Exploiting Power Pays

[jfc]

I'm amazed that no one responded to my earlier post on Power Pays, and that there has been minimal discussion anywhere on ways to exploit them.

But as noted elsewhere yesterday UniTAB "secretly" also lowered its rake to ~7.5% thus providing a welcome price war with SuperTAB's 5.95%.

And IAS still offered SuperPrice - essentially Median Tote + ~6% of winning portion.

ozeform.com/site/todays_racing/raceresults.aspx?track=RANDWICK&GRT=R&seldate=20070126

By my calculations for SMB yesterday IAS returned an average 2.5% more than SuperTAB.

Betfair also returned more but some weird claimed prices make it harder to quantify.

Anyway all this appears too good to be true.

If this situation continues today then astute punters should be able to get set for considerable amounts in favourable markets. By shopping around between Betfair, IAS and the TABs.

Of course SportsBet with its Best of 3 Totes is even more attractive but they might consider anyone trying this to be a little too over-recreational for their taste.

[crash]

I think the main reason what you suggested has been ignored is that 99% of punters here don't know what your talking about and/or wouldn't know how to [practically] go about it even if they did.

[jfc]

I think the main reason what you suggested has been ignored is that 99% of punters here don't know what your talking about and/or wouldn't know how to [practically] go about it even if they did.

I extend my sympathies to these 99% of Smartgamblers and Pro-Punters who are unable to grapple with a 10% dividend bonus when it bites them in the hip pocket.

Meanwhile,

One would have imagined that turnover would have switched to the Power Pays Win Pool at the expense of the other Pools.

Yet after translating Tabcorp's figures for the Power Pay weekend:

+23% Win Increase to $20.82m.
+16% Increase on Other Pools to $25.24m.

Fortunately Tabcorp is planning a "thorough analysis" of their promotion so maybe they'll explain this perplexity.

[Stix]

I'm amazed that no one responded to my earlier post on Power Pays, and that there has been minimal discussion anywhere on ways to exploit them.

But as noted elsewhere yesterday UniTAB "secretly" also lowered its rake to ~7.5% thus providing a welcome price war with SuperTAB's 5.95%.

And IAS still offered SuperPrice - essentially Median Tote + ~6% of winning portion.

ozeform.com/site/todays_racing/raceresults.aspx?track=RANDWICK&GRT=R&seldate=20070126

By my calculations for SMB yesterday IAS returned an average 2.5% more than SuperTAB.

Betfair also returned more but some weird claimed prices make it harder to quantify.

Anyway all this appears too good to be true.

If this situation continues today then astute punters should be able to get set for considerable amounts in favourable markets. By shopping around between Betfair, IAS and the TABs.

Of course SportsBet with its Best of 3 Totes is even more attractive but they might consider anyone trying this to be a little too over-recreational for their taste.Ok, I'm just a dumb bean counter........ Can you enlighten me?

Thanks In Advance

[Stix]

Ok, I'm just a dumb bean counter........ Can you enlighten me?

Thanks In Advance
It's alright I've figured it out....... sheesh!

The IAS account is loaded to the brim !

[Moderator 3]

It is policy to remove most working links to sites posted in the forum unless by Management.

We welcome contact should a working link have been posted and escaped a moderator's notice.

Moderator.

[Stix]

Damn, missed it..... email me at:
stix17 at dodo dot com dot au


Thanks

=======================

E-mail address edited - everyone should know by now how to correctly format an address in an e-mail.

How much spam do you want to be sent by the spam robots?
Post your e-mail address in correct link format and the spam robots will love it!

Moderator.

[jfc]

Damn, missed it..... email me at:
stix17 at dodo dot com dot au


Thanks

=======================

E-mail address edited - everyone should know by now how to correctly format an address in an e-mail.

How much spam do you want to be sent by the spam robots?
Post your e-mail address in correct link format and the spam robots will love it!

Moderator.

The alleged Counter-measures above which also proliferate this site actually have zero effect. A robot can just as easily parse an adjacent "at" and "dot com dot" versus "@" and ".com.".

I suspect they just aggravate the problem. Robots will be encouraged to harvest here more often in the hope that people will be imprudently disclosing their e-mails through being lulled into a false sense of security.

Ironically the "E-mail us to advertise" link here will actually bewilder and mislead many humans resulting in lost leads, while robots should just lap the precious information up.

