Rosehill
race 5 # 3 Midnight Avenue
race 6 # 5 Stormcat Academy
race 7 # 7 Dow Jones
race 7 # 10 Arigato
race 7 # 14 The Little Tacker
race 8 # 2 Caissa
Doomben
race 2 # 2 Gullcatcher
race 3 # 1 Icy Pride
race 6 # 8 Coolawin

bet wise bet smart

Surely you jest when you tip Stormcat Academy to beat Lonhro!!!!

Racing's history is littered with "certainties" that didn't win first up.

I'm not putting a case for the specific horse selected, but one way of making money is to occasionally back the winner at big odds, when the odds on certainty loses.

With popular opinion saying Lonhro is past the winning post before the race is run, I am pretty sure this will result in odds about it under the horse's true winning chances.

I think Ancient Song is a special

Lonhro cannot possibly win this.

Looks to be a very open race. Should get some good overs, with Lonhro very likely to start at odds well below true winning chance.

_________________
All the best from the West

Sandgroper :smile:

[ This Message was edited by: Sandgroper on 2002-08-03 09:38 ]

I tend to agree about Ancient Song. Although I wouldn't call it a "certainty". I'd rather be on this around 8/1 than Lonhro @ 4/6.

Good Luck Wise One

I agree with your tips in Race 7, although I like Musical Beat as well.

My Rosehill tips are:

R1. #1 Penny Opera
R2. #4 Russell On
R3. #6 Size her up
R4. #4 Binnia Best
R5. #2 Master Pom & #6 Via Sinai
R6. #4 Sportsbrat (with lonhro & haha in trifectas and F4s)
R7. #6 Musical Beat
R8. #10 Abeel Hostess

I will be having most of the above as a standout with the field in each race. Its amazing how many good quinellas you can win doing that (thank you "Coincidence" in Brisbane during the carnival - nice quinella of over $600 as the second place getter was at $200/1, bet cost about $8). Having said that, I probably won't win a cent today!!

Anyway, good luck everybody and Wise One I'm sure you'll get a lot more for a place on Stormcat Academy than Lonhro will pay for a win - makes more sense to me.

I am more than willing to cop the mocking, insults and ridicule that should come my way if i'm wrong, but i reckon the only question that needs to be asked is Lonhro, how far?
In saying that, he will be far to short for my liking.

Its great to see the differing opinions.But really how can anyone say that Lonhro cannot possibly win? For what its worth I have Lonhro as the likely winner but at 5/2 not long odds on. Ha Ha 4/1 Padstow5/1 and Ancient Song at 9/1. I agree that there is likely to be value as Lonhro will be unders and we all know whatever our opinion on any single race. You cannot win taking unders.

I think Lonhro started OVERS at $1.60!!!!

I know there is differing opinions on whether backing value runners instead of backing THE winner is better , but if YOU are sure a horse is going to win whether it be evens or 6/1 why wouldn't you back it OR stay out of the race altogether?

if you think a horse is a certainty then you are prepared to back it at any odds...so if you thought lohnro was an absolute certainty of winning the race then $1.60 is great value. A lot better than $1.00!

Testa your point is well made except to say that there is no such thing as an absolute certainty in racing. I wonder why you didnt quote a fair price for Lonhro before the race instead of saying he was overs at $1.60. Although I do admit I have under rated this great horse. As you will see I could not get my price for either Lonhro or Ha Ha and so stayed out of the race.Anyway good luck to all who took the short price. You never had cause to worry.As for those that said he cannot win or that others in the race were specials. I would suggest whatever handicapping method you are using is badly flawed.

As to Testa's question on whether betting in the red is clever or not - it depends on the number of runners in the race.
$1.60 is a fraction better than 4/7. If you take that bet with a bookie in a 12 horse race, it's equivalent to giving him 11 runners, all at 7/4 each and you have just one at 4/7. I don't like doing it 'cause too many odds on pops get beaten. There was a famous Syney punter in the 60's called the Fireman, whose specialty was large bets on odds on horses, especially St. Louis Blues. He only lasted about 2 seasons before the odds ground him down.
Try betting in the red on the footy (NRL or AFL) - at least it's only a two horse race! And the bookies margin is usually only about 10%.

[quote]
On 2002-08-05 01:06, Rain Lover wrote: too many odds on pops get beaten.

