- This topic has 24 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Thought Mr. G.Tipster might be interested in this:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IeenUaujVz9aQs6dpIbHQWl2IKo0Zjtd/view
I thought it only polite to respond, because I would not want you to think that were are so ill-mannered in this house to ignore the esteemed Colin Phillips from “the other place”. I assumed that you are the “esteemed” version of that name. (Is the language a bit too Parliamentarian?).
Thank you very much for posting the link on TRF. By posting here, are you implying that your fellow travellers in the other forum are all experts in the concept of value betting, or the exact opposite? Or are you feeding the hungry GingerTiger with the attention he deserves?
While we wait for Ginger to get his finger out and give a definitive reply, I shall offer an opinion.
The article is very good. The Americanisms can be readily converted to their English equivalents, and the essential premises that success is a function of the individual punter’s ability to get their values as close as possible to the real values, and that a value bet is a function of the punter’s estimated values and not anyone else’s values, are well explained. The method to produce a value bet is a sound method, even if the punter’s ability to judge value may be flawed. The early text of his Part 1 seems to imply that there are still a lot of people, in his target readership in the USA, who do not understand or even disagree with the concept of value betting. Does that also apply to the UK/IRE?
I shall look forward to GT’s reply.
“Esteemed” from “the other place”???
MV, I have been posting on here for many years, admittedly under another username (seabird), I had to change my registration because the site wouldn’t let me post under my former moniker.
The reason I posted it on here is that there has always been more interest/discussion in value on this site than the other place mainly because of the esteemed Gingertipster’s advocacy of it.
I can see the value in the approach but I have always thought it was a tedious way to approach punting but each to his/her own.
I apologise if you feel I was being condescending towards the site but though I do not post on here very often now I visit daily because there can be some very interesting discussions, sadly not as many as there used, and needs, to be but I am afraid that’s the way things are going with racing forums. I will miss them when they are gone.
I have to admit I haven’t read the article fully but I did think it would give Ginge some food for thought, though I’m sure he never needs for that.
Once again I’m sorry if my post has given the wrong impression it seems that on the few occasions I do post I raise someone’s hackles.
I will try to do better.
Col
There is no need for you to apologise at all. I apologise for trying to take the mickey about assumed rivalry between two racing forums and doing it in such a ham-fisted way. You were trying to provide something of interest, and I was being dumb.
No problem, MV, life is much too short to take umbrage at posts on internet fora/forums, the former sounds a touch pretentious for me.
Col
I understand the concept of value, ie a result of a coin toss is evens but bookmakers might offer 10/11. But with all due respect to ginger I can’t back anything on the grounds of value alone, in fact if it is value then it’s merely a coincidence. No my bets are on what I think could win, not necessarily favourites mind you.
🤞👌😉
You've got to accentuate the positive.
Eliminate the negative.
Latch on to the affirmative.
Don't mess with mister in between.Thanks for sharing Col.
Most of the document is standard punting/value speech but there’s a few things i’d disagree with –
Scenario 2 – He makes the horse an evens shot and because it’s 2/1 he has a 50% edge. Fair. The horse goes off at 2/1, now i agree that he might still be right and the true odds of the horse is evens, but if this continually happened then it’s much more likely than not that his opinion is wrong and he’s not finding value.
The document states “(Thats all we have to go on)” in terms of the punters opinion when we can clearly track odds taken against BSP/SP to analyse whether value is indeed being achieved – Standard practise this side of the water for most people that track there own punting. Especially BSP as this is seen as being the most accurate market for racing, although many things can skew that market also (tipsters, liabilities etc).
The Kelly argument is basically about staking, rather than true value (+EV). You can have a decent edge but if you stake wrong you can still lose fortunes, which is where Kelly helps.
Ginge uses Kelly or very similar (can’t remember now), whereas i use a points staking method which is less accurate, i’ll admit, but it keeps me away from being too methodical as i’m not doing this for a living.
I suppose what i’m getting at is that Kelly isn’t required to scope out and maintain value/edge.Good piece in general and i’d agree completely with the differing situations for punting from Pro to Mug. Differing mentalities etc.
TRUE VALUE LIES IN THE RESULTS COLUMN
If you made more money than you put on then you found value.
If you lost money then dont try and kid yourself, you didnt find value, you simply convinced yourself pre race that you had the value. Results showed you in fact didnt.
There are exceptions but ultimately the above is fairly accurate.
Values 9 times out of 10 just a word that some punters throw around because they feel it makes them superior.
Spud, not sure if there are two people using your account but you’re at danger of being accused of hypocrisy here.
With your brave (and excellent I must say) shout to back Siskin on the ‘Big Races’ section the other day, you described EVS as a “gift of a price”. Surely that suggests you’d (at least mentally) come up with a tissue for the race and given yourself a value spectrum for Siskin. Would you have backed him at 4/7, for example? How about at 4/5? Would you have staked more at 6/4? Would you have backed Siskin at SP? What was the thought process there?