In the statistically impossible situation that I was running a site like this, I would have seized on the "Power Pays" opportunity to run associated special promotions including selections plus a strategy to maximising bangs per buck.

[Management]

Thanks for the information. Our IT professional has read your post. OZmium leaves security issues up to our IT professional.
<!-- / message --><!-- edit note -->

[Chrome Prince]

Power Pays are simply a temporary correction.
You can't exploit it when bookies already have in place counter measures such as best of two or average of three.
There are simply better ways to get a better return.

The bottom line is that at the first race in Melbourne, the bookies paid 7c worse than STAB, and in Sydney 6c worse.

The "exchange" paid up to 20% better on both odds on favourites while Top Fluctuation paid the same as STAB.

As far as the "exchange" goes, regardless of what the TAB pays, overall the firming horses win, and the drifters lose, and you can make an overall easy profit on both!

I extend my sympathies to these 1% of Smartgamblers and Pro-Punters who are unable to grapple with an email link.

[downbylaw]

Had a guy telling me tonight the only reason for these "powerpays" is that the tab need to return "excess" money to the punter. Where the "excess" money comes from i have no idea, perhaps uncollected winners? Just shook and nodded at him as i could hardly decipher what he was saying. Reading this thread just reminded me about it.

Is it a true promotion or something going deeper that is covered up as a promo? Or was this guy just really really drunk?

[jfc]

Had a guy telling me tonight the only reason for these "powerpays" is that the tab need to return "excess" money to the punter. Where the "excess" money comes from i have no idea, perhaps uncollected winners? Just shook and nodded at him as i could hardly decipher what he was saying. Reading this thread just reminded me about it.

Is it a true promotion or something going deeper that is covered up as a promo? Or was this guy just really really drunk?

There are a number of google-able recent press releases which explain this.

Essentially Tabcorp must keep its overall annual rake below 16%.

They have been raking over 20% on new exotic pools which have proved popular. So they have to return that excess.

[jfc]

Power Pays are simply a temporary correction.
You can't exploit it when bookies already have in place counter measures such as best of two or average of three.
There are simply better ways to get a better return.

The bottom line is that at the first race in Melbourne, the bookies paid 7c worse than STAB, and in Sydney 6c worse.

The "exchange" paid up to 20% better on both odds on favourites while Top Fluctuation paid the same as STAB.

As far as the "exchange" goes, regardless of what the TAB pays, overall the firming horses win, and the drifters lose, and you can make an overall easy profit on both!

I extend my sympathies to these 1% of Smartgamblers and Pro-Punters who are unable to grapple with an email link.


CP,

I recall you once promoting TABs over Betfair.

Furthermore according to your product disclosure:

"In addition, when you purchase the RaceCensus database you also receive four free systems which show a six year profit on turnover at level stakes using only TAB prices!".

So how can you now argue the futility of trying to exploit a 10% bonus over TABs?

And unless I've missed something both Best Tote and SuperPrice (advertised here) are still available on Power Play days. So the bookie counter-measure argument is dead wrong. Obviously you churn away from any outfit that that's party-pooping this welcome price war.


Aside from all that the theoretical angle for exploiting Power Pays is compelling.

The 5.95% rake in question in theory equates to a market of 106.3%. In practice truncation makes that ~108%.

So if you can shave over 8% off you can "guarantee" a profit.

With IAS SupaDiv you can expect to shave:

2.50% = Premium over SuperTAB
3.33% = Effective Bonus on Thursday Deposits (10% on triple-rollover)

Only 2.17% to go.

So when you find you've matched on Betfair at significantly better than the TABs you can back the complementary runners at IAS for a favourable book.

One stunning example from yesterday was Miss Andretti. You would have spurned this disconcerting drifter. But $3.20 and better was readily available at Betfair. Even with the full 5% commission that's $3.09.

The market difference between $3.09 and the SuperPrice $2.80 is 3.35%.

So mission more than accomplished.

Now surely no one playing this caper needs to be told about the harsh distinction between theory and reality. But with a little effort there are many ways of improving the favourable figures above. For example I suspect that effective Bonuses far better than 3.33% can be hustled.

[crash]

Power Pays are a marketing tool to turn around declining TAB market share to Betfair and the NT reg. bookies like IAS etc. [especially now they are offering exotics] as more and more punters make use of the internet to place bets. These punters quickly find that better prices are available than what the TAB is offering.