In answer to that comment , a lot of 3/1 shots get beaten to , so do 4/1 shots and 5/1 shots and so on..........does that mean you shouldn't back those either , i understand that the better the price the less amount of winners you need at that price to be in front , but if you are confident the odds on horse is going to win why back anything else in the race (even if they are at value!!!) Either back it or nothing at all.

If you like a horse in a race with a odds on fav then by all acounts back it , but if you like the odds on fav and you back something at better value and the fav gets up all you are doing is betting against yourself.

And even if the odds on fav doesn't win in a field of 10 , there are still 9 horses that can win with the majority being value.

Hi TestaRossa,
You may well be right about Lonhro being value - at top fluctuation in the race the Sydney bookies market was only 102%!

If Testa Rossa was value at $1.70 in a market of 102% it would also mean none of the other horses were value - despite the odds on offer.

That is also something we keep hammering away at on this site - double figure odds does not mean value.

We see it as a way of trapping punters into accepting poor odds about horses in the most difficult of races.

The more open a race, the harder it is to back a winner, yet punters are told by media commentators "Whatever you like you are going to get value."

To use the roulette example, if you are given $21.00 about a single number of your choice coming up on the next spin, we all know that is atrocious unders and not value.

[ This Message was edited by: Neil on 2002-08-05 14:52 ]

Odds On - Look On.
:eek:

Backing odds on favourites results in bankruptcy.

Equine investor,
Just as others on this forum have said. Value is relative.If a horse is 3s on and its real chance of winning in percentage terms is better than 80%(In other words its real chance expressed in odds is 4s on)then this horse represents value.This is an extreme example but is also valid for a 10/1 chance or any other price for that matter. Unless a punter understands that the ONLY way to win long term is to secure a price longer than a horses real chance he/she has no hope at all. This is why Testas asertion that if you are sure that a horse will win you can back it at any price does not stand up. Every horse has an actual chance and the art is being more accurate than the market at assessing that chance and acting accordingly.

Odds on, get on. I like a big winning strike rate. So for me its odds on, get on for the best wining strike rate. You feel real good backing them. And if you lose you know everone else loses with you. I also take the odds on favrite with the field in tris. Ive had plenty of big colects.

Legion,
I agree with your thoughts on value etc but odds-on horses are very costly commodities.

You are saying that based on PAST results and PAST form Lonhro had a 80% chance in the race for example. Well I can give thousands of examples of good horses which failed in their careers after being good horses early.

Lonhro would probably win 8 out of ten races but to keep taking those odds will result in a loss when he gets beaten a few times.(not if but when).

Hay Chee,
How do you get your money back when an odds on favourite gets rolled?

Double up?
Cheers.




[ This Message was edited by: Equine Investor on 2002-08-05 23:36 ]

He may have a point with filed trifecta's. I know it's only a one-off but Lonhro x f x f would have cost $56 & paid $145.10 in Qld, that's almost 13/8. I wonder if enough of them pay overs to make it worthwhile.
Just noticed Rubitano, cost $12 wins & pays $5.50

HayChee,

Hacche, is that you? Similar name, similar grammatic style, similar sentiments only now you're talking about racing and not casinos or pokies.

Still can't work out if you're for real or having a dig but the new pseudonym and change of tact is giving me a clue.

My Spider sense is tingling.

I agree with Testa's view for only backing the horse I feel will/should win. Chasing value is like chasing the winners, all you do is chase. The game for me is getting value for the winning horse. eg. $3.50 is better than $3.10. Or in the case of Rubitano in the autumn $18.00. My cutoff point is at evens, $2.00, even for a deadset horse like Sunline and now Lonhro.

If less I sit out and just watch the race and enjoy the event. I know I'm mad but that way I make money AND remember great races.

good punting,
Horse cents

Hay Chee;

Please say your joking.

[quote]
On 2002-08-05 23:27, Equine Investor wrote:
How do you get your money back when an odds on favourite gets rolled?

How do you get your money back when a 10/1 shot , or a 20/1 shot gets rolled?

What happens if you like the odds on fav but being TO cautious you back another horse as it is "VALUE" and the odds on fav wins and instead of winning a little on the race you lose.

This might seem cliched but backing a winner gives you confidence , whether it be at odds on or 20/1 , a win is a win.

Confidence is the most important thing in racing , its like someone like Adam Gilchrist hitting the ball left right and centre and the commentator says "He is seeing the ball like a football" , in racing it could be interpreted as "He is seeing the form like he's looking through a magnifying glass".

If your first two selections for the day were odds on and they won surely that would give you confidence for the rest of the day.

