I keep reading in the replies to the posts in these forums that the "market" is efficient, accurately reflects the chances of runners, etc. And it can be used as a tool to assess the winning chances.

Personally I reckon this is another racing Myth. Less than 30% Favourites win for a start. Hardly an impressive figure.

Stats show that on level stakes we lose on all runners at any odds you wish to nominate. On this basis alone, I don't accept that it is an efficient market.

As posters rightly point out there is no logic in this game and the market myth is just one of too many to mention.

Tauto,

Sorry but I have to disagree with you there. If you take into account the TAB take (around 15%) then the prices ON AVERAGE are quite a good indication of winning changes. For example around 50% of $1.80 starters win and around 10% of $8.50 runners win - once you adjust for the TAB take this is almost exactly what should happen. There is a slight bias in the market towards longshots (ie. short priced runners win slightly more often than their odds suggest whilst long priced runners win slightly less often than their odds suggest) but not enough to overcome the TAB take.

The fact that around 30% of favourites win is exactly what you would expect - given the average price is around $3.00. An efficient market does not imply that the favourite will win all the time - instead it means that the price of runners is a good indication of their winning chances.

This does not mean, of course, that ALL runners are priced correctly, merely that ON AVERAGE the market gets it right - the challenge is trying to work out when the market has got it wrong!

__________________
"Computers can do that????" - Homer Simpson

I cannot agree.

(1) If you add up results accross the market for any odds range you must lose due to the fact that the market is set at greater than 100%. So if the market is efficient you will lose at all odds ranges and lose a similar amount accross all odds ranges.

(2) The fact that favorites win less than 30% of the time does not mean the market is inefficient. For the market to be efficient favoites must win more than second favorites and second favorites must win more than third favorites. This is true.

When looking at averages accross a large number of races the market is efficient. However an average says nothing about an individual event. And this is why it is possible for some punters to make money even though the market is efficient.

T Auto,

Your definition of "efficient" a little skewed and Becareful has expertly explained just how the market is in fact efficient. It's about assessing the win rates against the probability as indicated by the prices....not that every favourite should win.

Gettingitright, your point that because the market is set to >100% means you will lose across all odds ranges is spot on. The loss is not exactly the ame though, as Becareful pointed out, because there is a favourite - longshot bias in our betting markets. You will lose less if you backed every even money favourite than you would if you backed every 2/1 shot, which would lose less than backing every 5/1 shot etc. This characteristics exists world wide and there are all sorts of theories to explain why, too detailed to discuss here.

It's also true that while the market is efficient on average across all races, there is natural variation to that, call it standard deviation if you like. The task of a punter is to identify the specific instances where the market is inefficient (the positive variations) and bet accordingly. In markets set to anything more than 100% it's the only possible way to win.

It's kind of ironic that this is the most logical of all winning principles but the one least understood by punters.

[ This Message was edited by: puntz on 2003-08-15 13:19 ]

It is a statistically proven fact that the first five in the market will win roughly 80% of all races.It makes no difference what market that is.....teletex,Tab,prepost or bookies,those figures will stand up.So how can anyone deem whether any of same are effecient,or not?Again,does it not boil down to opinion?If you can back your own opinion V market opinion and get it right on a regular basis,would you not have a winning edge?Personally,there is an angle I have had a lot of success with using the dreaded prepost market.Any race you consider bettable look at the horses on the first 5 LINES of betting....IGNORE the prices.Do the form study for all horses on those lines,which includes equals etc.If you have the knowledge and the skill to study the form,isolate your 2 main chances,and then look at their prices.If prices permit,I Dutch both,or in certain case I will back one and save on the other.Try it...you may just surprise yourself.

angel,
What do you use for the pre-post market - just the newspaper? In Brisbane on Saturdays we only hav one choice - the Courier Mail, which only has markets for Bris, Sydney & Melb. And days other than Sat. it's even more hopeless. Is there a better alternative?

[quote]
On 2003-07-19 00:00, shoto wrote:
angel,
What do you use for the pre-post market - just the newspaper? In Brisbane on Saturdays we only hav one choice - the Courier Mail, which only has markets for Bris, Sydney & Melb. And days other than Sat. it's even more hopeless. Is there a better alternative?

La Mer: Go to: http://www.tabform.thewest.com.au/j.../TFFrameset.jsp which has prices for all meetings every day. They are supplied by The Ratings Bureau. You will have to register but that costs nothing.

Also try; http://www.australianracing.com/ a US site that supplies information (on selected meetings) for Australian racing - very good site BTW. These prices are supplied by a very reputable company connected with Racing Victoria. Look for the Racing Info tab and Overnight Sheets.

[ This Message was edited by: La Mer on 2003-07-19 11:51 ]

[ This Message was edited by: La Mer on 2003-07-19 11:51 ]

[ This Message was edited by: La Mer on 2003-07-19 19:49 ]

I would agree with Angel416 about pre-post markets.Sticking to the same p/p source is impotant, as markets all vary against each other and at some times, some will reflect the true state of affairs better than others, but overall,they will all pan out in the wash and come out about equal.

Chopping and changing p/p sources will upset the apple-cart [first 5 = 80% of winners]and usualy, not in our favour.

I believe S/P loses any true view of real value as it is set by the mob and our objective is to step outside the envelope heading for the "undelivered mail" bin.

After selecting 2 from 5 through competant form study, comes the hard part: bet or no bet? If either starts as favourite it's a no bet race, because we are looking for a combined overlay and one selection starting as favorite will usually produce a combined underlay.For this method to be profitable,a combined overall overlay is required. If true value, it's a no bet because we are trying to make a profit and this won't produce it.We will know when we are making all these decisions correctly because we will be " making a profit". This process for me, always seems to be in a constant state of ebb and flow.Knowing when NOT to bet and having the willpower to do so seems to be the crux of profitable punting.

Crash, just had to applaud your observation that chopping and changing the source of P/P will upset the applecart (could). But I couldn't get anyone to agree, they ALL eckon it makes no difference!!!! But as far as Value is concerned I don't agree, to me 1/1 about a 4/5 chance is incredible value. presuming that you are ble to identify the 4/5 chance that is of course.