Should punters factor in price?

[Steve M]

As a regular listener to Sport 927 I've heard Steve Moran's grab that 'Value. You can't eat it but you must have it in order to survive.'

Also read a forum comment recently that you're best to ignore price as you have to believe your own judgement is better in the long run.

What are the thoughts and approaches used...

Have a selection, attach a price stipulation and only back it when the price matches your assessment.

Or back your selection come what may.

[Mr. Logic]

in my opinion the only way you can make a profit over the long term by backing every selection you have made and ignoring the price is if the "overs" more than compensate for the "unders." Bacause you can guarantee that by backing every one of your selections you will get plenty of unders as markets are priced at more than 100%.

[jake]

selection 'unders'..i include in exotics..selection 'overs'..back for a win.. (& place if 20/1 or over) ..

[Brendon]

The price is important. This is how I work. Once I make my pick - 99% of the time the night before - I then try and figure where and when I can get the best price.

Who says the openers are accurate? Its just opinion until the race is over.

If its 8/1 fixed on the tote fixed price the night before, and I think it should be 3 or 4/1 and I'm sure it has a great chance then I get on it. Quite often (not always) I do good this way.

Sometimes if I think a horse is money in the bank, and it is $2.20 the night before and I'm willing to back it at short odds, I might wait until the last moment. Sometimes it goes into $1.80 (odds on, look on). But sometimes it blows out to $2.80, when punters all of a sudden notice C. Williams on another horse in the race.

I go to different online bookies to get the best price.

I have never put money on a horse just because of the odds. I got to think its the one.

[crash]

When it comes to price, whether we think 'it is the one' or not, price is very important. What we have to overcome is our average strike rate and average price to turn our SR into profit, otherwise 'feel good' winners can be a big drag if they are too short in price, regardless if they win or lose!

What we should be doing is working out our SR over the last 12mths. [average SR] if we have been keeping a record of our bets, which we should be doing of course.

If our strike win rate is 1 in 4 [your not a bad punter if your score is this] we should remember that 3 out of our 4 picks averaged out will fail regardless of how we 'feel' about a bet. Because a bet is a short price, it does not guarantee a better chance of a win [ approx. 70% of favorites lose] and says nothing about overs or unders. So any bet below 3/1 is a bad bet if our SR is 1 in 4, win or lose. Any bet above this is a good bet, win or lose when we take SR into account.

There is such a thing as a losing bet being a good bet if the price is right and is above our SR win price formula because we win 1 in 4 bets [example, but work out your own SR and the maths that suit].
Below the price that fits the SR is a spiral into loss and punter misery. It's basic maths after all. Isn't it?

[goty0405]

If our strike win rate is 1 in 4 [your not a bad punter if your score is this] we should remember that 3 out of our 4 picks averaged out will fail regardless of how we 'feel' about a bet. Because a bet is a short price, it does not guarantee a better chance of a win [ approx. 70% of favorites lose] and says nothing about overs or unders. So any bet below 3/1 is a bad bet if our SR is 1 in 4, win or lose. Any bet above this is a good bet, win or lose when we take SR into account.

There is such a thing as a losing bet being a good bet if the price is right and is above our SR win price formula because we win 1 in 4 bets [example, but work out your own SR and the maths that suit].
Below the price that fits the SR is a spiral into loss and punter misery. It's basic maths after all. Isn't it?And the beauty of maths is that you can make numbers say almost anything. I think you're on the right track but I'd like to point out something - by eliminating selections based on a price after you've calculated strike rate is bad news. These two facets need to be looked at simultaneously.

Using your example:
25% Strike rate. Therefore you say you need 4.0 (3/1) on each bet for it to work. However if you elimante all those under that price you could be eliminating a fair share of winners, thus lowering the effective strike rate to be more like 15-20%, and thus making this now a bad system...

So if you have a method/system/whatever and you start thinking about applying upper or lower limits on prices then you need to re-calculate the strikerate for those criteria...otherwise the wrong maths could get you into a lot of trouble!

[crash]

SR is SR regadless of how you would like to swing it.

[Stix]

And the beauty of maths is that you can make numbers say almost anything. I think you're on the right track but I'd like to point out something - by eliminating selections based on a price after you've calculated strike rate is bad news. These two facets need to be looked at simultaneously.

Using your example:
25% Strike rate. Therefore you say you need 4.0 (3/1) on each bet for it to work. However if you elimante all those under that price you could be eliminating a fair share of winners, thus lowering the effective strike rate to be more like 15-20%, and thus making this now a bad system...

So if you have a method/system/whatever and you start thinking about applying upper or lower limits on prices then you need to re-calculate the strikerate for those criteria...otherwise the wrong maths could get you into a lot of trouble!All depends on the make up of the prices in your Strike Rate. Av Div is one thing but % of winners between certain price bands ($2-$3, $3.10-$4, those over $10 etc), might tell the story in terms of profitability. For me S/R and Av. Div is important and most importantly % of winners less than $10.

[Steve M]

My thoughts are that things can be a little over analysed and complicated by punters.

Keep detailed records.

Is it possibly as simple as SR [in % terms] x Ave Ret = [Over 100 good] [Under 100 bad].

Punters introduce a price component when it's Under 100. That is the selection method isn't profitable. But that becomes rather dangerous, because as mentioned, you invariably pass up winners. Now backing less losers than more winners is always my aim [to a point] but how do I really know which horses to pass up? Do I do it on mathematics or some other means, which is heading down the system punters route of being forced to introduce more rules to try and eeek out a profit.

When all this is saying is you're selection method is no good...

