are incapable of doing so and therefore blame the form book instead of their own inadequacies.
Who do you back given this scenario?:
If two horses run to form with horse
A
beating horse
B
by a length (both "all out") and they meet two weeks later under identical conditions. That’s same weights carried, distance, going, track, jockeys, trainers, jockeys and trainers are in the same form as they were for the first meeting, both horses of good temperament and consistent, number of runners, equally suited by the likely pace, both "exposed", unlikely to improve. (Hope I haven’t missed anything out).
Question:
Who do you back / are more likely to back?The answer of course should be "depends on the prices".
The "Form" says
A
has the best chance of winning, so most "form students" will back
A
. But bookmakers try to allow for that fact and exchange layers know that too. So
A
will be a shorter price than
B
. Therefore
B
may be be the "value" selection, because it might be offered at a bigger price than it should be.
In this scenario those who
always
back
A
will win more often than not. But because the odds will reflect that, they will not make an over all profit.
Struggling punters may not want to hear this, but even if he/she knows the form book backwards… Unless a punter applies "probabilities" to his form study/betting he/she will not make a profit. It is because punters do not apply "probabilities" that they think form doesn’t work out.
(Of course a successful punter also needs to be good at working out probabilities).
If a punter does not apply probabilities he/she is likely to think the form book does not work out.
Value Is EverythingThe probability is that punters that back solely A or solely B will lose in the long run as the rest of the alphabet will win too often to make such tactics profitable.
Punters have to enterprate the form book correctly. Fact is most punters are incapable of doing so and therefore blame the form book instead of their own inadequacies.
Who do you back given this scenario?:If two horses run to form with horse
A
beating horse
B
by a length (both "all out") and they meet two weeks later under identical conditions. That’s same weights carried, distance, going, track, jockeys, trainers, jockeys and trainers are in the same form as they were for the first meeting, both horses of good temperament and consistent, number of runners, equally suited by the likely pace, both "exposed", unlikely to improve. (Hope I haven’t missed anything out).
Question:
Who do you back / are more likely to back?The answer of course should be "depends on the prices".
The "Form" saysA
has the best chance of winning, so most "form students" will back
A
. But bookmakers try to allow for that fact and exchange layers know that too. So
A
will be a shorter price than
B
. Therefore
B
may be be the "value" selection, because it might be offered at a bigger price than it should be.
In this scenario those whoalways
back
A
will win more often than not. But because the odds will reflect that, they will not make an over all profit.
Struggling punters may not want to hear this, but even if he/she knows the form book backwards… Unless a punter applies "probabilities" to his form study/betting he/she will not make a profit. It is because punters do not apply "probabilities" that they think form doesn’t work out.(Of course a successful punter also needs to be good at working out probabilities).
If a punter does not apply probabilities he/she is likely to think the form book does not work out.Of course it’s "interpret", didn’t think it looked right.
Must have been low in blood/sugar levels at the time of writing. Most punters "should be able" Gord, but without "probabilities" all they do is back the one with the best chance of winning, which is often
not
the "value".
Value Is Everything"The Ante-Post King":1wa7xamg wrote:
Who do you back given this scenario?:If two horses
run to form
with horse
A
beating horse
B
by a length (both "all out") and they meet two weeks later under identical conditions. That’s same weights carried, distance, going, track, jockeys, trainers, jockeys and trainers are in the same form as they were for the first meeting, both horses of good temperament and consistent, number of runners, equally suited by the likely pace, both
"exposed", unlikely to improve
. (Hope I haven’t missed anything out). EDIT: I did, they’re full brothers.
Question:
Who do you back / are more likely to back?OK clever dick.
Read what I said. "If two horsesrun to form
" and…. "both
exposed
,
unlikely to improve
". It is/was clear to most people Dancing Brave did NOT "run to form" because anyone could see he was better than the distance beaten suggests; and NOT "exposed" either. Any fool could see Dancing Brave was "likely to improve". So Dancing Brave and Sharahstani does
NOT
apply to my scenario.
Does It!!??Nice try Gord, think again.
Value Is EverythingI find the form book extremely useful over jumps and the fact I stay in profit through winter would suggest I can interpret it.
Perhaps it comes down to something fairly simple, such as stamina and weights are are easier to get a handle on over extended trips. I don’t know. All I know is that I too now dread the coming of the Flat: the good winners that take a bit of finding seem to vanish.
I see what ginge is saying, but I’m not a favourite backer and never have been.I’ve found two ways to get ahead these days.
Firstly concentrate on a limited group of horses and know more about them than the majority. For all that prices are generally accurate, they only reflect the opinion of ‘the crowd’. THe layers price up all races, backers can pick and choose.
Secondly, endeavour to get on at the best terms possible. Looking at the exchanges, if I can get on at a price within the top 20% of money traded then the selection method need be no more than reasonable to have a very good chance of finishing in front.
Note to the ‘Prof’:
Surely if ‘the handicapper appear incompetent’ then surely you shouldn’t be binning the Racing Post, indeed the exact opposite, should you not be taking advantage of your ‘superior knowledge’ to benefit from his incompetence?
Rob
I don’t have superior knowledge. Form study is an art not a science, but you have to believe the handicapper can do his job and you have to accept what you are seeing in print: this horse has gone up x amount over x number of rather rubbishy races. He is up against class today and not quite on his ground and I would be most surprised if … That is how I do it. I can’t see how you can not do it like that. Once this is confounded a few times, and not by stars either, your condfidence in what you are reading starts to evaporate. If your confidence goes, your success follows.
WHY? It costs enough to keep one slow horse in training-to keep another in training that won’t even win back any money itself is nuts. And in claiming races there’s the chance of the rabbit getting claimed and then you’re SOL. And UK purses are so much lower than US purses at all levels, it makes no sense to me to go through all that trouble for a cheap race.
Must have been low in blood/sugar levels at the time of writing. - You must be logged in to reply to this topic.