- This topic has 68 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
Good post Marginal Value. The Old man has a 65% strike rate on his 20 selections and a 50% strike rate on his backed selections. I dream of getting that sort of Strike rate consistently, who wouldn’t, particularly if combined odds are better than even money and the shortest priced selection on his list of 20 is one runner at even money, the remaining 19 are odds against. I would be re investing following that run of 20 and upping the basic stake by at least 50%. The old man can pick winners but he cannot work out how to profit from his ability.
- Total Posts 17716
I am always amazed that people don’t ‘get’ this fundamental concept.
You can back as many ‘winners’ as you like without having ANY guarantee of profit.
However if you
always
back horses whose actual winning chance is greater than their odds suggest then you will
always
win in the long run.
So ‘value’ is king.
The cororally being that the first guy is good at picking winners but can’t make it pay, while the 2nd fellow isn’t very good at picking winners yet can price up a horse’s chance very accurately?
Yeah, right.
If you can price up a horse’s winning chance accurately Reet then if you back those that start higher than that you’ll win. The winners will find themselves. Mathematical certainty in the long term.
But you’ve got to be able to price them up accurately, more accurately than a very efficeint market, which is the desperately hard part.
I think everyone is overlooking one thing.
Before an event, you don’t know the outcome.
This is why you must search for value.
In the example the old man didn’t know that the horse would win, but reckoned 7/2 was an accurate reflection of value.
In hind sight the horse won at 9/4 but equally could have lost.
We can all be clever with hindsight.the whole point is that it makes no difference if he knew it would win..the story was he made his selections in a similar fashion..his strike rate is 50%+.
therefore anything above evens is value on HIS past selection method
thats his value, it matters not what happened in one race, he’s getting 50% strike rate using the SAME selection method.
its not as complicated as some of the posts here are suggesting.
If winners are everything and value unimportant, why don’t bookmakers just bet to 300% over-round? If you consider value to be nothing then the price is unimportant.
But…, if I were a bookmaker and priced up a 6 runner field as 1/4, 1/2, 1/1, 5/4, 6/4 and 2/1 would you bet in the race?
And, if you were betting on course and all the bookmakers bar one showed 5/2 on your selection, the other showing 11/4, who would you bet with and why?
Rob
OneEye
Value doesn’t just come in setting a price and only betting if the price obtained is at or better than that price. Anyone who makes a profit over a period of time is achieving value prices, whether by design or apparent accident. It may be because their judgement is much better than the crowd or that they have spotted a method of selection which others under-rate.
The act of securing the best price available at any time is securing value. Whether you view it as value or not, if you can regualrly back SP 5/2 chances at 11/4 then you are nearer to a profit than SP punters. That’s effectively money in hand, and money in hand may be deemed value.
Whether you call it ‘value’, ‘edge’ or ‘oojamaflot’ if you seek the best terms, or least better terms than most then you are more likely to be in profit.
Rob
P.S. That’s the second time today a message has disappeared after I’d replied to it. Although in this case it appears OneEye is still with us!
Lol, sorry Rob. On reading back, I’d realised I’d made a bit of a rick in the ‘test’ I was proposing
What you say is of course correct, but to me what you say – and the whole process of calculating a tissue to determine (in someone’s opinion) if they are getting value or not – completely over complicates an already difficult task (finding a winner).
Value doesn’t just come in setting a price and only betting if the price obtained is at or better than that price. Anyone who makes a profit over a period of time is achieving value prices, whether by design or apparent accident. It may be because their judgement is much better than the crowd or that they have spotted a method of selection which others under-rate.
This paragraph says it all
According to Nick Mordin of the Weekender, you can only make money by exploiting what others have missed and thus they are under-rated.
He looks at systems which picks winners, yes. However he’s also looking for value in that other people tend to miss these winners.
What you say is of course correct, but to me what you say – and the whole process of calculating a tissue to determine (in someone’s opinion) if they are getting value or not – completely over complicates an already difficult task (finding a winner).
OneEye
I calculate a tissue and far from over complicating matters it simplifies things for me. It takes me not much more than 10 minutes to form a tissue for a race of 20 runners, and a good deal less for smaller fields. My method is quite simple, some would consider ridiculously so, but it works and does the job for me. I’m really not over worried about ‘finding the winner’, more that I’m backing enough horses at better odds than I judge they should be. My best successes have been backing a handful against the favourites in decent class handicaps.I used to hate 20 runner handicaps, but now I look forward to them!
Before the advent of the exchanges I tended to keep any serious betting to racecourse visits. My selections were reasonably well informed and broke even at SP, but the secret was beating SP, something I was able to do regularly enough to make a profit. I do the same thing now by taking advantage of prices on the exchanges.
Rob
Rob,
Do you find beating SP enough?
These days SP over-rounds seem to be so big that it is difficult not to beat SP’s when taking early prices.Yes, a price bigger than SP is better value than SP. But is it actually "value"? As in a better price than it should be prior to the start.
I will use the throw of a normal dice to illustrate, I know it won’t happen in real life, but equates to what could happen in horse racing. Just wanted to use something with definite true odds. With gambling there is no known "true odds".
Betting on the throw of a dice in an uncompetitive market (120%); you might get all SP’s of 4/1, a price of 9/2 taken is better value than SP but it is not "value". Obviously you need better than 5/1.