Power Pays [selected days only] are having moderate success in increasing TAB pools but eventually, the TAB will have to bite the bullet and lower their takeout % on all meetings and days as their good old monopoly status fades into the distant past.

The only bet source the TAB have all to themselves now is the cash bets from TAB outlets [Power Pays not offered there ...yet] but that has been a dwindling money supply since the introduction of poker machines and the increasing punter drift to the PC as a betting tool. Reduced takeout % will eventually be right across the board I think, even in cash TAB outlets. Long overdue too!

[michaelg]

Hi, Crash.

Apart from strong competition, maybe as computer betting increases with the TAB it could provide an even stronger argument to reduce the take-out. With on-line betting there are less overheads, such as no buying/leases of TAB agencies, associated costs with them, no involvement of phone operators, etc.

The NSW TAB could also consider abolishing the current method of rounding-down particularly with the Place divvy. If after the 15% (or whatever) the true divvy is $1.38 they will then halve this because they greedily work on a $0.50 divvy that then results in a divvy of $0.69. But as they declare divvies, not as $0.50 but as a dollar amount they now round-down the $0.69 to $0.60 and multiply it by 2. This then comes to $1.20 which is the declared dividend. So by this method a $1.30 becomes a $1.20 dividend.

When this method was introduced in the mid-seventies by the then-government which owned the TAB there was a justified outcry but the TAB/Government's attitude was the usual "stuff the punter".

[crash]

I'd like to see a closing bet time for every race too. I'm sick to death of watching the jump prices of winners shorten AFTER the race.

Yesterday I had a win bet on r8 in Brisbane on a $9.70 jump price runner [Stab] that went down to $5.50 after the race was called. The fact the horse won was no compensation as when I can, I judge my bets close to start time as 'value' [bet] or 'no value' [no bet]. Getting caught out holding subjectively judged poor value bets win or lose, is poor punting.
As I rarely back favorites, 'top fluctuation' from bookies is [usually] a waste of time. Stab overall generally pays better odds on longer priced runners.

I'm not a Betfair punter, but I'm starting to seriously think about it.

[stugots]

I'm not a Betfair punter, but I'm starting to seriously think about it.

seriously doubt you would regret the move crash

[Chrome Prince]

CP,

I recall you once promoting TABs over Betfair.

Furthermore according to your product disclosure:

"In addition, when you purchase the RaceCensus database you also receive four free systems which show a six year profit on turnover at level stakes using only TAB prices!".

So how can you now argue the futility of trying to exploit a 10% bonus over TABs?

And unless I've missed something both Best Tote and SuperPrice (advertised here) are still available on Power Play days. So the bookie counter-measure argument is dead wrong. Obviously you churn away from any outfit that that's party-pooping this welcome price war.


Aside from all that the theoretical angle for exploiting Power Pays is compelling.

The 5.95% rake in question in theory equates to a market of 106.3%. In practice truncation makes that ~108%.

So if you can shave over 8% off you can "guarantee" a profit.

With IAS SupaDiv you can expect to shave:

2.50% = Premium over SuperTAB
3.33% = Effective Bonus on Thursday Deposits (10% on triple-rollover)

Only 2.17% to go.

So when you find you've matched on Betfair at significantly better than the TABs you can back the complementary runners at IAS for a favourable book.

One stunning example from yesterday was Miss Andretti. You would have spurned this disconcerting drifter. But $3.20 and better was readily available at Betfair. Even with the full 5% commission that's $3.09.

The market difference between $3.09 and the SuperPrice $2.80 is 3.35%.

So mission more than accomplished.

Now surely no one playing this caper needs to be told about the harsh distinction between theory and reality. But with a little effort there are many ways of improving the favourable figures above. For example I suspect that effective Bonuses far better than 3.33% can be hustled.

jfc,

Yes I have promoted TABS over Betfair, as I have also promoted Betfair over TABS - both have advantages, both have drawbacks, which is why I use both. Betfair have also changed a lot of things since my posting on the subject, namely ease of deposit and withdrawal. What used to take up to 7 days (via account), now happens in 24 hours.

Of course if we can get a better market percentage, then everyone is better off, but it was the use of the word "exploit."

