- This topic has 57 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I have said before that no one on our side of the fence is making a penny out of racing, we are all left with a questioning expression etched on our faces ‘where the heck did that come from’?
But I do make a lot more than a "penny out of racing", proven it time and time again on my DLAP threads on this forum. Without any inside information what so ever. Just hard work, studying and evaluating form in to chance. Every horse in every race has some sort of chance of winning.
Of course there is some foul play, there is in any sport or wherever money is involved. And we need to stamp it out as much as possible. But it is not enough to make the difference between profit and deficit.
Value Is EverythingTo make a profit with 16/1 shots from level stakes betting… all a punter needs to do is win more than 5.88235% of his/her bets at that price. Let’s call it 5.9 (but remember it is really 5.88235%).
A pretty lazy bit of rounding if I may say so Gingerintegers
I’m sure you know that the reciprocal of all prime numbers (p) – in this case 17 – have a recurring decimal period of (p-1), so while for those peasants who merely stake up to 10^6 UKP per stake your approximation will suffice, for we ‘serious’ punters you really should make it clear that the probability is
0.(0588235294117647)
or in your language
5.(8823529411767)%
or with those generous bookie chaps
100/6
cum racing!
by gum I feel better for that
To make a profit with 16/1 shots from level stakes betting… all a punter needs to do is win more than 5.88235% of his/her bets at that price. Let’s call it 5.9 (but remember it is really 5.88235%).
A pretty lazy bit of rounding if I may say so Gingerintegers
I’m sure you know that the reciprocal of all prime numbers (p) – in this case 17 – have a recurring decimal period of (p-1), so while for those peasants who merely stake up to 10^6 UKP per stake your approximation will suffice, for we ‘serious’ punters you really should make it clear that the probability is
0.(0588235294117647)
or in your language
5.(8823529411767)%
or with those generous bookie chaps
100/6
cum racing!
by gum I feel better for that
I don’t "(p)" about Drone.
My maths is simple, for simpletons.
No need to confuse those in sheep’s clothing still further.
Value Is EverythingGinger
I’d be more inclined to take advice from someone who is able to narrow a field down to one selection and produce a profit.
You knowingly back losers and that’s where I have a problem with your method, any fool can use a scattergun and back three horses in a race and hope for a winner and a small return to compensate for losses.
Horses with hidden ability are not restricted to an SP of 16/1,
weight of money can compress the price from considerably higher early odds. Bookmakers react to the amount staked.Your concept of value is completely bonkers, as any regular backer knows, strike rate is far more important than value.
Admit it Ginger, if you were forced to back only one runner in a race you would soon be seen outside Asda selling the Big Issue. You’re in the very same boat as everyone else who exist on the wrong side of the fence.
as any regular backer knows, strike rate is far more important than value.
WHAT??!!!
Mike
as any regular backer knows, strike rate is far more important than value.
WHAT??!!!
Mike
As one who laughably admitted to backing 32 losers in succession, how do you view the question of strike rate/ value? 32 losers is backing everyday for a month and not seeing a winner.
Many would have correctly concluded that they’re in the wrong game. At least you had the honesty to admit it.
as any regular backer knows, strike rate is far more important than value.
WHAT??!!!
Mike
As one who laughably admitted to backing 32 losers in succession, how do you view the question of strike rate/ value? 32 losers is backing everyday for a month and not seeing a winner.
Many would have correctly concluded that they’re in the wrong game. At least you had the honesty to admit it.
Woolfie, you’re underselling me! I spit in the face of a mere 32 consecutive losers!
The last time I bet before the summer of 2013 was in summer 2009, where I "laughably" backed
37
losers in a row. I had 1215 bets over that period at an average price of 4.7/1 so statistically speaking losing runs of 20+ are a certainty. Mind 37, was going it a bit.
Note: That took place over four days, not your assumed ‘month’.
Regarding value & strike-rate, if one defines ‘value’ as backing horses at prices bigger than their chance of winning, then one simply cannot make a profit without getting ‘value’. (I.e. the alternative to ‘value’ is backing horses at prices
smaller
than their chance of winning!).
Anyone who makes a profit, has got ‘value’.
This is not up for debate – it is a statistical fact
.
(If you look at Venture To Cognac’s fantastic
‘Midnight Club’
thread in
Systems
, you’ll see that he is 150+pts ahead from backing all horses with
Midnight
in the name…now he may not be
looking
for value, but he’s sure as hell got it so far!!)
