Lay the LSW Fav

[beton]

System just dropped on my desk. UK and free SNM. But it begs the question.
What is the strike rate of the LSW Fav in =>10 fields?
5 simple rules
LAY THE FAV THAT MEETS THE FOLLOWING
LSW
FAV between $2 and $6
=>10 Runners
Soft to good
Age 3 to 7.

They are spruiking 84% winning lays and 130% ROI.

The bell ringing here is that it is the Fav. So there is only one qualifying horse. And every second system is saying back the LSW.

[Rinconpaul]

Well Beton, 3/3 yesterday Lay winners:
R5 Ipswich Ziggies Dance $4.50
R5 Randwick Perplexity $4.00
R7 Muswellbrook Strobic $3.75

Another gem from Beton, thanks for that, will look further :)

[Lord Greystoke]

Interesting angle.

Makes you wonder how many sucker plays there are out there which get milked by the few 'in the know', every day. In many(most?) cases, the direct opposite to the racing myths which get passed down and passed on by the clueless crowd??

Cheers LG

[darkydog2002]

If you layed the Fav regardless you could expect between 67 - 72 % successful Lays.

[beton]

If you layed the Fav regardless you could expect between 67 - 72 % successful Lays.And you would lose overall.

This takes out the odds on Favs which get up to 82% depending on price. It takes out the heavy tracks. and it is the LSW.

Considering the price, the going and field size the average SR is 27.78%. Thus if this group is claiming 84% one must consider this is a dramatic difference 11.78%. We are not looking at just a few oddball races. We are talking of 50% of all races.

We could almost get a very positive result Backing the fav in =>10 fields, good and better between $2-6 IF NOT LSW.

If somebody could test this please. If it is a good result I will post my addy

[Rinconpaul]

If you layed the Fav regardless you could expect between 67 - 72 % successful Lays.
You're right Darky, but you need to Lay favourites for a min average price of $3.20 to break even by my rough maths. If you could Lay them for the average Tote price you could make a profit but Betfairs SP/Lay price is nearly always greater, then less the 6.5% commish, you don't stand a chance, otherwise we'd all be doing it. The other alternative is to increase the strike rate to 84% as they quote. Good if it's true?

[beton]

<o:p> </o:p>



SYSTEM RESULTS FOR: CURRENT_LSW FAV 11/11/2011-03/09/2012



WIN PLACE QUINELLA EXACTA TRIFECTA FIRST FOUR



Races Bet: 1004 1004 1004 1004 1003 962



Races Won: 197 489 235 117 76 40



S.R./Race: 19.6% 48.7% 23.4% 11.7% 7.6% 4.2%



Outlay($): 1004.00 1004.00 5154.00 5154.00 21400.00 65220.00



Return : 764.70 845.46 4125.30 3658.50 15530.60 49684.90



$ Profit : -239.30 -158.54 -1028.70 -1495.50 -5869.40 -15535.10



% P.O.T. : -23.8% -15.8% -20.0% -29.0% -27.4% -23.8%

NOT VERY GOOD AT ALL

[beton]

Previous post was fav Not LSW $2-6 DG =>10. This is exactly same substituting LSW. Neither are impressive.
SYSTEM RESULTS FOR: CURRENT_LSW FAV 23/12/2011-03/09/2012
WIN PLACE QUINELLA EXACTA TRIFECTA FIRST FOUR
Races Bet: 1030 1030 1030 1030 1025 995
Races Won: 221 525 238 138 76 41
S.R./Race: 21.5% 51.0% 23.1% 13.4% 7.4% 4.1%
Outlay($): 1030.00 1030.00 5208.00 5208.00 21080.00 63120.00
Return : 815.80 935.86 4059.30 3936.10 10354.50 38465.40
$ Profit : -214.20 -94.14 -1148.70 -1271.90 -10725.50 -24654.60
% P.O.T. : -20.8% -9.1% -22.1% -24.4% -50.9% -39.1%

[Rinconpaul]

Call me dumb or dumber Beton, but I just don't get it? In both posts you start off with $ bet matches Outlay and then the outlay seems to go through the roof, $63120 for 995 races??

