Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Were there any good mares missing from that field?
Does that make her the best mare in training, even allowing for the heavy going she was impressive?
It is a pity the mares race at Cheltenham is not 3 miles, she needs soft ground to produce her best too (has a markedly round action).
Delighted for the horse, and connections, well done to Emma Lavelle (my local trainer) and her team for getting her back after such a bad fall.
Value Is EverythingSometimes it seems to me as if Twist Magic does not find a great deal off the bridle. Heavy ground not ideal in such cases. Though I do agree, I would very much doubt if he will stay 2m 3f, and todays conditions made it more like that sought of test.
I would still have him fav for the Champion and ignore this run completely. He has long enough to get over it. Given good-soft or firmer should run well at Cheltenham.Value Is EverythingThe new Ascot has become one of those courses that favour those ridden prominently. First two in 1:20, Tamarinbleu in the 1:45, Labelthou 2:55. Even when the pace was far too fast in the 2:20 Mahogany Blaze almost held on.
Unless they go too fast here it is difficult to come from behind especially on very soft / heavy ground.
On the flat too, it was noticable how many winners were ridden up with the pace, even at Royal Ascot.With the going report, do you think they bothered to walk over to the far side?
Heavy, even heavier in places might have been more acurate.
It seemed more testing there than the home straight.Raceable though, and they deserve some credit for getting racing on.Value Is EverythingJust a thought.
I am going to be participating in a racing quiz on tuesday night at Newbury Racecourse, representing the West Berkshire Racing Club. In the seat once polished by Alan Potts. There will be all sorts of racing personalities there including racing journalists.
Don’t worry, I will not be attacking you, spouting off or anything. This is social evening that racing people enjoy. I guarantee I will not mention the table of odds and chances. Unless any of the racing media want to approach me and give their views, why the table is never spoken about in the media. Whether it is on or off the record. Just like to know.
To use Kevin Keegans words "I’ll love it if we beat you, love it"
Come to think of it, it is more likely to be me that is attacked
As I said earlier, I like you all really.Value Is Everything Sure you know by now Haydock is off, shame.If my thread got to you Fist
I am sure it can get to anyone.Read what you said about Straw Bear for the Champion, and agree with you.
Can not see him finishing in front of Harchibald there. Can not see Harchibald going through with his effort either, might be an each way or place only bet nearer the time.Ginge
Value Is EverythingI find it very disappointing that no members of the racing media have come on here to defend themselves. May be they do not have the time, may be they know there is no defence. I note that many in the racing media call for racing personalities to talk and be quized by them. But when it is the media themselves being questioned there is silence.
Though I must thank Tanya Stevenson for e-mailing me to give Channel 4’s opinion that their viewers would be lost if given an explanation. And the amount of people that would be interested in the table is very much a niche market.
Do not agree with it, but thanks anyway Tanya.
The niche she talks about consists of just about every professional gambler in the land, what does that tell you about the importance of something so rarely mentioned by the media? I just can not believe that so few punters are interested in making a profit.Value Is EverythingHi Maverick, remember me?
From that site you used to post on. Before I was banned.
You are right they were mainly system buffs. The owner sold his own from the site, so did not want anyone critercising systems in general. As I found out.Good luck with this Maverick.
Ginge
Value Is EverythingA horse who does not truly stay the trip can still run well over that trip, just not as well as a trip he does stay.
In my opinion Florida Pearl was better at 3 miles, the Sun Alliance is over 3m 110 yards, the Gold Cup 3m 2f 110yards.
I am not saying Best Mate was inferior to Florida Pearl, but there was not much between them. Therefore, Best Mate was not quite in the same class as Kauto Star and Dessie.
Value Is EverythingFlorida Pearl never stayed 3 1/4 miles so never ran to form in a Gold Cup.
Kauto Stars form in the Gold Cup is not as good as his King George wins.
I wish Turpin Green had won the Gold Cup, had over 200/1 about him.
I think Timeform over rated both Best Mate, and Kicking King for that matter. I believe both best ratings were based on one performance that in my opinion have not worked out as well as they seemed at the time.
Not that I wish to knock that great company as they are my Bible.
Value Is EverythingBest Mate won three Gold Cups but what did he beat?
Without him we would have had three of the worst Gold Cup winners ever.
Just because a horse wins the so called best race of the season, does not mean it was great form. Form is one horses performance measured against his rivals. Not what races he won and how many times.
His form was barely, if anything, above that of Florida Pearl.Value Is EverythingTake a look at my Question To The Racing Media thread Jackal. The first, 3rd and last pages may be of particular interest. Including how to make your own 100% book.