I still fail to see how a temporary correction can be exploited when the bookies are not paying the top tote price.

I did explain best tote and gave two clear examples - the bookies paid worse that STAB.

What looks good in theory, is not what often happens in practice.

If you found an angle, then that's great - I don't personally see that all things being equal, it's worth chasing pennies on very slim advantages when the advantage is fleeting (timewise).

I possibly have misunderstood what you are doing, or maybe you haven't revealed the whole picture.

With regard to Miss Andretti I backed her at no risk whatsoever.
I had matched odds early on the lay side and backed her late in betting.

On the flipside, I backed Universal Queen, not knowing that this was possibly one of the biggest plunges around Australia to actually come off in a long time that wasn't foul play but the real deal. I backed her at long odds and layed her late in betting.

For me, any market movement is good, but I have been caught with my pants down on more than one occassion :(

[jfc]

....

Of course if we can get a better market percentage, then everyone is better off, but it was the use of the word "exploit."

I still fail to see how a temporary correction can be exploited when the bookies are not paying the top tote price.

.....

(

CP,

"What we've got here is failure to communicate."

(No prize for guessing why I haven't provided an apt working link for the memorable quote's origins).

"the bookies are not paying the top tote price."

They are, they are, they are! Or at least their sites claim to.

At least one of the advertisers on this site pays Best Tote for the SMABP Metros. Along with a handy 20% sign-up bonus.

Typically in Power Pay season that's usually a sub 105% Market.

And as I pointed out, the Median Tote + mystery Bonus outfit ended up paying 2.5% more than SuperTAB on the the first Power Pay weekend.

[Chrome Prince]

jfc,

I could be wrong, but I was informed that during PP, they weren't.
If they are then I stand corrected.

[jfc]

jfc,

I could be wrong, but I was informed that during PP, they weren't.
If they are then I stand corrected.

I can't find any evidence of such Power Play Party Pooping.

I note the oufit offering Maxidiv =Best( Best(Tote), SP ) claims Maxidivs were offered on their results page.

I suspect Bookies would have difficulties covering expenses during the Power Plays but the alternative is losing patrons.

[mad]

I'd like to see a closing bet time for every race too. I'm sick to death of watching the jump prices of winners shorten AFTER the race.

Yesterday I had a win bet on r8 in Brisbane on a $9.70 jump price runner [Stab] that went down to $5.50 after the race was called. The fact the horse won was no compensation as when I can, I judge my bets close to start time as 'value' [bet] or 'no value' [no bet]. Getting caught out holding subjectively judged poor value bets win or lose, is poor punting.
As I rarely back favorites, 'top fluctuation' from bookies is [usually] a waste of time. Stab overall generally pays better odds on longer priced runners.

I'm not a Betfair punter, but I'm starting to seriously think about it.Agree 100%.
Had this happen to me during the week. Had the opportunity of taking fixed odds but the premium available on the tote was sufficient and i "chanced it". Needless to say a stack came for the Nag and i'm left standing there holding me tool. I was F'ing furious as the Nag duly saluted. LOL, serves me right i suppose.

Anyways, i think a serious punter would be CRaZy not to have a few quid in a Betfair account. To valuable an "out" not to.

[Chrome Prince]

It won't really make any difference if they close the pools early.

In the old days they used to close with 10 minutes to go and it took a further three minutes or so til the pool updated.

So you were still having dividends crunched in after the close of pools.
The only difference was that it happened earlier.
Odds are that if the pools closed early, the bookies and Betfair would close early too.

[Bhagwan]

I believe there is a 90 sec loop between bets placed & to when it finally shows up on a internet screen.

So it makes no difference as to when close off betting occures , the same situation would happen.

The only way it could work is if TAB refuses all further bets except yours, after the 90 sec loop has done its thing.

Cheers.

[Merriguy]

I'm not a Betfair punter, but I'm starting to seriously think about it.I'm sure you would enjoy the challenge, Crash. Certainly produce a few lines on these pages from you!. The following words, however, are from a wise person on the B/F forum:

"normal life of a betfair punter


find bf, yippee 20% better odds, start backing, end up losing

start laying, its easy you have the field on your side, end up losing

start laying outsiders they never win,end up losing

start backing "two horse races" the outsiders never win,end up losing

start trading, easy in and out ,in and out, all green, end up losing






start backing......."

