Forum Replies Created
- Posts
re Audit trail etc
That does indeed sound future feasible.
One would need to gather data via some means.
Picture all races on oddschecker and the relevent bookie odds
parsed and saved regularly during the day.One could then investigate patterns in odds drops of eventual non runners.
What one would be looking for are individual bookmakers judged likely to be
abusing the system.It sounds like a good topic for some university style research paper.
“Is There Evidence of Fraudulant Abuse Of Horse Racing Rule 4 Rules By Uk Bookmakers”Picture the uk bookmakers ranked in such a paper by statisitical likley hood of fraudulent abuse of their customers.
Racing authorities / the gambling commission should of course be doing such research themselves
but will they bother?But perhaps they may pay heed to the findings of such a university research report
and punish those deemed most likley of bad behavior.It would certainly be terrible poor PR for the bookies top of the list.
Perhaps some of you here even have past logged data sets?
Do a bit of googling find relevant university head of departments and offer you data sets up as base for their research. Nottingham has a gambling study dept. Many others have maths and stats depts and may welcome inspiration for research ideas especially if you make it easy via provision of the data set to study from a statisitcal viewpoint etc.
And a quick brainstorm idea for the future
How about taking rule 4 out of individual bookmaker hands and instead have the racing authorities declare an official one to applied globally across all bookmakers. That would reduce the ability for individual bookmakers to fradulently abuse their customers via ruke 4.
Such a change may be a future reaction to some factual based report comfirming high likley hood of such abuse actually taking place.
Cheers
MickPS going back to Professortrubshawe’s original question
Personally I find spreadsheets a great help.
If you have a spreadsheet with all the base data it is easy enough to do calculations based upon it.eg strike rate, total profit , ROI percentages etc.
I can give you sample simple spreadsheets if you like Professortrubshawe.
If not too clued up on excel or open office spreadsheets there are plenty of cheap beginners guides on amazon etc.
Get in touch if you want a sample spreadhseet.
re return on investment & profit on turnover.
I often see confusion over this with people quoting figures and then calling it in words one thing when it should be the other.
Info on the difference with worked example at
http://www.sports-betting-blog.co.uk/roi-in-horse-racing/Hi One Eye
I would not have closed said account myself.
The concept of an unlucky shop or website is just supersticeous sillyness.If you are a bad punter you will probably lose over time but a big losing run is normally just statisical scatter at play.
In a strange way a horrendous record at an individual bookmaker can actually be a good thing. Picture their traders or liability software checking your history when pondering to take a future big bet of you ( on what you believe is great value ) .
Your bad historic record wil be of great assistance to you in getting on. They will look at your bad record and say ..we want to keep this Guy sweet he has been historically great for us.
Also ponder them running a future offer to selected account holders. They may search their database for say ..known historic losers who have not deposited in a while. Such offers are easy extra cash if used wisely. Close your account and you won’t get it. Keep it open with zero balance and you will.
In short a particular account with a very bad history can be an asset.
Reopen it I suggest. Wait for a similar reactivation offer and play it tight next time. Trade qualifying bets against exchanges and leave yourself with the free cash to play with.
If seeking a partner to help get extra weight on for myself, the ideal partner would be someone with a known history to the bookmakers of losing big. Mug punter Premiership soccer player for example. Their repuatation with the bookmaker as being a good thing for the bookie would permit a lot of shrewder decent stake action on the account before said bookie eventually caught on.
Cheers
MickYup its an interesting angle.
When referring to pace most common references are to an individual horses running style. Front runner / hold up horse etc.
However lesser touted are the stats for how certain individual track and distance combinations show a strong bias towards a particular running style.
In a simplistic sense a punter could for example be looking for a horse with a proven tendancy for early pace running in a course / distance combo that has a proven favorable bias towards such early pace horses. ( draw can play a part here as well )
One more obvious potential usage is to use pace data to back pre off and lay back in running at hopefully shorter odds.
Pace info ( both for horses and track / distance bias) is obtainable on a daily basis from RacingTrends.
See sample at http://www.racingtrends.co.uk/racing/sa … r-message/
Lots in that sample message but if you scroll down you will see a pace section.
You do have to pay for that service but stick your neck out, contact Dave and ask for a free trial if you feel it may be of longer term interest to you.
Ask nicely and you will be more prone to get a "yup sure no probs" rather than a "bog off you sponger" type response
Yup Proform is a great tool.
I have chatted to people who have used both it and raceform.
More of them prefer proform.There is a review with more information about at:- punterprofits.com
Note as well the info on how to get some discount.
It sounds like an idea worth researching further Scott.
Trainers & owners often give clues worth noting.
An owner forking out big wads of their own cash in order to get a run is arguably as blatent a clue as one could get that they feel their horse would have a more than fair chance.Obviously owner and punter may have different outlooks.
Corporate owner may just be seeking a high profile day out for key clients.
Some rich owner vanity driven potential as well.
Prize money for place may offer value but odds may not.All that said there is still quite a bit of logic to the key premise.
Worth futher investigation I feel even if historical data just rules it out as a meritous betting filter.
