The reason a selection starts favourite is because it has the most money on it.
The reason roughies start at their price is because they have the least amount of money on them.
Not every time,but nearly every time.Can we all agree the truth there?

Now,just because the favourite wins doesn't mean that most punters win.
It is not like an election where one person,one vote applies.
My $2 is not going to change the market,but Inghams(does he bet? dunno)$2000 probably will.
I would think if you went to the track and asked each punter who they select and give each selection a point,you may well come up with a different order than the actual market.
Consensus of opinion is a summation of everyones tips averaged out.
Very hard to argue with its selection.
I hope I get round to seeing the results of Fridays Herald-Sun tipsters of 2003.
I'll report back when I do.
One person,one vote?.I wonder if a lawyer's vote should be worth the same as a toilet cleaner (some of my best customers are toilet-cleaners)regarding "capital punishment-yes or no".
So when I check those results,I'll see if eliminating the celebrity tipsters improves the result.
What I aim to find is if there are overlays to be found by following a tipster or a consensus or whatever.
I'm tired now,I think I will have a rest.

Mo.

Well, I think I read somewhere that Shane Warne was leading or close to the lead in one newspaper's AFL tipsters poll. Is that right? Anyway, how do you know exactly what constitutes an expert???

Before the season started, they combined the opinions of all 'experts' in The Age and came up with their Ladder predictions for the year. Believe it or not, I think they actually predicted Hawthorn to finish 4th and St Kilda 9th!!! I thought it was stupid then, but now it looks totally ridiculous.

[ This Message was edited by: sportznut on 2004-05-25 10:44 ]

Sportznut
Anyone can pick a winning favourite,but its not so easy to pick a winning roughie.
It is not the number of winners I am concerned with,but the return made by backing every selection.And also the returm made by only backing the overlays.
I think we could play at something on this forum that goes a bit like this.

I think that the Kangas can beat Collingwood by 16 points.Tell me what the margin should be and why.I then say but what about! or you forgot! or ********! I never thought of that.
Then I might say Well after some reworking,I think the Kangas by 9 points.Anyone want to say what the margin should be?.
And it goes like that until we get some sort of consensus and see how it goes.

Howzat Mo.

Removing celebs from paper tipsters won't work. Same goes for following tips on all of the footy shows. They are tipping who will win, not who is value.

" The reason a selection starts favourite is because it has the most money on it.
The reason roughies start at their price is because they have the least amount of money on them."

First of all, do you mean 'start' as in opening lines, or 'start' as in at game time? You give the punters too much credit for influencing the market. If a fave is a fave, it is generally because that's what the bookie wants.

I do have problems with some of the language of gambling,but surely when you say a horse starts favourite it means exactly that.
I don't mean the horse is favourite for the Melbourne Cup when the Millers Guide comes out.Or at acceptances.
Mr J you are a very negative person.This won't work,that won't work.Of course tipsters are trying to pick the winner.THATS WHY THEY ARE TIPSTERS.
What I will be researching is by using the margin the tipster gives and converting that margin into prices,I will have a price the said tipster says each of the two teams should be.
From this data I can then relate whether said tipsters know more than others.
You know about systems,Tell him Sportznut.

Cheerio - Mo.

"but surely when you say a horse starts favourite it means exactly that."

I was simply saying the bookies set and control the lines, not the public.

"Mr J you are a very negative person."

You have come to that conclusion from just a handful of posts your've read?

You said it yourself:

"Of course tipsters are trying to pick the winner.THATS WHY THEY ARE TIPSTERS."

"It is not the number of winners I am concerned with,but the return made by backing every selection."

Tipsters (I'm talking media here, like the footy show, the tipsters in the paper etc) only try to pick the winner. They don't take value/prices into consideration. So why follow them? Why listen to them?

The opinions you want to place value on are those of sharps (serious & informed bettors who bet with an edge).

Do you really think this will work? Common sense?

"You know about systems,Tell him Sportznut."

Yeh I'm sorry I'm just a mug punter :roll:

"I was simply saying the bookies set and control the lines, not the public."

Money talks.If no-one wants to buy,bookie needs to make the price more attractive by lengthening the odds.

"Tipsters (I'm talking media here, like the footy show, the tipsters in the paper etc) only try to pick the winner. They don't take value/prices into consideration. So why follow them? Why listen to them?
The opinions you want to place value on are those of sharps (serious & informed bettors who bet with an edge)."

Have your people ever played a game of football in their lives?.These tipsters lives revolve around football.

"Do you really think this will work? Common sense?"

I have the data,but am having difficulty writing an Excel program to analyze the data.
Looks like the old pencil and paper trick will rear its head.
I just want to find some authorities that I can compare my selections with.
These tipsters are not gamblers,so their selections are based on their footy knowledge and not biased by the prices available.
I have come up with 8 lots of information I am seeking.
1.Flat stake on all 1st selections
2.Flat stake on all 1st selection overlays using Fridays Sportsbet prices
3.Flat stake on all overlays using Fridays Sportsbet prices
4.Flat stake on all overlays over 15% using Fridays Sportsbet prices
5.6.7.8.Same conditions as above using assessed price percentage as stake

Anyway,stay tuned for the next installment.

Cheers Mo.

I can sort of see why you are doing this. You'd think that players/ex-players etc would be able to judge a game pretty well. That's not really the case though. You don't have to know much about a sport to beat it. Just have to be decent with statistics and creative.

"Money talks.If no-one wants to buy,bookie needs to make the price more attractive by lengthening the odds"

Remember most bettors don't care about the odds. If they did, the TABs would be out of business.

"Have your people ever played a game of football in their lives?."

What do you mean by 'my people'? The only picks I've posted here are Super 12 picks, and yes I played rep footy.

"These tipsters lives revolve around football."

If you are using statistics and a computer model you don't need a knowledge of the sport at all. If you are basing picks off your own opinion then yes you do need knowledge of the sport.

Seeing the prices does not necessarily make biased opinions. Course it's always better if you have formed an opinion first.

I'd be surprised if most sportsmen could beat the bookies at their own sport. I'd say the % who could is a small minority.

I dont take any notice of the so called "expert tipsters" as they even have netball and hockey players in front of radio commentators and former international players in the NRL.

One thing I've found over the years is that the tipsters usually seem to be conservative with margins. Take St Kilda Vs Carlton on the weekend. Most of the 'expert' tipsters from The Age have picked the Saints to win by about 40 points, but I reckon the majority of them probably think the margin will actually be greater than that. They're just playing it safe.

Also, there is a question of bias. Almost all expert tipsters have some sort of affiliation or leaning to some club and you always have to take that into consideration.

[ This Message was edited by: sportznut on 2004-05-28 15:23 ]