Average div. for 2nd and 3rd fav. win Sat. Metro?
 

Anyone know the average divs. and SR% ?

Second Favourites
s/r 19.43%
Ave div $4.48
Loss 12.89%

Third Favourites
s/r 13.59%
Ave div $6.07
Loss 17.50%

Second and Third together
s/r 16.50%
Ave Div $5.14
Loss 15.20%

These figures are based on tote rankings at the jump.

Thanks for that Chrome.

Is that figure for second and third together correct? I would have thought that backing both would give a higher strike rate?

Yes, it's correct thorns.
You get the better strike rate of the second fave and the worse strike rate of the third fave as an average, not together.

As another example, faves have a 30% s/r.

Add that to second and third faves and you get 21.29% strike rate, because it's the average.

This is the strike rate of the horses not strike rate per race.

Cheers for clearing that up, I knew there must have been a logical reason for it.

The figure should read for 2nd & 3rd Favs.
19.43% + 13.59% = 33.02% SR

Av $5.14
-15.20% LOT

Cheers.

Except you double the amount of bets (2nd & 3rd pick), so the strike rate is halved. The original figure of 16.5% is correct.

Is that you making books today at sandown to payout 8k?
;)

Remember to pot those odds on favourites at Canterbury, they have a terrible record ;)

Hi Chrome.

Thats the beauty of your data base isnt it? Facts at the press of a button.

AND also exposing Racing "myths" ( of which the industry abounds.)

Cheers.
darky.

The problem of facts at the press of a button is the 2/3rds unknown that can never be known. 1/3rd is better than nothing though. Computing hasn't improved the 30% fav, SR one inch.

That's true crash, but it has improved spotting value or lack of.

Canterbury
Love And Kisses WON $1.40
Unconditional Love

I laid love and kisses at $$1.66 and still came out well ahead.
Not to mention good ole Shibboleth at Sandown.

I laid the horse so high because I know just how nuts they go on these hot pots at Canterbury and wanted to get matched as I was going out - must be something in the air there.

I am sorry but you are wrong, the strike rate is the Combined strike rate of the second and third favs.
Unless you mean something else, as far as I know, the strikerate is defined as how often you hit the bulls eye or snare the winner.
Betting on more than one horse is almost like using a machine gun as opposed to a rifle, bet on all runners and you will have a 100% strikerate (and an empty bank).

Now if you talk of the return on investment you are correct, you outlay double, so your return is accordingly the (win div - $2.00) instead of (win div - $1.00). That is for each bet, meaning that you bet two horses!!!

If you back 2 horses per race and back 8 winners from 8 races then yes, you have a race strike rate of 100%, but a selection strike rate of 50%, so I fail to see that I am definitely wrong as the original question did not specify which.

As for backing 100% of runners and ending up with an empty bank then you are wrong. The first race at Kempton park tomorrow morning I've backed every runner at the following prices, 2.98, 5.05, 5.70, 9.50, 8.90 & 37.........guaranteed profit.

Upon re-reading, CP has stated the difference.

There is a difference between strike rate per race and strike rate of the horses.

Hey Chrome, no it wasn't me. I've been stearing clear of bigger betting on our races due to the mostly ridiculous reduction factors that greatly favour backers.

Yes, it can get rather complicated with the reduction factors.
I just asked, as the guy doing it was on as early as me, so it really stood out.
It was interesting to note he was asking for a 130% book, but an hour later he disappeared off the grid.

Great minds... I've almost moved 100% over to the UK markets. With "Keep in-running" I can put up a price and more often than not I'll get matched at some point during the race. Best of all I can do it when I'm asleep :) The local markets pale in comparison.

Now let's see, where do we start?

Post your email address and I will prove to you that it can be done, and that I, among others, do it. Or if you like I'll send it to a 3rd party who can send it on to you.

I did not start the name calling........politician indeed.

Show me where I said I get every bet matched, every race, every day.

Bookies can't run balanced books??? Now what are you on about?


Ok, let's say you have 1000 bets and 300 of them win. What's your strike rate? Now what if those 1000 bets were over 400 races?, has your strike rate magically increased?

Just to summarise..........no to hell with it, you are 100% right and I am 100% wrong. I started the name calling, and I'm going to give back my profits and stop backing/laying horses forever because it can't be done.

ps it also can't be done on football (of any code), golf, tennis, politics, cricket, etc etc etc

pps have a look at a number of races, anywhere, anytime. In the last minutes before they jump record the highest price to back and the lowest price to lay. You'll find the back is around 93% and the lay around 107%. Now if you can't glean something from that information alone then give it away.

ppps don't tell me it can't be done.

You can have the last word, I've got better things to do.

Since when is calling someone a "politician" a deragotary term?
I simply meant you avoided, clouded the issue on the strike rate which was the main point anyway.

I said it was a rhetorical question.
I am not interested, not may way of punting.

That was my original proposition and more or less a throwaway line, since the main issue was about the combined strikerate.
Why did you jump in then and claim, that it can be done?
All this argument could have been avoided.

A balanced book is where the amount on each horse is such that no matter which horse wins, the bookie will get his percentage.
Ask any bookie you know, and they will tell you, it is just not so anymore.
The reason they still winnig because they don't give you the true odds.
And in actual fact when the favored wins they lose quite often, because of the book is not "balanced" ie. not enough money on the rest of the horses.

I am a punter in the traditional sense of the word, not an accountant.
I back my selections for a win or the place if I can get the right price.
And I'm doing very well thank you!

Having to do all that work, watching the prices, laying and backing, I bet you do!

Mmm well anyway ...
 

Two in-running lays from last night:

STH_1510 Pappas Image (3rd @ SP 33/1) layed at $4.70
LUD_1530 Dakota Boy (UNP @ SP 50/1) layed at $6.20

I have just read that thread and that is two minutes of my life that I cannot get back.
I am giddy from going round in circles, did either antagonist get what the other was saying anytime.
Lets get some humour back boys.

Well done Angry Pixie.
You are a smart smart man.
From what you've posted, you've realised not one, but two angles and why it will be a huge longterm winner.

Sorry about your two minutes Top Rank.

My instinct told me to leave the matter alone after the first reply, but got frustrated by the sideways response, that avoided my main point.

I see he is still at it, "not getting it, as it were".

Not surprised really.
What has numbercrunching on BF to do with real punting anyway?

Sorry everyone, won't take any of your time in the future.
Cheers