Thanks for all that P57.
Unfortunately I don't have your knowledge of racing which would be essential to back long shots the way you do (I would think). Often the horse I back is the shortest price in the race and I only back it if the price is longer than I reckon it should be. Hence my search for the best price.
When you are backing short priced horses the sit in front of the computer can be worth it. I often get a price above the final SP or Best div just by watching the prices. The idea of the thread was to see if others had any strategies along those lines.
Thanks again for your input.

KV

Anchor, thanks for that, it was quite a long time ago that I contacted IAS and they definitly said that place bets were settled at Untab divies, so I guess they've changed policies, I should have checked that b4 making the statement.

However, I still "think" that I am better staking half of my bet at best of NSW/Supertab (Sportsbet) and half at Unitab, as I am always guaranteed to have at least half of my bet at the highest Divi.

Whereas with the middle divi you are never on the lowest OR the highest, (unless they are all the same)

It would be interesting to see which method comes out on top over time (if any)

Funny you should say that PP.

I ran some tests on exotics a while ago comparing the three Tabs, maxidiv and second best div and was quite dissapointed with the results. I was just testing the races I would have bet on with my system (had it been running in past years) but it amounted to quite a few thousand bets so it should be pretty typical.

Maxidiv returned at least 10% better than the best return from the best tab in all cases, usually more. Second best div actually returned slightly less than the second best tab in almost all cases. In case that's hard to understand I'll give one example.

Quinella, 3441 bets,
NSW Tab 126.82% Return
Tabcorp 130.62% Return
Unitab 129.81% return
Best div 146.10% Return
2nd best div 129.27% Return. (i.e. slightly lower than Unitab which was the second best tab return).

I think you have to think not only is it second best tab but it's second worst tab as well.

To qualify this - Place betting and probably to a lesser extent win betting may (or may not) be different to this as odds will be MUCH shorter. Also I've been watching IAS divvies for a while before plunging into exotic betting and I find that they usually pay above that middle tab, sometimes by quite a bit. Again this is exotics I'm talking about (because that's what I've been interested in IAS for).

Hope this is of some help.
KV

"The only general trend I seem to notice is that real short favorites on the Tab, like 1.40 to 1.80 ish seem to lengthen in the last few minutes and favorites about the 2.50 upwards seem to shorten. I'm guessing the mass of favorite backers plonk on the favorite if it's long enough and don't bother if it's too short."

I think you may be right about the longer priced faves shortening the most at the last minute..possibly also helped along by bookies having a dip at what looks to be good value and good laying off. I doubt that anyone can be near 100% accurate in securing the best odds about a short priced fave..unless he has a special arrangement with a bookmaker..as some horse owners and big punters purportedly do.. I am not in that league these days so I cannot vouch for that.

Im new to the forum and now living in New Zealand. A lot has changed in Australian betting since I left in 1992...Mark Read was just a rails bookmaker and the likes of Iasbet etc were just dreams.

New Zealand racing... I just cant get into it at all and I,ve stayed away from horse racing up until about a year ago. I now concentrate on melb Syd and Brisbane mainly, with Syd still remaining my most profitable and most enjoyable. I was pleased to hear the familiar tones of Ian Craig...

I walked away from punting when I left OZ because I relied upon attending the metro tracks and using the best of tote or "the ring" in order to get the most profitability. I also used the services of three ratings services there which formed the basis of my selections. All I did was apply some rules to those ratings to come up with my selections for the day.

The Internet means that I can now re enter the fray and reside in new Zealand. heck, , I can even get to view many of the Aust races live on my t.v at home..and with tote fluctuations, and the likes of IASbet etc, I have it better than i did when I lived in Australia. What i would like to do now is tap into OZ Sky or whatever channel provides the best live racing coverage. Anyone got any tips? I understand that tv coverage may be in limbo in oz at the moment...is there a sattelite channel doing it bests? I would really like to know.

I am particulary enjoying reading the posts here on this forum and the various opinions. What I have discovered is that the methods I used ten to 15 yrs ago, still hold up today. I only back horses that are 8-1 or longer in the home state tab win pool at the 10k win pool mark... however they first have to be top 3 rated by a ratings agency, and there are couple of other factors of elimination, applied to that top 3.

When a horse qualifies as bet, it may also qualify under 4 other selection processes that are applied to it. I bet level stakes, but as a result of having a portfolio of fine tuning plans, one horse can be backed for 6 units on level stakes., if it comes up in each refinement. If there is more than one qualifier in a race..no bet.


The raw plan has a poorer strike rate but supplies turnover and sometimes selects winning horses that dont qualify in the other more refined selection methods that are applied to the same horse. It is one thing to have a very high strike rate of winners at healthy prices, but if the plan only provides three bets in a year, there is not much actual revenue to be made, whereas a plan with many bets and a lower percentage of p.o.t will provide more revenue. So, I have both going around for me...