Value Is EverythingThe quality of the majority of staying races does not warrent another group 1, wish it did. I enjoy them very much, Gold Cup and Leger are two of my favourite races, but we must keep Group 1’s for the very best horses. Hopefully the breeding industry’s bias against the word STAMINA comes to an end soon.
Why has Newbury overlooked for the Temple Stakes? It is the fairest course in the country.
The King Stand deserves to be a Group 1 judged by previous winners.
My question about the King Stand and Golden Jubilee is this:Do Australian horses have an unfair advantage?
To ease the stress of the journey over, they are allowed to use steroids. These are not in their system when racing at Ascot. However, they have, surely been trained with the steroids still in their system over here. Do they have muscles where our sprinters don’t?Ginge
Value Is EverythingTotally agree with Drone, different course, turf, partly all weather. The 3rd last is in a different place and the fences are not as stiff. Different pace too. Can not compare time performances at all.
Kauto’s performance was awsome, but that was on a sharp track over 3 miles. 3m2f on a stiff track, possibly on soft ground, might be different.
Last years Gold Cup was run at a funereal pace. The first 4 home all having form at 2m4f. That may have played into the hands of Kauto Star. Kauto Star has yet to prove for certain that he stays a truly run 3m2f. In my opinion he probably will stay it but we do not know yet. Probably the stiffest test of stamina he has had so far was when scraping home in this seasons Betfair Chase, 3m on very soft. His Gold Cup form (on good going) is some way short of his two king Georges, did not have to be at his best. Is he the same horse on good going as he is on softish? Again imo yes, but we do not know for sure.Denman has a fair way to go to beat Kauto Star on form. I was there to see him pulverise his field in the Hennessy. Did it in tremendous style, but it was not a Burrough Hill Lad performance, the field was nowhere near as good (particularly with the favourite falling). That is not to say he will not be as good, in time. I think those backing Denman are backing potential more than form. He is an exceptional looking specimen and still improving (needs to). The slowly run Lexus did not play to his strengths. There is still a slight doubt as to whether Denman is as good on good going. Did win the Sun Alliance on good but has improved on soft since. That is probably due to experience and strengthening up, but we do not know that yet. Will he be given the ride to beat Kauto Star? To my mind his best chance of beating his stable companion will be to set a searching gallop. But that will also be the best chance of Nicholls coming away without the winner. So what will the orders be, will Denmans jockey be allowed to go all out to win?
I backed both Kauto Star and Denman (made a loss on the four days) ante-post for their festival wins last year, but will wait until nearer the day this time.
Exotic Dancer was not at his best in the latest King George (stable in very poor form and change of tactics). Everyone knows his record against Kauto Star, but that being the case, may well represent a value bet. With punters dissmissing his chance. I beleive he was a little flattered in the Betfair, flew the last where as Kauto slowed, then Kauto possibly idled in front. But is there as much between them as the betting suggests? He stays the trip well, acts well on the course, equally effective on good or heavy. Would not be surprised to see him split the Nicholls duo
If I backed anything ante-post at this stage it would have to be Exotic Dancer, or possibly Halcon Genelardais (and hope for an overly strong pace on heavy going).Value Is EverythingIf the media is listening, or should that be watching (no I have not given up yet). I would like to expand on my first post for a possible explanation of the table of odds and chances to show to your viewers / readers.
(say as well as show in graphic)
For every £1 staked on a 31 chance a punter gets back £4, winning £3 plus his £1 stake returned.
Say he / she has 100 individual bets of £1 all at 31 (staking £100 in all).
If he wins 25 of those 100 bets he has staked £100 and gets £100 back (25 x 4 =100), breaking even.
If he wins less than 25 he makes a loss.
If he wins more than 25 he makes a profit.
Another way of saying 25 out of 100 is 25%.
Therefore the true odds of any 25% chance is 31 (25% = 31).
A punter who believes a horse has a 25% chance is expressing an opinion (not fact).
But the fact is, if he wins more than 25% of his bets at 31 a profit is made and so:
Anything believed to have a 25% chance should only be backed if better than 31 is available.
(say but don’t show)
This simple equation finds the percentage of any given price:
(show graphic and say)First figure + second figure = resultant figure.
Second figure divided by resultant figure = decimal.
Decimal x 100 = percentage.For example with 31:
3 + 1 = 4
1 Divided by 4 = 0.25
0.25 x 100 = 25 = 25%
31 = 25%114 would be:
11 + 4 = 15
4 Divided by 15 = 0.267
0.267 x 100 = 26.7 = 26.7%
114 = 26.7%(you can say the rest of the dialogue without showing it)
In a four horse race where each horse is thought by the bookmakers odds compiler to have the same chance of winning, then they all are 25% 31 chances (to 100%).
