Unders and overs revisited
 

I was looking at the AAP prepost market and back analysing the results of 1M+ the somebody had summarised.
These had been linked to the tote prices.
I was under the belief that the tote market is a 85% market. Prepost is generally over 100%. Thus to get a 100% market the prices must ease. However some firm and some stay the same. meaning that those that ease must ease longer.

So I started looking at the number that firmed. And found that significantly more firmed than eased. which put my initial thoughts out of whack.

Then I searched for an answer and had the eureka moment. The AAP prepost are the odds expressed as currency and the Tote prices are not odds but a formula based on the market less the rake. Two totally different things. However the tote price is a reflection of what the market thinks the odds are.

Hence a $2.50 PP odds has to match with a $2.10 tote odds. This being $2.50 chance minus 15% minus the round. Hence the pp odds to tote price
are always going to be unders. Which in turn explains there is a significant parity between unders and overs (It is not until you get to the $40-50 band that the unders equal the overs).

Food for thought and discussion. Also adds to the fact that unders are more profitable than overs.

What ?

I'm with darky I don't exactly follow what your saying. I think what you mean is AAP prepost market is sometimes up around the 150% mark while the Tatts market is usually around the 115-120% mark. So that way the AAP prices are generally speaking going to be lower than the Tatts prices most of the time due to the framed market %'s.

If your going to compare the AAP prepost, any other prepost or your own ratings to Tatts for example you should always re-calculate them to a 118% market or thereabouts. I do mine to 115% just for ease but then you can actually compare them appropriately (apples for apples we say at work) instead of comparing a banana (150% market) to an apple (118% market).

I hope the above is what you were basically getting at, otherwise i've misunderstood your post more than i thought.

Evajb.
Basically we have to compare apples for apples. A tote market of 100% -15 and overround comes to circa 120%. the AAP at 150%+ has to reduce the odds to be equal. Decrease the odds - increase the $. Yet across the board the $ is decreased. What do we do? maybe we have to reframe the PP first before using them.

Reckon you have answered your own question there.

I don't always agree with the stuff PaulD01 puts out, but I do agree with this quote re the AAP Pre Post,"It is nothing more than a subjective/predictive rating that has been adopted in order to provide something to the masses to facilitate TAB turnover"

For me it's purely a marketing tool and you can convert it into any percentage you like, it counts for nothing. It's a hype tool. Most punters haven't got a clue who to Back in a race. Think about it, a bunch of brickies knock off early, call into the club to have a drink and a punt, pick up a Tele, look at the prepost and go, "Yeah, this 2nd favourite looks like a bit of value" and Back it? The whole pre post scenario doesn't rate as a tool in the kit of a serious punter, IMO.

Tend to agree RCP but does that in itself make it a tool? i.e. ignore the top 3 favourites according to AAP as they are overbet and look at say the 4th to 6th favourites?

I don't use their ratings at all myself, not currently anyway but just food for thought. The way I approach everything now is to look for the underbet profitable angles not the overbet profitable angles or the overbet high strike rates (hope that makes sense).

RCP As a layer you should find this a valuable tool for exactly the reasons you state here. The first five in the PP control 80%. But the top PP only wins 25.9%.

The top PP is only the tote fav 54% of the time and accounts for only 18.8% with the other 7.1% when it is in the other 4 top positions. Do the maths right and you will always lose backing and always win laying.

I agree with you Josh, you need to identify situations where the market consistently under or overbets a runner and build a system around it. For me it's meant becoming a student of price, not form, and how price, particularly oncourse bookmakers price interacts and behaves. It reflects a lot of the bad traits of punters, that you can go the opposite on?

That para is full of gems, RP. But how is price not a function of form, in some respect? i.e. the Like all markets, prices being a measure of value based largely on what is known, already disseminated - form being the most obvious example??

LG

Let me give you a parallel vision LG, to get my point across. Pretend the Racing game is akin to the Restaurant game. You've got the chefs preparing and cooking all the dishes and then the waiters present the food to the patrons to consume. I'm the sly one over in the corner watching everyone eat. I don't need to know anything about how the food was prepared or the ingredients, but I reckon I can pick the patrons who'll just peck at their food, and the one's who'll pig out? A kinda' purveyor of humanity and how they behave. Now back to reality, the restaurant patrons are the punters.....hahaa???

Agree with LG, RCP's post is essentially what i'm aiming to do, find a profitable angle that others:

1) do not know about
2) cannot access
3) decide to ignore

In reference to your post LG i think price is initially based on form but the way its manipulated through until close can sometimes move away somewhat from form. Now please note this is just my observed opinion and I don't utilize this myself currently but:

Let's say you have a favourite in a field at $4 in race 6 on the card. It flucs a little throughout the day but not much however now it flashes up as the next race on all TAB's and TV screens around the country. You'll have some people getting on it just because its a 100 rater, some betting anything BUT the favourite. Then comes tha announcement that the favourite is the market mover and you might get a splash of more money driving the price down. Some of these things are form related and some aren't, which I suppose is the nature of the game.