If I had twenty years results of the 3 bets per year plan to go by, I could bet with more confidence, but I just dont have enough of those bets to truly know what the winning strike rate actually is...and probably never will have.

All i know is that the flip of a coin for heads (1/1) has a theoritcal mathematical run of outs of 10. If that doesn't scare you, it gets much worse as the percentages lengthen... I've seen and won handsomely on 7 consecutive heads..and others could probably attest to even longer runs than that.


I used to have a chart of these mathematical runs of outs and I've lost it along with many of my records of earlier days...figured about two years ago that Id never ever need them again. It was handy to have vbeacsue it gace you some idea of what to expect. It meant for me that when I was experiencing a drought that this was normal and to keep going..remember I was on level stakes..

My first year of punting used $5 units. The second year, $10, third, $20, 4th $50, 5th $100, 6th 200. It was all self funding and working fine right up until I left Australia.


I have been using the ratings as usually supplied free on TAB.com.au . Previously, when I was living in australia I used at least three ratings services and ran the same plans individually for each service. They all provided level stakes value, but over the years the average price did shorten, esp in Melbourne.. Interestingly, when horses came up as a selection in two or three of the ratings services, they often did not win, whereas a selection from only one service , and not rated by the other services would duly lob. I dont have a rational explanation for this...

However, rationalism aside, if a selection today that qualifies under my plans is not mentioned in the top 4 selections as published on nswtab.com.au (eg ian Craig for sydney, greg miles for melb etc) I back an extra unit on it as a "non rated" selection. It is amazing how often these "non rated " selections win and at great odds. A recent one was "trick on track" at 25-1. ..top rated too. You could argue that there were some hard luck stories in that particular race, but the fact is it won and the others didnt. Incidentally that horse came up in all six refinements that I use for the ratings and copped the maximum bet of 6 units from me. It proved to me that 25-1 shots are still achievable today. (the biggest privce selection I had back in my punting days was 70-1 and a horse called Aqualone, which beat Lets get Physical and survived a protest at Moonee Valley. I was one of the few happy punters that day and I subsequently learned that the owners of that horse didnt back it)

(the late?) Bill Johnson who had a plan called the "Harry Bob" plan. An interesting chap with a penchant for longshots and a firm belief not to back anything under 4-1. he didnt seem to worry too much about wet track ability either. Bill would compare a couple of different ratings selections and if a horse was rated by one and not by the the other, it became a selection.

I get worried if a horse comes up as a selection by using several differnet selection methods and tipped by several tipsters.. be tipped as the late mail etc..So often they lose.. Common sense would suggest that these selections have a higher chance of winning...I find that often when many selection methods come up with what looks to be a sure bet, it isnt one....

Sure things have changed, and some things remain the same...

The main thing in all this is that are many ways to make money on horse racing and it is simply of sleceting something that is suited to your discipline and tastes. ..the latter not nearly as important as discipline. I am living proof also that one does not need to be an expert on racing form analysis etc in order to profit. I have always relied upon ratings experts to do that job, leaving me to live a normal life most of the week and just use selection fine tuning methods in order to come up with some bets...

All the very best to you
Steve

w924
 

Hi Steve.
I am from the old school too.
Remember Bill Johnson well.
A good handle on what to expect on the punt can be found on a FREE download from ****************************************.au called the bet simulator.

Cheers.
darky.

HI Darky, thanks for the link. I'll go check it out

re Bill Johnson, do you remember a book (booklet, really) he produced and inside it he had a doubles/trebles method with some huge examples? It was parlay betting but halving the firts winning leg stake on to the next, etc. For the very brave only I would suggest...

I last met Bill at his Gosford home circa 1986 and he would have been in his seventies then.

You will probably also remember those "maxim" booklets I think they were called, produced in Sydney, probably going back to the 70's and maybe even earlier. We used to spend far too many hours dry running some of those plans... no computer programs then. It was fun though and all part of the learning process.

Here is one simple one I remember from the scores of plans in those books, I remember called the Rainbow. only horses that have won their third last start and run 4th or worse in their two runs since. Every now and then a horse will win or place at big odds and I'll look at the formguide, bemused, and whisper under my breath,, " another Rainbow horse"

There was another one too called "rainbow variation". The horse had to be placed 2nd or third at its third last start and run 4th or worse in its two subequent races. In both plans if more than one horse qualifies, no bet. genearlly this can snag horses at even bigger odds, beacsue the form line is looking pretty ordinary at this point in their campaign.


They are about the only two I remember form all the ones on offer.

Both those plans still jag great prices today, but you would probably go broke backing them all without some sort of refinement.lol I am not suggesting for a minute that anyone seriously use these.