I tend to think punters would be well advised to look at selections that are further out in the market [can you argue that introducing a pricing component is the same thing? maybe?].

I feel that plenty of market favourites and jockey/trainer favourites are under the odds. Some of the less fancied runners can also vary more widely in markets providing value [in theory].

Plenty of ways to skin a cat and I'm sure others will have different experiences but that's my [rambling] thoughts :-)

Edit: posted before seeing your last post Stix but agree with some of your throughts about Ave div and SR

[Bhagwan]

Here's one way to convert its win chance to price.

Lets say we use its career win SR & convert this to price & only bet this horse if we get this price or more.

Maybe target just the 2 best chances for each race & bet either one or both if we get our price or none if we don't get our price on either of them.

Example
18% SR
1 divided by 18% = $5.55

15%
1 / 15% = $6.67

21%
1 / 21% = $4.76

25%
1 / 25% = $4.00

30%
1 / 30% = $3.33

The idea here is to try & think in general terms when it comes to value.
We know we will never be 100% correct & with some value injected, it helps us to get closer to our goal.


Cheers.

[crash]

All depends on the make up of the prices in your Strike Rate. Av Div is one thing but % of winners between certain price bands ($2-$3, $3.10-$4, those over $10 etc), might tell the story in terms of profitability. For me S/R and Av. Div is important and most importantly % of winners less than $10.

You have a valid point there Stix. I think than in my post I was oversimplifying the point about acceptable price regarding SR.
Put another way, in the long run if we add up all our winning bet prices [from shorties to long-shots] and work out their average price and find we have lost for the period, then the prices we are taking must be improved in some areas, or alternately, our SR must be improved if we wish to make a profit. Naturally, as you have pointed out, our shorter priced winners will get up more than our long-shots. Getting the price balance right is the important thing. Looking at the performance of our 'price bands', will soon tell us where we need better prices.

We also have the option of ignoring a race if we feel the price on our selection is too low. Although we might be sure the selection will win, often it won't! We don't have to bet a selection regardless of price just because we think it will win. We can move on.

I ignore heaps of horses that I consider at a poor price and unless their is another horse in the race at good odds that I think has a better chance of winning than it's odds suggest. Some will lose but also some will win. Ditto a shortie I liked but ignored because below a certain price, not enough of them get up for me, to be profitable. Ditto above a certain price [unless I've spotted something, which doesn't happen that often].

Between $4 and $9 is my personal comfort zone and ironically, the higher odds winners [a bit less of them of course] are returning more profit than my shorter priced ones. That's my personal experience anyway. For other punters it might be the other way around.

[Maurice]

For me, i guess value can also be a bit systematic, i have it priced at $4.00 (3-1) , but its showing 3.90, so i cant back it, unders? but if its 4.10 i can back it, overs? ..if you decisions come down to 10 or 20 cents, umaahhh your in trouble.
So basically then it depends , if you took the early price or missed the boat. oh...real world
my top selection $4, i see 3.90, i hope it will move out a bit, from the bird cage hes tipped it, and its an O'shea horse, so now the stable has hit the ring, now its 3.50 .... 3.00..the tote $2.50 ..wins with a leg in the air, like those good things do.....
next race, can you belive it ..same thing , top rated $4, it shows 3.90, it O'shea horse, while typing this its now moved now to $4, we'll take it, from the board cage hes tiped it second, but now its 4.50 ...sp was $5.50, it ran 3rd.
your down say $25, really you should be a little in front,..how much is depending ,if you took fixed or tote...or square if your busy watching the fashions on the field.
perhaps one example , said you are on the right track, the other said you maybe mistaken.... :)

My markets are far better than than yours, BUT his is far better than mine and the other guys are even better, BUT the odd set early on, made by the head hcp'er in the NT, seconded by his back up,confirmed by their video watcher...are now being confirmed by the stable ..........but.. i ,we, you , know better and so much more?

[Bhagwan]

One can see from that good example , that it is a strong idea to treat value in general terms.

Its easy to get too caught up in analysis paralysis.

Try not to beat ourselves up to much if we miss a collect.

Cheers.

[schonegg]

i have it priced at $4.00 (3-1) , but its showing 3.90, so i cant back it, unders? but if its 4.10 i can back it, overs? ..if you decisions come down to 10 or 20 cents, umaahhh your in trouble. You're right Maurice, it's a tough one, a judgement call. How confident are you in the prices you have?

I remember a chap in the West who had a pricing service, and he would put up his working sheet on his website the Monday after the races. He axiom was to never accept unders no matter what, and his worksheet showed he never budged from that. It was fractional odds then, but as an example, if he rated something 9/4 he wouldn't touch it at 2/1. So he'd then stand it out in Trifectas, multiples etc. because better value would be had in those pools. But if he got 3/1 he'd have a decent win bet on it.

[Maurice]

I wouldn't be so stringent and to not accept unders..but i cant disagree. It depends on how you structure you bets, I personally bet exotics more than anything, there is very little value in win betting, especially on metrop's, too many people with too much information, Superior resources and heaps of cash. Most of the runners with a realistic chance have been found by the bookies, and then crushed by the large punters. Although if your likely return was $100 from $70 worth of trifacta's but also and you can get a return of $90 from win bets, thats a choice.

And of course, i am always weary of anything printed on Monday, BUT then again, why should anyone give you anything in advance for free.

[Brendon]

Post deleted. Low content. Moderator 3.

[Brendon]

Robden Flyer is a very stupid horse. I didn't ask for much, just for it to be in front of the other horses at the end.