[denis m]

JFC what are power plays

[jfc]

JFC what are power plays

http://www.thoroughbrednews.co.nz/spring-racing/?id=27788

[Chrome Prince]

"normal life of a betfair punter


find bf, yippee 20% better odds, start backing, end up losing

start laying, its easy you have the field on your side, end up losing

start laying outsiders they never win,end up losing

start backing "two horse races" the outsiders never win,end up losing

start trading, easy in and out ,in and out, all green, end up losing

start backing......."

And why is this the case for a great many punters?

(a) The twenty percent or more on some runners occurs because they have diminished chance. The one's with increased chance actually pay less than the TAB (overall).

(b) Punters don't research enough before diving in head first.

(c) They don't set a percentage limit on lay/back prices, but chase prices, then fear they'll miss out so take what's available.

(d) Over indulgence - getting set at a price and it moves a lot, so they bet more, it moves even more, so they bet even more. One great hit suddenly is too much risk either way.

Laying horses isn't a licence to print money, but picking and choosing what to lay and at what price is a subcontract to earn your own.

I just had a horror day with regards to laying, worse possible result for a long time, but I know the way I've done it, the odds are in my favour and I can recoup them quickly because my exposure is set at no more than even money.

[the freek]

Chrome, I hope this doesn't sound like a dumb question ( I've not got into laying yet) but when you say your exposure is set at even money, are you only laying short price favorites or laying more than one horse in a race?

[Chrome Prince]

Chrome, I hope this doesn't sound like a dumb question ( I've not got into laying yet) but when you say your exposure is set at even money, are you only laying short price favorites or laying more than one horse in a race?

Often I'm laying short priced favourites, but also others.
I have learned the hard way that anything can happen in this game, so I bet back a percentage of my stake onto the win to limit my exposure to even money or less at any given point.
After busting a bank I now am doing pretty well, except I had a shocker today, all in all I'm well ahead of the game because of the exposure limits.

[Chrome Prince]

I should explain my strategy of limiting exposure a little more as it's not a case of "just bet less" or "you're just making it worse by giving back profit"

Assume the price I can back at is $2.60
Assume the price I can lay at is $2.70

Assume I lay the horse for $50.00 therefore if it wins I lose $85.00, or if it loses I win equal to my stake of $50.00.

Now my risk is $2.70, but I want even money risk and no more.

So I back it at $2.60 x $13.50.

My outlay on this runner is now $63.50, if it loses I win $36.50
If it wins I lose $63.50 or odds of even money.

Now assuming that 30% of favourites win and 70% lose, in the long run I win $653.00 for every 100 races wagered on.

My profit is reduced but so is my exposure.

So why not just lay for $63.50 instead?

Because I stand to lose $107.95 everytime a winner hits and only win $63.50 each time a lay is successful.

My profit is almost halved but so is my drawdown should a bad run of winners ensue.

However, this will only work up to a certain price before it becomes unprofitable. Also assumed is that you are laying at a profitable price in the longrun.

It might be that someone is thinking, why not just use lay amount of $36.50?

Because I can turnover more money and get an extra reduction in commission which adds a lot more to the bottom line when bet size is three or four figures ;)

[crash]

Surely, If your backing a horse at $2.60 and laying it at $2.70 regardless of bet amounts on either, the $2.60 odds is an underlay bet [and deduct 5% Betfair commission too].

[Shaun]

I can understand what you are doing is playing the percentages but as you have said this will only work up to a particular price.

The 30% is based on every fav that wins including those at $1.40 to as high aswell $6+ what you need to do is look at the price range that you can actualy make a profit at and work out the percentage from there.

using your example if you lost 65% of races your profit is $2,372.50
and winning 35% of races gives you a loss of $2,222.50
$2,372.50 - $2,222.50 = $145.50 - 5% commission = $138.22

Now this is not all that bad if you multiply the amounts by 10 but you can see where i am going with the percentages depending on the prices..

[salty]

Chrome Prince

Can you give us an idea of how you calculate the amount to bet to bring your lay risk down to evens?
I have quite a good strike rate on lays, but don't seem to come out much ahead, and I think your method has merit - I'm sure it would improve my bottom line.
Salty

[Chrome Prince]

I can understand what you are doing is playing the percentages but as you have said this will only work up to a particular price.