Maybe it'd be better if you just one line it for me. Are you saying that the system as described in your first post is a loser, big time? Yes or No?

[beton]

Call me dumb or dumber Beton, but I just don't get it? In both posts you start off with $ bet matches Outlay and then the outlay seems to go through the roof, $63120 for 995 races??

Maybe it'd be better if you just one line it for me. Are you saying that the system as described in your first post is a loser, big time? Yes or No?Ain't no one here dumb or dumber.
The system in the first post was for UK. That being said there should be a similar result in Aus. The first post was lay the LSW FAV so it has to be BF or equiv. The increase in outlay was that the test was run thru betselector and the $63120 is their default first four outlay. The test is on Aus races and tote prices.

Based on the claims of 84% it did not seem right and if it was true then it really puts the cat amongst the pigeons. So I thought I would run a representative sample 1000 races and see. I tested looking at the non LSW which I expected a good result but wasn't. so I did the same looking at LSW.

So would you get 84% and 130% laying here unlikely. In the UK is another story.

Several questions are raised but. My database of races which is prior 2006 spits out 27.78% ALL FAVS (can't split them) and the current test in 2012 only gives circa 20%. Could have been a bad patch. Or it could highlight some current theories that with the advent of computers both the handicapper is getting better (ave 1.7 len winning margin down to 1.3 len) as is the punter (lower market prices).

I doubt that the overall fav SR has improved but I suspect that there is an increased recognition that some races are one horse races, some are two horse races and some are wide open.

[partypooper]

You're right Darky, but you need to Lay favourites for a min average price of $3.20 to break even by my rough maths. If you could Lay them for the average Tote price you could make a profit but Betfairs SP/Lay price is nearly always greater, then less the 6.5% commish, you don't stand a chance, otherwise we'd all be doing it. The other alternative is to increase the strike rate to 84% as they quote. Good if it's true?

Interesting, I wonder though do you have any stats if ONLY the favs @$3.20 + are layed?

[beton]

Interesting, I wonder though do you have any stats if ONLY the favs @$3.20 + are layed?Now you are pushing the envelop. This requires someone like UB or CP with a relative database. Betselector won't do it.

[UselessBettor]

I can do it but probably not for a few days. I have a couple of other projects I am working on.

[UselessBettor]

it got the better of me so I ran it :

It shows an 11% loss laying the fav based on the original rules.

[UselessBettor]

in fact swap the rule of laying to backing and you make a 2% profit after commission.

[UselessBettor]

Started playing around with the rules:


BACK THE FAV THAT MEETS THE FOLLOWING
LSW
FAV
=>10 Runners
Not Heavy
Age 3 to 7.
Barrier >= 10

Profit of 11.98%

[SpeedyBen]

<table align="center" bgcolor="#ddffff" border="4" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="95%"><tbody><tr align="center"><th width="20%">
</th> <th width="20%">Bets</th> <th width="20%">Wins</th> <th width="20%">Win Strike Rate</th> <th width="20%">Win %Return at Estimated Betfair Odds</th> </tr> <tr align="center"><td>All Selections</td><td>488</td><td>131</td><td>26.8%</td><td>103.7%

</td></tr> </tbody></table>

[beton]

Just goes to show that some of the claims you get bombarded with on a constant basis are not worth the paper they are written on. Barrier =>10 shows that if you in form then you can get across quick enough to negate the draw

[SpeedyBen]

Beton
I think the UK have standardized on barriers now but until recently each course decided which side barrier 1 would be on. With so many straight races sometimes the low numbers are better and sometimes not. On some big race meetings all winners on the day come from the same side of the draw. I would think that unlikely unless there is a bias of some sort - going, wind, drainage et al. It's a dog's breakfast.