I have a huge amount of respect for you and think you have massive potential. Your formreading is exceptional and (I’m assuming you’re quite a young guy) you’ve got great energy for watching and studying and betting. However rash sentences like “if you made more money than you put on then you found value” are quite worrying. Likewise your behaviour in your recent 2yos tipping threat in the DLAP section where your P/L went into the negative (no shame there) then your stakes increased and increased (chasing losses) until you put up a ‘boom or bust, bet the farm’ pick (which lost) and you quit the thread (and the forum) for months afterwards. That’s a sign of problem gambling and you need to be very very careful if that is happening in your real life punting.
There is a fair amount of variance in horse racing. A good long-term winning punter could have 500 bets at early prices in a month and lose – luck in running, falls, jockey errors, reversed results and general swings are always a threat in the medium-term. However I would argue with those who use ‘Beat SP%’ as the ultimate gauge of the value you’re getting since on-the-off exchange markets have changed somewhat in the last year or so. That’s another debate!
Gift of a price, value, no doubt we are all guilty of using such racing cliches. Guilty as charged.
Siskin was forecast as being much shorter and I wouldn’t have backed it at 1/2, I felt evens was a gift though so did have a bet.
You can use this is an example of ‘value’ betting but I wouldn’t have had twice as much on had it of gone to 2/1 which if I was backing purely on the term value I really should do. In.fact if it went 2/1 I would probably have left well alone as it could have signified the horse had an issue.
So was the bet to value? Or to something else because if it was value then I would have had to back it at 2/1 (had it of touched that price) but I wouldn’t have.
Explain that one
To be fair I just wanted to set ginger off and then run away with my comments here.
As for my 2yo thread, it was frustrating me badly so I gave it up. I felt it was mentally effecting me for some reason and there were mistakes left right and centre due to it.
I did the right thing as next 2yo bet won at 8/1 then I started doing quite well away from the pressure that was self created by my thread.
The thread wasnt working, I was doing too many MAX bets. I was correct to quit it for my own good.
Fairplay on the 2yo situation. Glad you’re in control, good to hear!
That’s a good point about Siskin as well – really would have looked toxic in the market if he had drifted as far as 2/1. I guess my situation was more hypothetical: as in what would you do if I’d been the first bookmaker to put the market up and you’d looked at the race fresh with prices along the lines of:
Monarch Of Egypt 8/11, Siskin 2/1, Royal Lytham 6/1, 33/1 bar
However I would argue with those who use ‘Beat SP%’ as the ultimate gauge of the value you’re getting since on-the-off exchange markets have changed somewhat in the last year or so. That’s another debate!
I wouldn’t say that it should be the ultimate gauge – making a healthy enough ROI%/P&L in the green over a sustained period of time are the main signals of successful value-seeking/punting, but comparing to SP/BSP% gives an indication if you’re seeing the value prices.
I’d be interested in your ‘on-the-off exchange markets have changed somewhat in the last year or so’ comment, could you elaborate further on that LS3?
Machine learning operations are increasingly influential, especially in that key period when liquidity is at its highest.
Don’t get me wrong – if you have a bad bet at early prices (with an obvious reason WHY it’s bad e.g. ground, absence, poor sectionals/times) it’ll probably SP bigger. But there is some evidence that these machine learning boys are overplaying the market and overloading small or even non-existent edges.
A standard piece on value, with very little to add to the age old “winner or price” debate.
He has conflated Kelly staking with long term success, ie. the former being essential for the latter, which I’d disagree with.
He concludes that a 2/1 bet with an edge of 25%, is ten times more value than a 20/1 bet with the same edge, which mathematically it most certainly is not. He’s conflated risk of ruin with value here, we’re surely talking bank roll management in that scenario, not value.
I’d rather read Ginger on the subject to be honest.
LS3 – Machine learning operations such as sims and algos? Are these boys so big that they sway the exchange market in most races? Sounds like Bloom wannabees to me, but very interesting none the less.
It’s absolutely fascinating and I’m a little bit obsessed with them at the moment. There was a decent introductory piece by James Willoughby in the RP the other day about Machine Learning but he stopped short of saying whether or not they are in the market already. They are!
Quite who ‘they’ are, what data they are crunching, how they have such huge backing and how they carve out a really small ROI over such massive turnover are all hard to grasp. Whenever I feel I’ve got them sussed they do something unexpected. They’re also active at early prices and, from the patterns we see, they have huge influence on the eventual ISP and BSP.
What I would say is that their edge (so far) seems absolutely tiny and out of proportion with the major market shifts they’re creating on a day to day basis. Hence my opinion about SP beat % no longer being a valid way for ‘client profiling’ departments at bookmakers to judge customer accounts.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.