The problem that I see with Odds-on horses is that you are never going to get a big over - if you are lucky you might get 10c or 20c more than the fair price - with $8-$20 horses you can often get overs of $3-$10 (in my opinion!). When you are operating on such a slim margin you have very little scope for error - you would certainly never want to back these on the TAB because the price can move by this much between the jump and when the divs are declared.

If you are backing a 10% chance at $15 and it doesn't win it doesn't really matter - you only expect them to win 1 in 10 times and you still have another 14 chances to square up. If you are backing a $1.50 favourite and it doesn't win you have to win the next 2 just to get back to square before you even think about making a profit.

So if there is an odds-on favourite that you are confident will win - don't back anything in the race. If you think it may lose then look for the possible winners that you can get a good price for.

All the confidence in the world won't help your bank balance at the end of the day.

If you back a 10/1 shot and it gets rolled, you stood to GAIN 10 times your money. Odds on gets rolled not only did you risk $10.00 to win $7.00, but unless you're a freak, you have to increase your bets just to break even....or wait 2/3 months for another odds on favourite with the same credentials and class to even break even. And if that gets rolled by a neck - what then?

I agree value is value, but odds on is never value in my book - as NO horse has more than a 50% chance in a race and therefore worth more than even money.

EI ,

I'm not saying to back odds on favs , i'm saying if you feel confident that the horse will win then either back it or stay out of the race.

Surely if you backed a horse in a race you would have to feel confident it will win the race or why else would you back it , so then why if you thought the odds on pop was a very strong chance to win would you back another horse HOPING it will roll the odds on fav.

In saying this i rarely back odds on pops at all and when i like one to win but not enough to back it i just simply do not bet in the race.

But surely you can get off the fence and say you feel supremely confident about a horses winning chance once in a while or else why would you be involved in this game!!!!

Equine Investor
In response to "You are saying that based on PAST results and PAST form Lonhro had a 80% chance in the race for example."
I was not saying Lonhro had an 80% chance at all. In fact I posted my prices before the race and I assessed him at 52.A gross under rating on my part but never the less I was unable to get my price so I stayed out of the race. In the example I was trying to explain that whether a horse is odds on or 10s is not important. What is important is getting a price longer than its real chance of winning. That is what is meant by value.The various arguments on whether you bet when say your fourth pick is value but none of your others is entirely a matter of choice. For what its worth I agree with Testa and if I cant get my price about the likely winner then I don't chase value on the outsiders. I have posted my prices for todays San Domenico Stakes on Paddys topic of the same name. Good luck to all.

Be Careful
Your assertion that you rarely get a big overlay with odds on pops is not quite so. If you look at the percentages. A horse assessed at say 12 represents 66% of your market.If you could get say 910 or 52% that represents an overlay of about 14%. If you assess a horse at say 101 or 9% and you get 251 or 4% then that is an overlay of 5%. So as you can see there is good value in getting overs on short priced horses. I do hope I am not coming across as being too critical here. I have only posted a few times and am enjoying the cut and thrust of the differing opinions.Especially Testa, Equine Investor et al.

Legion,

No offence taken but I would take the "4%" overlay anytime - let me show you why. Lets say each time you see either of these overlays you put $10 on.

In the first case (your "bigger" overlay) you are getting a price of $1.90 on a horse that you think will win 66% of the time so your expected return for your $10 is 10 * 1.90 * 66% = $12.54. If this happens 100 times a year then you have outlayed $1000 and should win $1254 (25% POT). Quite a nice return.

Now with your "smaller" overlay you are getting a price of $26 on a horse you think will win 9% of the time. Expected return is therefore $10 * $26 * .09 = $23.40. If that happened 100 times per year then you have still outlayed $1000 but will win $2340 (134% POT).

Now I know which overlay I prefer - how about you? :grin:


_________________
"Try not. Do or do not. There is no try." - Yoda

[ This Message was edited by: becareful on 2002-08-10 20:37 ]

Becareful ,

What about the losses in between the 100 winners?

There are most probably going to be a lot more losers at the 10/1 price than the $1.90 price.

Testarossa,

In those examples I was saying we had 100 bets total. In the $1.90 case you would expect to have 66 winners and 34 losers so you would have spent $1000 (100 * $10) and got 1254 in dividends (66 * 10 * 1.90). In the $26.00 case you still have 100 bets but only 9 winners (so 91 losers) so again you bet $1000 and get $2340 in divs (9 * $10 * $26). Obviously in real life you don't always get the expected win rate in the short term - so in the first example you might only get 56 winners or you might get 76 winners, similarly the second example might only have 6 winners or 12 winners but in the long run this will even out. Obviously you have to adjust your staking to the expected hit rate - you will get lots more "losing" bets with the 10/1 scenario and the potential run of outs is quite long so you must allow for this but as long as you do that the rewards are there for the taking!

