Odds on betting

[sammyg]

Hi,

Just wondering if anyone can tell me how I would go betting $1000 on every odds on favourite (Gallops/Trots/Dogs) with UniTAB in the past year or two??

Thanks!

[crash]

You'd lose plenty of money. "Odds on look on" is sage advice going back to the beginning of punting. Some specialist punters might make a go of it on Betfair perhaps, but generally speaking the saying holds true.

In my silly days of punting, I once stuck a run of 7 odds-on outs at $300 a pop per bet and almost wiped out a $2,500 profit I had up on IAS.

[Chrome Prince]

You'd lose the least of any price band, but you would lose.
Odds on you'd lose 5% to 7%, the higher the price band the more you lose in percentages.
Odds on is profitable taking top fluc or best price on Betfair.
Chuck in a filter or two and you're in business.

[Bhagwan]

Google - Adrian Massey .
There you will find a research engin which can break down the various odds ranges up to 2000 races.

It's a UK site but the basic stats will be similar to here.

Cheers.

[rumply]

There is or was a fella called the 'Fireman' who would probably put a strong case to you NOT to chase the odds on conveyances

From memory he only backed odds on 2 yolds racing in Brisbane, did very well for a while then came a big cropper

All I would say on the subject is why bet so short? Look at the results on any given day & tally how many winners are odds on. That should be enough of an incentive to go longer.

To add a post script - theres not much sweeter than collecting on that 30/1 shot, whilst getting back $145 for my $100 outlay just doesnt do it for me

[crash]

Look at Sydney last Sat. all the winners were double digit longshots. The sense to me is get on to decent prices. I just can't see the logic of betting short. Do the form and spot the weak favorites and bet around them.

[Chrome Prince]

Because you lose less betting on odds on favourites.
Longshots, you have to overcome 30% plus percentages against you versus 5% to 10% against.

A little bit of filtering, not least of which can be just easing or firming, can reap profits, even though their so small odds.

The Fireman came unstuck through poor money management, his story is notoriously known for his martingale staking which wiped him out. Had he stuck to sensible bank management and concentrated on getting the best odds, he'd be chief of the brigade and at the top of the fire ladder instead of jumping out of a burning window and missing the mat. ;)

The Fireman's spree....

$40000 bank - put the lot on the flying sprinter Tod Maid.
won

$105,000 on Danish Dancer in Sydney.
lost

$60,000 on Sheil Sail in Sydney
lost

$70,000 on Princess Thalia.
lost

Crazy :eek:

[crash]

For the small punter though and I will assume that would be most forum members here [$2 to $50 bets] with smallish banks or more likely, a weekly punting allowance, there is probably no real joy in chasing tiny margins during a day of punting at short odds. The popularity here of exotic betting also points to this. Most punters are looking for a decent win. It may not be the most sensible approach, but it's there never the less. Any martingale approach with short favorites, just isn't an option for small punters.

Backing the right runner at decent odds though certainly creates it's own problems. Still, I'd rather have my money on something with a bit of odds and lose than a $2 shot. There is no maths that says in a particular race, a $2 shot has a better chance than an $8 shot [or more]. Good odds are getting up all the time. Sometimes for the whole meeting!

[rumply]

Because you lose less betting on odds on favourites.
Longshots, you have to overcome 30% plus percentages against you versus 5% to 10% against.
Sorry Chrome Prince, have to disagree if your saying the reason to back shorties is because one 'loses less'?

One should take up another pastime if thats the logic they follow.

[Shaun]

For the small punter though and I will assume that would be most forum members here [$2 to $50 bets] with smallish banks or more likely, a weekly punting allowance, there is probably no real joy in chasing tiny margins during a day of punting at short odds.

This is the reason punters lose because they think that it takes a very large bank to win.

You can start with as little as $500 and build it up in to a bigger bank, the idea is to start thinking like a professional and not a mug punter chasing a dream that never comes.

If you are just after a bit of fun on a saturday you can still use good money skills, it is better to win a little than lose a lot, and with practice you can increase your bets as the bank grows.

[crash]

I know what Chrome was saying is correct:

Originally Posted by Chrome Prince
"Because you lose less betting on odds on favourites.
Longshots, you have to overcome 30% plus percentages against you versus 5% to 10% against."

But only as far as overall stats. go.

We don't bet 'overall', we bet 1 race at a time and in that situation, the percentages are meaningless, regardless of how many bets we have. Also, a $5 loss on an odds-on favorite is exactly the same $5 loss bet on any other runner. Every race bet is separate from any other bet. Their is no rule that says a longshot punter will lose more than an odds-on punter. It depends on the punter. If I back a horse at say $10, that's not because I think it is a 9/1 chance, it's because I think it's a 3/1 or 2/1 chance!

[Chrome Prince]

Sorry Chrome Prince, have to disagree if your saying the reason to back shorties is because one 'loses less'?

One should take up another pastime if thats the logic they follow.

The logic is pretty logical actually, you have to find a 10% edge to make money as opposed to finding a 30%+ edge.
It's easier to find a smaller edge than a larger edge.

As crash says though, it's probably also easier to find a horse that is completely mispriced at longer odds.

[crash]

The logic is pretty logical actually, you have to find a 10% edge to make money as opposed to finding a 30%+ edge.
It's easier to find a smaller edge than a larger edge.

As crash says though, it's probably also easier to find a horse that is completely mis priced at longer odds.

How do you measure 'edge' in a race [especially 10%] accurately? It's only opinion isn't it or is there a 'true odds' handbook each race day I don't know about?

As you said, I have no trouble finding plenty of horses I'd judge [ in my opinion] have 30%+ edge in their odds. I can be out quite a bit and still be mostly on overs, but 10%? $2.70 instead of $3?
Flip a coin, heads your overs, tails your unders. That's about as accurate as anyone will ever get in an individual race before it starts.