The 30% is based on every fav that wins including those at $1.40 to as high aswell $6+ what you need to do is look at the price range that you can actualy make a profit at and work out the percentage from there.



Precisely.

My range is odds on to $2.90

I lay all odds on with no bet back.

Anything from $2.10 to $2.90 I lay and bet back.

[Mark]

Hi CP

I think you've made a boo boo here.
By my calculations you've now laid the horse for 63.4/36.5, odds of 1.73/1.
The odds laid are now higher than the original bet because you've backed back at lower odds.
Surely you mean back @ 2.70, and lay off at 2.60.
eg lay $50 @ 2.60 = 80/50
back $43.33 @ 2.70 = 73.66/43.33
Which gives, laid an even 6.66........(after commission)

[Shaun]

Mark he is trying to play the percentages a bit like that other system you tried where you layed three horses where if the fav came in you lost on the race but in the long run you tried to make a profit with less favs winning, but in the end more favs won than you accounted for.

[shoto]

CP - this is known as hedging, is it not?

[Chrome Prince]

Yes I know there are boo boos, but I was very tired when posting (these UK races take a lot out of you.)

I actually am betting back at a higher price, but only when it's within 10c of the lay price and only up to $2.90.

It may be a little obscure, but it's working a treat over hundreds of races.

There is also a little more to it, but I'll keep that bit to myself for now.

Suffice to say that this is in conjunction with other overlays achieved in the race at the same time. I am limiting my exposure on the favourite because I already have huge overlays (no risk) on other horses.

E.g. my profit on one race was $594 and my investment was $46.00.

I had six horses running for me no risk, and could afford to lay and bet back on the favourite to even things up.

But that kind of result is extremely rare, someone offered 100/1 about a horse that was realistically a 15/1 chance. It won, so I collected on the win (after laying it back at realistic odds) and collected on laying the favourite.

[Mark]

Risk free Chrome ???, I've had people tell me for years that it can't be done.
The best way to go IMO.

[shoto]

Assuming you cannot know with certainty the price movements, and you allocate amounts for back and lay at various prices, how can you engineer a risk-free situation, other than luck or hope that the necessary bets will be matched?

[Chrome Prince]

shoto,

Yes you can actually be sure that some prices will move out and others will come in, especially when bookies are winding prices in, but it hasn't hit Betfair yet.

Also, just with a little experience, I can spot a price that I know with a good deal of certainty will come in or blow out, especially on outsiders. I sometimes get it wrong, but the times I get it right more than compensates.
If a price doesn't move like predicted, I can always lay off on another runner.

I can have five runners running risk free, and then have a free bet on others and still come out ahead.

[shoto]

Thanks CP. Are you mostly looking to get set-up with lays, or do you go in with a mix of back/lay from the beginning?

[Chrome Prince]

Shoto,

To be honest I don't have a set strategy for every race, although the principle is the same. I read the market and make decisions on the best approach and may have three different strategies in the one race.
I approach a race with an odds on favourite quite differently to an open 4/1 the field race.

As an example: In a trot race tonight I assessed (better word than "knew") that the long odds on favourite would firm in the market and the longer horses would blow in the market, so simply backed the odds on pop and layed all the longies at shorter prices than they'd end up on the tote. As they were scoring up, I was able to lay the odds on horse @$1.15 and had backed it @$1.51. I also bet back on the longshots on the tote which were "free" bets.

If the shorty won I would have made a small profit
If the shorty lost I would have been square if a longshot didn't salute.
If a longshot saluted I would have made a huge profit @ no risk.

The best scenario was a very nice profit
The worst breaking even!

As it stood I won a small amount for the race as the odds on favourite held off challengers...one of those challengers was one of the longshots :(.

But multiply betting like this over 100 races and you have to end up in front as long as the prices are right, although of course it doesn't always go exactly to plan and this is only one strategy in the armoury.

Someone once told me I'd go broke laying every favourite on Betfair (Racing, Pacing, Australia, U.K, South Africa, United Arab Emirates etc).
But I'm doing it, and winning better percentages than I thought.
The only thing I avoid is the USA.

[shoto]

Thanks CP, very interesting stuff! For some (ie me) it would not be an easy thing to do. I can understand what you have said recently that it has not happened without alot of study and work.