Also, getting less than SP might still be "value" in the true sense of the word. Just not so good value as SP or bigger. ie Getting the best price available about a horse who is never truly "value", is no "value" at all. Where as getting the shortest price about a horse who’s price has always been truly "value", was still "value", just not the best value.
Hope I have not confused.
On that throw of a dice: If "1" is 9/2 and goes down to an SP of 3/1, the 9/2 was not actually true value, because better than 5/1 is needed to be value. Where as if "4" were 11/2 and went out to an SP of 13/2, the 11/2 is not as good value as 13/2, but it is still "value".
Of course, if a punter does not beat SP regularly he won’t make a profit. But by not beating SP on any individual race does not mean a punter has failed to get true value.
Value Is Everything- Total Posts 17716
Ginger, Rob
– whilst I am in fundamental agreement with the concept of "value" over mere "winners", there’s one thing which perplexes me.
You gave an example of
Rooster Booster
being offered ante-post at 12’s when he should be 4’s. But surely "value" here relies entirely on knowing who else is running and who isn’t? If
Istabraq, Night Nurse
and
Persian War
are running against him, then 12’s represents something rather different from the case where it’s
Maidstone Monument, Castlemorris King
and
Quixall Crossett
(God bless him!).
Does not the uncertainty of who’s in and who’s not make "value" betting ante-post a far more slippery proposition? And how might you factor in calculations as to likely opposition (or indeed, ground conditions) months before an event?
- Total Posts 17716
This paragraph says it all
According to Nick Mordin of the Weekender, you can only make money by exploiting what others have missed and thus they are under-rated.
He looks at systems which picks winners, yes. However he’s also looking for value in that other people tend to miss these winners.Yep, says it all, imo.
With disciples like Nick Mordin and Mark Coton, small wonder plenty choose not to worship at the ‘value’ altar.In Enemy Number One Veitch talks of backing runners that are under estimated, I think for the masses this is a great way of describing what type of runners you should be looking to back.
Fundamentally this is getting value but and easier concept for many.
A personal example of this is Arthur’s Edge at Brighton in 2009
It was my opinion Arthur’s Edge was the most likely winner of the race and was impressed with what he had done at Goodwood and felt dropping back to 6f he still had some mileage and could progress to listed level. I had him priced at 4/1 and he was as big as 12/1 early. He went off 9/2 joint favourite, won 2L and placed at listed level next run out, subsequently he won for me again at double figure prices at Southwell.
Ginger, Rob
– whilst I am in fundamental agreement with the concept of "value" over mere "winners", there’s one thing which perplexes me.
You gave an example of
Rooster Booster
being offered ante-post at 12’s when he should be 4’s. But surely "value" here relies entirely on knowing who else is running and who isn’t? If
Istabraq, Night Nurse
and
Persian War
are running against him, then 12’s represents something rather different from the case where it’s
Maidstone Monument, Castlemorris King
and
Quixall Crossett
(God bless him!).
Does not the uncertainty of who’s in and who’s not make "value" betting ante-post a far more slippery proposition? And how might you factor in calculations as to likely opposition (or indeed, ground conditions) months before an event?
Pinza,
Obviously it is impossible to make a 100% book for anti-post bets (unless very close to race day). The uncertainty of who runs is greater and the 4/1 is only a rough assessment. A bigger margin for error is also needed. If Rooster Booster had been 5/1 I would not have taken it. But there are ways to bring down that uncertainty with "probability". What we do know is how good every winner in the last 5 or even 10 years.
By looking at the probable runners I assess if the field is likely to be above, below or exactly average. It is unwise to believe it would be much below average. Because there may be something which nobody has yet considered coming through handicap ranks like Make The stand. If there is a known top horse like Istabraq or night Nurse allownace can be made for that.
You can also take allowance for the probable ground conditions. Cheltenham is usually good or slightly on the soft side. Rarely as soft as true "good-soft" (I don’t go by official goings). Although occasionally the price makes it worth the punt for a soft ground performer (it is not usually so).
So you are judging each price against the probable (average) rating of the winner and probable going.
In the case of Rooster Booster, I considered his Greatwood performance up to average Champion Hurdle form so 12/1
… By the time my Timeform Perspective came through a few days later, down to best price 8/1. Yet their assessment (forgive me if I forget the exact words) "a performance good enough to win three of the last four Champion Hurdles". 8/1 still looked outstanding value so I went in again. Though temperament has to be a factor. Allowance made for Rooster Booster often not finding a great deal in front, but had not done much wrong in recent starts. Went well on good going and an excellant record at the festival, including a County Hurdle win and second.It was pleasing to read in Dave Nevison’s book, Rooster Booster was his biggest single winner, backed at the same time as my bet.
Value Is Everything
… By the time my Timeform Perspective came through a few days later, down to best price 8/1. Yet their assessment (forgive me if I forget the exact words) "a performance good enough to win three of the last four Champion Hurdles". 8/1 still looked outstanding value so I went in again. Though temperament has to be a factor. Allowance made for Rooster Booster often not finding a great deal in front, but had not done much wrong in recent starts. Went well on good going and an excellant record at the festival, including a County Hurdle win and second.- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.