As for strike-rate, it’s basically governed by the area in which one is betting. If you are backing short-priced horses, even a losing punter’s strike-rate will be high. If you’re backing 10-1 shots you can get into some massive losing runs. I think one’s acceptance of a higher/lower strike-rate is a personal thing: are you comfortable with longer losing runs at bigger prices?
Although you mock me for backing so many losers in a row, I think this really displays your poor knowledge of statistics and probabilities. The long losing run is totally inevitable. Mathematically speaking, it HAS to happen. If you’re backing at value prices, it is also completely irrelevant to long-term profits.
As for being in ‘the wrong game’ you may possibly be right. In 2013, I made a fifth of what I made in 2009 which was very disappointing. I might start betting again this summer, but certainly not on the ‘flogging myself’ basis of last year!
Maybe far fewer bets at considerably higher stakes as a possibility?
Or maybe nothing.
Mike
good post Mike , whatever you decide , the best of Irish to you !!!
its a tough game , I would think from looking from the outside , perhaps fewer bets may be better..but you know best in any event
hopefully you will post updates …it was a cracking good read last time
I will be trying my luck this year on kempton park alone , heaven help me I will be assaulted with 0/55 beautiful racing
…..I must not use the D word , that is reserved for ATR posts I will post 2 reports half yearly
I feel a Gamble attack coming on …..
Mike. I started betting in 1976, in my mid twenties, my work colleague was doing well and I decided to give it a shot. My first selection brought me a 4/1 winner.
I began setting targets and would usually hit at least one winner in six bets at prices between even money and 6/1. This was profitable and I kept betting until after the exchanges were set up when losing runs became longer and longer. I finally stopped backing nearly two years ago apart from a trial system that didn’t last very long. When 15 bets are placed without a winner at top prices up to 6/1 it’s impossible to make a profit and it’s demoralising in the extreme having to go back to the well.
I usually selected one a day so your 32 losers would have meant a whole month of disappointment. Strike rate is important not only to maintain profits but to bolster morale.
When 15 bets are placed without a winner at top prices up to 6/1 it’s impossible to make a profit and it’s demoralising in the extreme having to go back to the well.
Eh?
"Without a winner" it’s "impossible to make a profit betting at any price.Value Is Everything(quote Gingertipster) Eh?
"Without a winner" it’s "impossible to make a profit betting at any price.It’s stating the obvious I know, Betlarge has discounted losing runs of 30 as normal when the majority of sensible regular punters know it’s time to find another sport.
Betlarge has discounted losing runs of 30 as normal when the majority of sensible regular punters know it’s time to find another sport.
You seem to have these strange ‘rules’ Woolfie, particularly that one should never experience any losing runs and one is only "allowed" to back one horse in a race.
What happens if you have losing runs of 30+ and make an excellent profit?
What happens if you back 2,3,4 or more runners in a race and make an excellent profit?
What
really
counts – obeying your random ‘rules’ or making a profit on your betting?
Mike
Ginger
I’d be more inclined to take advice from someone who is able to narrow a field down to one selection and produce a profit.
You knowingly back losers and that’s where I have a problem with your method, any fool can use a scattergun and back three horses in a race and hope for a winner and a small return to compensate for losses.
Horses with hidden ability are not restricted to an SP of 16/1,
weight of money can compress the price from considerably higher early odds. Bookmakers react to the amount staked.Your concept of value is completely bonkers, as any regular backer knows, strike rate is far more important than value.
Admit it Ginger, if you were forced to back only one runner in a race you would soon be seen outside Asda selling the Big Issue. You’re in the very same boat as everyone else who exist on the wrong side of the fence.
Oh but I do freely "admit it" Woolfie. I know some successful punters who back one horse per race, but I am not good enough to be one of them. At least not in every race anyway.
But why should it matter how anyone shows a profit? Backing more than one horse in a race is not cheating you know.
I don’t "knowingly back losers", I combine the odds to make what I believe is a BETTER bet.
If you and I have the same amount of money £100 to gamble on one race Woolfie…
I half my stake, two £50 bets on two horses both @ 3/1.