Your comment about determining a true price is intriguing, and surely must be a huge key. (Not that I'm asking you to say anything about it.) That you have created a methodology that is reliable and low-risk is excellent. Good success to you!

[jfc]

One outfit developing an automated betting product, has published full results of a theoretical overlay betting splurge on the 1st Power Pay weekend.

It reported a staggering 24.29% POT from 197 bets and 22 wins.

Unfortunately there are some non-key errors in the figures, and the experiment has not been updated for the subsequent days.

I am in no position to vouch for the validity of those figures and whether they could be sustained through the 700 or so bets for the full Power Pays.

But, in rough calculations, if you bet 2% of your bank (as Kelly suggests) then you would expect to grow your bank by 0.5% every bet.

And after 700 bets the expected bank would be 32 times the original!

I'd probably be satisfied with a mere 16-fold increase.

[Chrome Prince]

Your comment about determining a true price is intriguing, and surely must be a huge key. (Not that I'm asking you to say anything about it.) That you have created a methodology that is reliable and low-risk is excellent. Good success to you!

Shoto,

I don't want to hijack jfc's thread, so I'll answer your question and post in another thread if I need to reply to you.

Whilst there are massive variations within, it is very easy to determine the overall true prices of horses. Take whatever price guide you use and simply work out the market percentage, add that percentage to the price given of your horse, the true price will be very close to what you work out, or close enough for you to make a profit laying at less than that price.
*NB I don't use published guides etc, I only use bookies prices.

Here's some justification for my research, if you were able to back every favourite on the IAS opening fixed price, you would make around 2% POT +/-.

It is also not that hard to lay at better than the final and true prices on Betfair if you weight your bets so that you have the most money on the shortest price available.

I layed a hurdler in a 4 horse field in the U.K. last night for as low as $1.31, the last lay price before they jumped was $1.80, this makes a huge difference in the scheme of things, I had assessment that this was more than 50% less than it's true price.

It lost ;)

The night before, a horse in a 3 mile race in a three horse field was layed at $1.12, it also lost.

[jfc]

One amazing achievement from Power Pays was converting a 5.95% commission to a market of 109.80%. According to the BAT for the Miss Andretti race.

There are a number of news items about Power Pay extensions. Further Victorian weekends.

But now they are trying El Gordo Quaddies! Zero % commission!

[jfc]

http://www.thoroughbrednews.co.nz/spring-racing/?id=28160

Skinny details about the Fat Quaddie to date, but finally some news.

An obvious way of exploiting this is to skirt ~around the pair's public charity picks in the Quaddie itself, and covering those presumably overbacked perms elsewhere.

[jfc]

The Rosehill Fat Quaddie has been moved forward 1 race! And the Daily Double races also seem to have changed.

http://www.racingandsports.com.au/racing/rsNewsArt.asp?NID=101766

This non-traditional arrangement should be tremendous for adding even more confusion to the typically malfunctioning Tabcorp experience.

Presumably many will miss getting their bets on. Not to mention those putting their Race N selections on Race N-1 instead.

[jfc]

The various Tabcorp fire-sale promotions this year continue to be manna from heaven for anyone who dreamt of making it in this caper, considering they allow modest punters to compete on a more level playing field against the sharks who enjoy the advantages of secretive kickbacks.

Yet not only has there been ZERO interest here, but discussion has completely ceased everywhere.

And now it's almost too late.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/horseracing/west-looks-to-increase-racings-pot/2007/08/07/1186252705474.html

NSW racing minister West is trying to scale Everest by proving that he is even less competent than his predecessors.

By trying to lift the obscene 16% rake.

Hope someone introduces a market on his re-election prospects.

[crash]

As far as Saturday's go anyway, I can't believe there are still punters who aren't using Betfair if they are able to. It has the biggest collection of mug Bookies available anywhere .... a punters paradise.

[jfc]

http://www.virtualformguide.com/cgi-bin/tvf/displaynewsitem.pl?20070809tabsays.txt

By my calculation punters will be slugged an extra $40 million from these so-called reforms.

But Nason claims that punters will benefit.

This is clearly "misleading or deceptive advertising" which the ACCC considers in breach of the Trade Practices Act.

And if punters simply voted with their feet then such rubbish would immediately come a cropper.

Instead punters will probably still patronise the high-rake exotics. And when these jackpot the wise guys will definitely move in to clean up.