HI STEVE
 

Yes I do remeber that Bill Johnson book .As i recall it had a yellow cover and really quite small.
The old Bill was a trier alright.

Those Maxim books from TURF MONTHLY when Phil and Arnie Rogers used to own it.I still have a couple of theirs .
THE WENTWORTH

BLACK LANCE
And 1 other whose name eludes me.

Ah the good old days .
Cheers.
darky.

Hi Steve,

Welcome to the forum,

One of the themes of your despatch was that horses tipped by many didn't neccessarily win and that those tipped by one often did. I wonder if the horses tipped on something other than the common form which everyone can see (i.e. those tipped by only one) had some special something which the one tipster had noticed. I talk of the sort of things Punter57 for example mentioned picking up on recently, or maybe the one tipster has some inside knowledge. These things are probably more valuable in isolated cases than run of the mill ratings.

KV

Hi Kenny, I have enjoyed reading your posts. I'll have to scroll thru this forum to find out what "57" wrote about..sounds interesting...

In the days when I lived in OZ and could therefore get "The Australian" newspaper, the tipsters chart in there was huge and many a longshot winner was tipped by just the one person, and often was their first pick. I used to put that down to inside knowledge.

I suspect that many tipsters dont actually do a lot of serious form analysis. I can vividly recall at least one well known Melbourne identity with a serious social drinking problem who couldnt possibly sit down for even an hour and do form, even if he had the time. Racing 7 days a week and other obligations, and paper deadlines mean that tipsters polls have to be treated with at least a grain of salt. In my day the Best Bets tipsters took their work seriously, but they were hampered by the fact that they had to make their selections several days before race day.

Ive never worked any of my plans my plans around tipsters polls, but I always gained confidence in my selections if my final selection was either, not listed in a tipsters poll at all, or selected to win by only one tipster in a big panel of tipsters.

What I find really interesting is that established and respected Ratings services, (the ones which do serious form analysis), will sometimes come up with a top 3 selection, or even a top rated selection that the other form services do not. It is probably reasonable to assume that particulary form factors for that selection must have been given a higher priority by the ratings service in order for thats election to end up above the others. (aside from the fact that some ratings services add their subjective touch to tweak their final ratings figures and assessed prices.)..I worked alongside one such prominent ratings service man..

As a humous aside, I recall that same friend (his business still operating today I believe ) whose ratings would come over the phone on racedays in code. One Saturday, he gave out his Sydney selections and mistakingly used the wrong code letter for his top rated selection. Fluke of flukes ,those subscribers, completely unaware, who decoded his ratings and duly backed his supposed top selection, were rewarded with a winner at huge odds (probably still the biggest Sydney top rated pick he's ever had)


ye olde bill johnson would probably say that it these hot shot faves are less likley to win because the owners and connections wont get the best price. The bookies too, stand to gain enormously if that horse (obviously a short priced fave) doesn't win..so there is pressure against it winning. How many times does this scenario happen and the gates open and the fave misses the kick ( I'm told by jockeys one of the best ways to pull a horse) runs wide , has a belly full of water, gets the stitch, or gets gets blocked, and loses by a half head?
Does this sound cynical?

What do you punters do when you have a horse that comes up trumps in almost every plan and is top three rated by several ratings services, and is given out as late mail and is the tipsters overall winning selection? Does it make you confident or wary? Does it look a moral or does it look too good to be true? I'd like to read your comments.

All the very best to you

I am really enjoying reading all these posts and learning the different ways you all approach this sport.

All the best
Steve

Hello W924. What I wrote is as follows. The trainer puts his/her horse in the race and, basicly, is in the game to make money. Thus, any unusual moves which "seem" like a waste of money or effort (ie spending a fortune to take a horse thousands of kilometres for a race, sometimes "too tough", sometimes not etc etc) have to be examined closely. Form is secondary: ratings UNNECESSARY (they only reflect "form").
Example; what was "Smart and Mighty" (Melbourne horse) doing in BR8 three days ago? It was 61 Kgs and CARRIED it (no apprentice claim thought necessary!!!!!) while next was 55.5 Kgs (ie even the handicapper was totally convinced which horse was "best"). Was it there to be thrashed at 40s (if you follow odds)?? If you don't already know the answer, check out Unitab 23-7-05.
Similarly, what was Venus Williams THINKING playing Wimbledon when the bookies had her at over 80-1 before the tournament??? What a monumental waste of time and effort!!! Was she "dreaming" OR were the punters lulled(by the odds) into forgetting that she was the best performed (at Wimbledon) of all the women present? Maybe she was injured and washed up (yeah, maybe!!!). Until proven otherwise, if you have to travel and it costs, you are there to WIN. Watch those trainers!!!! Good luck, too.