Becareful, your a gun did you do the IQ test on television bet you gunned that too.I was just wondering what your staking procedures were, as I agree totally about longer priced winners but was just unsure on how to stake them properly. cheers plug

one other question, how do we know (which ever ratings that you use) that the horses true market value is correct and therfore that we actually are getting overs, when maybe the true chances were actually less than what we predicted

Be Careful
I read with interest your answer regarding relative overlays. At once I thought "Aha" but he is assuming a level stake approach on 66% chances and 9% chances. The fool.Surely he realises the run of outs will kill him.So it was with much smugness i began to tap out a reply. Just as an after thought I ran the figures using my own staking approach.
As much as I hate to admit, the figures suggest an even wider anomaly using a more sophisticated staking method. You are absolutely right Be Careful and I reproduce my results for your and others interest.
Using our previous example I bet to take out a certain amount on each race. Lets say $100.
My assessed price of 12 has me outlaying $66 and securing 910 for a return of (66*1.9*.66)$82.76.Over our 100 bets this is $8276 for a profit of $1676 or 25%POT.
For the 101 chance the figures are assessed price 101 or 9% outlay $9 return at 251(9*26*.09)is 21.06 times 100 bets $2106 for $1206 profit or %134POT.Amazing.
Be Careful for all these years I have operated on the assumption that my returns would be proportional to the percentage differences without even bothering to check (obviously). In fact I gave up trying to chase turnover and only operate on races where I can get my price about my expected winner. Of course I do take the overs about longer priced horses when I can get my price about the expected winner.Your post has caused me to have a serious re think. Thanks for taking the time and I look forward to many more fruitfull discussions.

Plugga
Perhaps I can answer your question about knowing whether you are really getting better value than a horses real chance. The quick answer is we don't. Nobody does.That is why we have a dynamic market.In handicapping a field and arriving at a price for each runner you are expressing an opinion. All else being equal (Like your staking,discipline etc)you will win long term if your opinion is more accurate than the general market.

Plugga,

My basic "staking plan" is really simple - I just bet 1% of my current bank each bet (actually I do vary it a bit with smaller bets if I have a really small pool or if it is a real longshot but the basic bet is 1%). So when my bank was $2000 I was betting $20, at $5000 I bet $50, etc. As the bank grows so does the bet size, if I have a run of outs then the bet size reduces. This is the only problem with chasing the longer odds horses - you do have to be very cautious with bet size to survive the longer runs of outs. My current strike rate is just a bit over 10% and my longest run of outs so far was 41 (that hurt!) but it was followed up with 9 winners in the next 50 bets. Your other question was basically answered by Legion - you only know if you are getting value if in the long run you are winning! I have no doubt that on many occassions my evaluation about a particular horse is wrong (like when it runs last!) but in the long run I am winning so in most cases I believe I am being more accurate than the general punting public and that is what you need to do.

Legion,
Congratulations on actually bothering to check before posting a reply - it's more than a lot of people seem to do! I think your original mistake was that you were looking at the absolute change rather than the relative change - so you were saying that a 14% difference is better than 5% difference (seems logical) - but what you should look at is the relative change so we have 66%/52% compared to 9%/4%.

Of course both overlays are worth taking and as long as you are accurate both will make a good profit. The shorter priced horses do have the advantage that you can be more aggressive with your bet size and so have a higher turnover (but lower POT) whilst the longer priced horses give the higher POT but you have to be more careful with bet size to protect yourself from the lower strike rate.

The main reason I concentrate on the higher priced winners is that I just cant seem to predict the under $6 market with enough accuracy to make a consistant profit. My "system" seems to work great with horses in the $6-$15 "real" chance range (after I add in my overlay required this gives bets in the $8 to $25 range) but if I go below that my POT drops dramatically. I don't know if this is just my system or whether there simply aren't very many real overlays below that price - I suspect it is a bit of both!

Anyway best of luck finding those overlays - they are definitely the path to profit!
_________________
"Try not. Do or do not. There is no try." - Yoda


[ This Message was edited by: becareful on 2002-08-11 10:46 ]