(show but don’t say)
fig 1
a) 25% 31
b) 25% 31
c) 25% 31
d) 25% 31
100%To be able to make a profit a bookmaker puts his mark up on it and offers early prices of 114 all runners (working to 106.8%).
(show fig 2 alongside fig 1 but don’t say)
fig2
a) 26.7% 114
b) 26.7% 114
c) 26.7% 114
d) 26.7% 114
106.8%But these percentages are not certain, they do not know the percentages are correct, it is only their opinion.
(show fig 3 alongside fig 1 and 2)fig 3
a) 25% 31
b) 20% 41
c) 22% 72 (22.2%)
d) 33% 21 (33.3%)
100%If a punter believes the figures on the right are true percentages, then (d) is a good value bet at 114 as 33% is equivalent to almost 21. 33% being bigger than 26.7%.
(show fig 4)
In a different race, if a punter looks around the bookmakers and exchanges finding these to be the best prices available:fig 4
a) 26.7% 114
b) 25% 31
c) 15.4% 112
d) 10% 91
e) 7.7% 121
f) 6.7% 141
g) 4.8% 201
h) 3.9% 251
i) 2.9% 331
j) 1.5% 661
k) 1% 1001
105.6%If a punter believes (c) has a better than 15.4% chance he should back it at 112. If thinking (h) is better than 3.9% he should back that at 251, and so on. Because if a punter wins more than 15.4% of his bets at 112 he makes a profit (assuming level stakes), (h) at 251 more than 3.9%.
(show fig 5 alongside fig 4)
After studying form for this race a punter may want to make his own 100% book, and then back anything he can get a better price for than his tissue.fig 5
a) 25% 31
b) 23.25% 10030
c) 14.5% 61
d) 13.5% 132
e) 7.25% 131
f) 6% 161
g) 4% 251
h) 3.25% 331
I) 2% 501
j) 1% 1001
k) 0.5% 2001
100%The figure on the right shows the percentages you believe each horse has of winning together with an odds equivalent.
These prices are those that (by your working out) you should be trying to beat. The only value horse in your opinion is (d). Bookies best price being 91 and your price to beat 132.
Horse (d) only has just over half the chance of (a) but despite that (d) is the better bet. Because:
(show the next piece of dialogue underneath fig 4 and 5)
If you have 100 individual £1 bets at 91, a 13.5% strike rate returns £135 and a £35 profit. (13.5 x 10 = 135).
Backing the horse with the best chance of winning, a 25% strike rate at 114 only returns £93.75 making a £6.25 deficit (25 x 3.75 = 93.75).
It does not matter if this 9/1 shot wins or loses, as long as you win more than 10% of your bets at 9/1 a profit is made.NOW SHOW THE TABLE OF ODDS AND CHANCES.
(And say)
Anything thought to have a 60% chance should be backed at better than 46.
42% 11/8, 31% 94, 12.5% 71, 8% 121, 3% 331 and so on.
There is no need to work to too many decimals with your figures especially if putting in a margin for error. Not backing a horse unless it has a price of 1 or 2% more than your tissue price.(I hope to see the table of odds and chances together with an explanation on Channel 4 Racing, BBC, ATR, RUK, Racing Post and every other betting / racing paper / magazine.
If the racing media do not want to explain it, may be they would be kind enough to let us know why, as it is without doubt an important tool in profit making).Ginge
Value Is EverythingWEST BERKSHIRE RACING CLUB
CHELTENHAM FESTIVAL PREVIEW NIGHT
WEDNESDAY 5TH MARCH
AT NEWBURY RACECOURSE
Guests include TANYA STEVENSON
Value Is EverythingJim F and Clive X
If you take a look at page 3 of this thread with my post headed "How to make a 100% book",you can see I agree with you.
There is no substitute for studying form.Value finding must be done as well as studying form.
Value Is EverythingI do agree that anyone who has a concept about TRUE value can find out about the table if they look hard enough on the wibbly wobbly way, looking on TRF or elsewhere, but what about those who do not have access to the internet?
Many experienced racegoers I talk to have not got a clue, and think like Fist, it is nonsence. I believe one of the reasons is that they do not see it mentioned in the trade papers or T.V. Therefore it must be a lie. We see great articles about every aspect of racing, everything that effects who the gambler will bet on. From distance and going to trainer form, right and left handed courses etc. So should they not talk about this one just once? I do not expect it to be drummed in to peoples heads, just mentioned once or twice.
Journalists and presenters leap to the defence of punters on subjects like SP reform. But if they themselves do not tell punters all the relevant information available (possibly for their own selfish reasons), are they any different from those they are trying to defend punters against?Value Is Everything
