- This topic has 92 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 12 months ago by
.
- Posts
Since her performance in the Marcel Boussac last year I have been convinced that this filly will sweep all before her this year. Not sure on the prices but I really cannot see this horse being beaten on sunday.
Anyone willing to oppose her?
Hard to see anything getting near her, but there might be more fun trying to find the second for an e/w or a forecast.
no such a thing as a good thing…….but you won’t get any closer than this.
She’s about as nice a filly as you could hope to find and I agree 100@ she will sweep all before her.
I fail to see any logic in your post Ginge………wouldn’t matter if everything else was 1000/1 (win only) only a crazy man would oppose her
no such a thing as a good thing…….but you won’t get any closer than this.
She’s about as nice a filly as you could hope to find and I agree 100@ she will sweep all before her.
I fail to see any logic in your post Ginge………wouldn’t matter if everything else was 1000/1 (win only) only a crazy man would oppose her
If Zarkava was priced 1/10 and Modern Look 25/1, I’d rather back Modern Look.
Zarkava does not have as much as a 91% chance of winning, and Modern Look has a better than 4% chance.If Zarkava was a 7/4 chance I’d be on.
Ginge
Value Is EverythingZarkava has been priced up at around 4/6, with Modern Look and Psalm both available at 12/1.
Each-way bets on the latter pair for me, barman.
I’m with Fist on this one. I fail to see Ginge’s logic. If you pretty much know a horse won’t win why back it simply because its a bigger price than you think it should be? What a waste of money.
I can understand if you think something should be 5/4 and its 5/2 something like that but a 25/1 chance when it should be 16’s / 20’s? Stuff its mathematical percentage.
No offence Ginge but I really don’t like this method of betting. I dread to think how many bests you have per week, must be a millionaire just to cover the staking.
I’m with Fist on this one. I fail to see Ginge’s logic. If you pretty much know a horse won’t win why back it simply because its a bigger price than you think it should be? What a waste of money.
I can understand if you think something should be 5/4 and its 5/2 something like that but a 25/1 chance when it should be 16’s / 20’s? Stuff its mathematical percentage.
No offence Ginge but I really don’t like this method of betting. I dread to think how many bests you have per week, must be a millionaire just to cover the staking.
Makes perfect sense to me. Where has he said he ‘pretty much knows a horse won’t win’? I can’t bear to go down the ‘value’ route again, but the winner’s a winner brigade are usually the ones who can’t price a race up.
Makes perfect sense to me. Where has he said he ‘pretty much knows a horse won’t win’? I can’t bear to go down the ‘value’ route again, but the winner’s a winner brigade are usually the ones who can’t price a race up.
And me, Ginger T’s logic is spot on (i.e I agree with it
), with the rider that if I assessed Zarkava to be an odds-on shot, say 4/5, and she was underlaid at say 4/7 I wouldn’t bet the likely overlays against her.At assessed odds-on bet that horse and that horse alone if and only if it is available at odds-against is my mantra. Which I don’t claim to be ‘correct’
Haven’t looked at the race btw
There is a difference though surely between not backing a horse because it is too short and backing a horse at long odds just because its over the price you think it should be.
If you / anyone thinks Zarkava is too short then simply don’t back her.
Going strictly down the value route could leave you backing five horses and Zarkava still bolting up, what is the use of that?
Flash, I think the value argument is that one race result doesn’t matter, and that in the long run if you keep backing these horses that are longer-priced than they should be you will inevitably make a profit.
Colin
Flash, I think the value argument is that one race result doesn’t matter, and that in the long run if you keep backing these horses that are longer-priced than they should be you will inevitably make a profit.
Colin
I understand that perfectly mate. The thing is though you’re backing blind. You’re not actually backing a horse you are backing a percentage chance.
I just wonder how much money the "value" bettors lay out in a week as they must back an incredible amount of horses.
Its just not my thing I’m afraid. If it suits Ginge thats fine, its just not for me.
………..nor me!
But I believe that there many on this forum who will say we are wrong.
Colin
"Going strictly down the value route could leave you backing five horses and Zarkava still bolting up, what is the use of that?"
So what you are saying Flash, is that if you don’t want to back Zarkava, you shouldn’t have a bet in the race? Or that you shouldn’t take on any favourite as it might bolt up?
), with the rider that if I assessed Zarkava to be an odds-on shot, say 4/5, and she was underlaid at say 4/7 I wouldn’t bet the likely overlays against her.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.