You put all your £100 on the Even Money favourite – I am taking exactly the same Even money COMBINED price as you. If one of my bets win £200 is returned (3 X £50 = £150 + £50 stake = £200 returned) from an over all stake of £100 (remembering I "lost" £50 from my other bet which needs to come off the "winnings", £150 – 50 = £100 profit). If your Evens bet wins you’ve staked £100 and returning £200 (£100 profit). You are not cheating by backing the favourite @ Evens, and I am not cheating by backing two horses @ 3/1."Strike rate" does not mean a thing if it is not related to
average priced winner
. At level stakes a strike rate of 50% is no good if your average priced winner is odds-on. Yet a strike rate of 8% at an average price of 16/1 shows a good profit.
You say
"Strike rate is important not only to maintain profits but to
bolster morale"
. Finally something we can agree on Woolfie. Although there are some successful gamblers able to bet one horse per race (including on TRF). Backing what they believe is the very best value bet… Sadly, like most gamblers I need a certain amount of winners to
"bolster morale"
. Therefore, not only do I back what I consider the very best value bet in the race, but also any other horse I believe to be "value" too. Ranging from main bets being "best value"… through to saver bets "lesser value".
This season have so far had 27 main bet winners and 9 saver bet winners – from 76 races. Strike rates of 35.53% if only including "main bets" or 47.37% with saver bets added. I’d have made a greater profit WITHOUT making the latter type, but as I think we agree?… these "saver bets" (more winners/better strike rate) "bolster morale". If "morale" slips I might not be able to evaluate form in the same profitable manner, so the saver bets (although not profitable themselves) help me profit.
So if
"Strike rate is important not only to maintain profits but to bolster morale"
, what is so wrong with the way I bet Woolfie? It may not be the way many would choose, but surely any profitable way is a good way?
Value Is EverythingIt’s stating the obvious I know, Betlarge has discounted losing runs of 30 as normal when the majority of sensible regular punters know it’s time to find another sport.
To compare my losing runs with those betting one horse per race you must include each individual horse I’ve backed. If so, this season alone I’ve had one losing run of 18 horses without a win and one of 15, it’s nothing unusual.
I went through one spell I’d call a "losing run" between the Hennessey 13/11/13 and 20/12/13, where I backed
44
horses in 16 races… And in that time only one main bet (Sire De Grugy’s at Sandown @ 9/4) and two saver bets won. A "main bet" 6.25% strike rate on those 16 races compared to an overall season of over 35%.
Despite the losing run I’ve made 12% profit on my stakes this season.
Everyone has losing runs and Mike is right, 30
is
"normal". One or two long losing runs don’t matter if your over all record means a profit is made. Of course if you’re having too many losing runs and showing an over all deficit – then you are right to give up betting Woolfie.
I’ve got some figures somewhere, of how often punters can (on average)
expect
losing runs to start if knowing the punter’s over all strike rate. I’ll try to find them.
Value Is EverythingWoolfie , your going to have a field day ,….tasty gamble going on today on 4 horses prev connected to Barney Curley …3 have won so far
latest one just whizzed in after being off 700 days….returned at 4/6 with a row of duck eggs to his name …..if you0 landed from mars and looked at the form you would have priced him at 66/1 or maybe 660/1 …..
Bent ….of course not
Just random good luck perhaps
Yep a bit of skullduggery is brilliant , good luck to them
imo
Woolfie , your going to have a field day ,….tasty gamble going on today on 4 horses prev connected to Barney Curley …3 have won so far
latest one just whizzed in after being off 700 days….returned at 4/6 with a row of duck eggs to his name …..if you0 landed from mars and looked at the form you would have priced him at 66/1 or maybe 660/1 …..
Bent ….of course not
Just random good luck perhaps
Yep a bit of skullduggery is brilliant , good luck to them
imo
Just goes to show how accurate woolfie is with his opinion of horseracing ricky.Real punters will be willing
Low Key
home in the 6,25pm as we all know Barneys planned this one to the letter,irrelevant of what ‘connections’ say!
Indus Valley
goes in at 4/6 when 20/1 was freely available last night and he’s the 25/1 outsider in the RP betting forecast for todays race………You couldn’t make it up!
Go Woolfie milk it mate,you deserve some credit here.Bent ….of course not
Just random good luck perhaps
Yep a bit of skullduggery is brilliant , good luck to them
imo
I wouldn’t particularly call it ‘bent’ Ricky as all four easily have form in the book to win their races (Seven Summits and Low Key you’d pretty much make favourites anyway).
It’s just a really well-organised coup using some smart inside information combined with excellent training performances.
No problem for me as I love a bit of a gamble in racing, the game would be so much duller without it!!
Mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.