favorites with a SP of $3.50 and $4.50

[crash]

My latest 'sit in front of the telly teletext and do stuff all' system, except back favourites that will start at between $3.50 and $4.50 and count my profit ?

3 out of 10 will see me in clover ...or should if I can get 3 out of 10 [?].

Anyone with win SR's for this price range ?

[shy]

I'm afraid 2004 was not a good year....
3663 selections
822 winners
22.4% SR
LOT 13.1%

[davez]

longest run of outs availiable? if so a simple staking plan could be applied

[davez]

& also how about fav's starting at greater than $4.50?

[crash]

At $4 average odds there would be a 66% chance of a run of 20 outs in 1000 bets and a reasonable chance of having quit a few runs of outs of 10 [or more]. Not geat for progression betting.

$4.50 favourites are too few to make watching tab prices worth while.

[Mark]

How do you know what the SP will be?

[Mr. Logic]

I've had a think about your idea. Assuming you know what the favourite is and that its tote odds will be $3.50 to $4.50 it still doesn't make much sense to me.

I went to http://www.propun.com.au/bookmakers_online_gambling_index.html
and had a look at tote odds compared with bookie odds for Saturdays in Melbourne & Sydney.

Here are some examples of winners:

Why would I want to take
$3.50 tote about Flying Pegasus when $4.00 is available with the bookies.
$4.40 tote about But I'm Serious when $5.50 is available with the bookies.
$4.10 tote about Dance At Ascot when $5.50 is available with the bookies.

To me a method based on backing tote favourites is doomed to fail because of the big tote unders you get on Saturdays in Melbourne & Sydney. Now if you don't get such big unders on the tote midweek it is not because the tote offers you any better value. It is simply because the bookie markets may offer you worse value.

[crash]

Stats tell us 3 out of 10 favourites win. So [misplaced] logic suggests that we could indeed make a long term profit by simply backing all favourites starting at $3.50 or more.

I was having a bit of a play with the absurdity of putting too much faith in numbers that often by themselves as a betting guide mean bugger all. In fact the stats. don't tell us we will loose with the above system over the next year, just that we will loose long term or that we [might] have made a loss over the last year.

Another example would be: System 'A' checked over stats. for the last 10yrs. has averaged a 15% POT per year and another system 'B' similarly checked. made a 15% loss.

Armed with our stats. and being generally clever, we are going to bet system 'A' through the next year, but are we in fact making the correct decision and should we actually be betting on system 'B' instead ?

Do the stats. tell us that over the next year we will make a profit from system 'A' and a loss from system 'B' ?
Nothing of the kind of course and the 'all things being equal' logic doesn't cut the mustard either, because the laws of probability doesn't support backing A over B for the next year or vis-a-vis. We are on our own in this decision.

The stats cannot tell us the information we really need [will we make a profit or loss next year by backing system A or B ?] and never will tell us any such things. Hidden profit clumping and profit/loss % variables that have occurred over the past 10 yrs.in either system, would have ruled out any way of working out in advance which years where going to be profitable nor how the dice will fall next year. System 'A' might have made [averaged] 30% losses for 3 of those 10yrs. and system 'B' might have made 30% profit for 3yrs. and this explanation might go a long way in explaining why profitable systems always seem to go pear shaped after awhile, but not that they will stay pear shaped long term.

The only info. of any help is that if we have enough money [and perseverance] we have a better chance of making a profit on system A than system B if we back it for a full 10yrs., ....perhaps.

[partypooper]

Mark, it is possible to place your bets with IAS with a minimum price stipulation. i.e. $100 SR1-1, Min SP 3/1 /or top fluc. ( or no bet) not that that solves the problem entirely.

Crash, I realise where you were going with this one but as it happens I did a lot of research along these lines and built my own data base over a few years with the main exception that I used PRE-POST prices 3/1 or above. Overall of course, the trend was about 10% LOT, I was able to lift this ( with actual results) to a small profit of 2-3% with obvious filters, but was never game to actually try it with real money.
But this was b4 the days of being able to bet at Best tote or Top Fluc. So I feel that with a lot of concentration it could be made to "work".
Or indeed it could be used to only back the overs, using the pp as a rating sort of.
I've still got the data base on a floppy somewhere.

[Mark]

Couldn't tell you Party, I use Betfair for everything.

[partypooper]

Mark, so I guess you could only bet when you can get overs on Betfair??? that would have to lift the idea into profit wouldn't it?? (hoping)

[Mark]

Not sure why you're asking me as I don't think this method has much merit.

[crash]

Party,

I have an IAS account an no you can't. Deciding on genuine overs is no easy task either.

I often use pp to work out a 4 horse betting line and adjust them [downward] for an 80% field, but using the prices for individual runners could be a bit perilous.

I also use pp for all the systems I'm forever stuffing around with. I don't use a data bank ;for the reasons I've already mentioned in my above post] and if the logic is sound I just bet them [fun money] with not even a trial !!

[zeditave]

Crash - you used to be able to by phone, give that a try (i worked for them many eons ago)....

[partypooper]

Crash, I'm relyably informed that you can still bet with IAS and stipulate a minimum price. But also there is another link via Pro-Punter to a bookie who will do the same.