Most of us know what a "false" favourite (FF) is supposed to be. There are a whole heap of systems and eliminators to first detect them and THEN get rid of them. Simply, these FFs are horses which are overbet into favouritism (and therefore "unders"), while the genuine "top chance" or even second chance (or EVERYTHING ELSE) blows out to be overs. The theory goes that if there were 34 races last Saturday (with 34 favs, in S,M,B,A)) and you expected 10 favs to win (30%) on average, you would greatly increase your POT by getting rid of as many of the losing 24 favs as possible. Find the one's who "shouldn't" be favs and DITCH THEM. Bet the "right" 10 and you'd be home and hosed!!! Simple, eh? NO, not really. The main "problem" is in deciding, among the "real" chances, which one is the "realest" ON THAT DAY!!!
On the other hand, every week a host of despised roughies thunder home, or lead all the way at 33s or 50s or even at $209 in Melbourne (two saturdays back).
After seeing 5 such "upset" horses in the already mentioned 34 races LAST saturday, some at Group Level, you'd have to rub your eyes and scratch your head. Why WERE they roughies? Brindabella in MR8 was 3rd rated on Unitab but STILL over $30 the win. Romantic Lover was $5 in my Courier-Mail and won like it, BUT at $26!! Now there are a couple of FALSE outsiders!!!!
There were just over 140 horses paying $20 or more last Saturday (my definition of an OS), from which 5 saluted: that's about 1 in 28. But what if we eliminate 100 of the losers and bet the rest?? What if we cut it diown to 29 and still get 4 at an average price of around $30 EACH???!!!.Well, if you're satisfied with that, read no further (see Selecting Longshots Mechanically Thread) but if you'd like to do even better, maybe we can pull a few ideas TOGETHER right here. Please, everyone, this is a LONGSHOT thread. Let's not get swamped by "shortie fans" who have nothing positive to say. Thanks.