But the way I think and i'd be interested to see if there is any evidence people have to dismiss or back this up, is that if a favourite is at say $4 and then the commentators, tipsters, ratings and whatever else support it and in the leadup to the close it gets 'crunched' into $3, haven't you now missed out on the value that was available on that horse and it therefore becomes a lay? I'm not sure how often this scenario happens or if it does at all but its almost the thinking of a trader where you want to back something at its top fluc and lay it at its lowest available price. So if you've missed the boat on something that gets crunched, sure the public and whoever else has got on board may think it has a great chance of winning, but because you've missed those higher juicy odds doesn't it now constitute either a no bet or lay bet? Interested in peoples thoughts.

Or you put your price out there and when someone accepts it then you back it at SP

Some of the present company excluded, how many will adjust PP for scratched horses. Are they adjusted for the scratched horses shown? Does anyone adjust them for scratched horses on the day? I would say that very few would. Do they even know how to or have the knowhow to?

Hence a $2.50 shot in the PP market at circa 150% may be closer to $3.50. So with the hordes that believe the written word, the PP is a definite underlay. Or food for thought to a layer.

Beton, regards your earlier post regards the Top 5 PP covering 80% winners and No 1 at 25.9%, what is the average field size here?

Cheers LG

I saw in one of the posts a mention about market movers. Are their any studies into the market movers and whether they are a long term winner for backing or laying?

The study is with 1025000 runners broken down by PP ranking, Tote ranking and the pricebands

Nothing on field sizes and due to multiple equal rankings it would be impossible to reverse engineer

My fuzzy logic guess would be 10.5 or somewhere between 10-11. Not sure if someone else has seen that number before regards long-term average no. of runners?

Cheers LG

I revisited my post 210 in the DNA thread. While I was evolving my betting educations, I went through the PrePost phase and studied it fairly well:

Attached is a race worksheet from yesterday, Quirindi R8. I wanted to show you how prices change after Adjustments.

Take "Ima Secret", the winner. Original Pre Post price was $21 but that was based on a 170% overround. By the time you increase the % share of the field to make up for the four scratchings (in red) and then reduce the % to a 118% overround the Pre Post is now $12.55. Big jump from the $21 that it started off in the paper.

Rule 1 signals "LAY if OPEN > Adj Pre Post 118%"
Rule 2 signals "LAY if FINAL FLUC > Adj Pre Post 118%"

I filtered those signals with selection criteria and Lay bet Right Vintage & Cadel's Luck.

*********************
You'll have to go to the thread for the attachment

Now I am confused. I agree with your first part. You have 170% field and 4 don't start. So their chances are divided pro rata to the remainder. Their chances increase and their prices reduce.

The next part you reduce their 170% chances down to 118% chances. So for Tab#1, adjusted Prepost % 14.45%. By ( 118/170.65) 0.6914 =9.99% A 9.99% chance is $10. Or am I completely wrong. 170% going to 118% should be increasing in price.

Gees some of you blokes make punting hard for yourselves.

Its a wonder you have time to put the bet on.

It's a sad day when I agree with darky.

Hahaa. Beton I'm not going to revisit the nuts&bolts of the past, but if the reason you started this thread was to say, "Adjust your Pre Post market for scratchings and overround", then I agree with you.

The only thing I don't like nowadays is the creation of synthetic pre posts by the online bookmakers and the admitted trait of individual sports editor's amending the pre post figures to suit their own agenda. All of this could steer a punter in a direction to suit the hype being created by write-ups and advertising.

Let me take you on a visual fantasy to another planet called Mars. The Mars Cup is coming up and Big Bucks the online bookie has assembled his staff for a Monday morning briefing. He tells them,

"I've got the inside info on the Cup and it's that gremlins A, B or C are the main chances. So get onto the press and push gremlin's D & E as favourites and get them to frame the Pre Post around them. In the meantime, I'll go on national Mars TV and tell the punters that if D or E come 1st or 2nd, I'll pay for the Win. That should get them in."

Hahaa, take that with a spoonful of laughter, it could never happen here, or could it....???

RCP, almost sounds like a word for word exerpt that a bookie who is regularly on TV now would have, goes by the name Dom Squatterhouse.

If you want a fun drinking game for the rest of this spring watch the coverage on free to air and skull a drink each race he says that hes 'Taking this one on' (referring to the favourite)

Leading indicators eh. Don't you just love 'em? More fun than a nicely buttered slice of slap 'n tickle.

LG

Probably a cousin of Big Bucks...??

Ah .Mark.
Your finally realizing that I,m not just a pretty face.

I,m sure that you will be avidly following the WF MC selections as usual.

Yep - seen you standing over there for a bit now. You are diagonally opposite me so it's not that hard too spot you.

LG

Regular Secret Squirrel, hey...lol

I've taken you to Mars, the Restaurant and you've been to see the Golden Spiral, what more do you ask??

And the other one " It'll be a disaster if Dobbin wins ".

Join up the dots and show me how you can produce something like this...

Target 5% return
Outlay 10% of bank
10 sessions each month
6 months in the year
Bank doubles each year.

Keep your eye on the patrons, they eat quick.

Cheers LG

I had one of those today but I got 8.6% return.