Jump to content
Announcements
*** Punchestown Festival Competition: Well done to 1st. Craig Bluenose, 2nd. Lee Grays & 3rd. Carole Dawney ***
** April Poker League Result : 1st kevsul, 2nd Rob Valk, 3rd McG **
** Last Man Standing Results - glavintoby & Redno2009 both win £125 **
** April Naps Competition Result: 1st Sugardaddyken, 2nd TRAINMAD091, 3rd Harry Faint99, 4th Gary66. KO Cup Winner Waggy, Most Winners: Xtc12 **

Valiant Thor

New Members
  • Content Count

    3786
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from The Equaliser in 10 ways to improve your punting   
    1/4 shots have an implied probability of 80% therefore should  lose approx 20% of the time
    In 1000 bets there will be approx 200 losers not 4
    Its the 200 losers that have an Implied probability losing sequence ratio of 4 (4.29) in 1000 bets
     
    I believe that's the same advice advocated by Dave Nevison (Failed Gambler,failed tipster) in one of his books who now sells his wares on Racing TV as some sort of expert mustn't be paying him that much as he looks like a tramp whose just slept in a skip when Ive seen him on tv.
    Mind you John McCririck made a decent living out of talking crap and he was a failed bookie as well so couldn't do it as a pundit a poacher or a gamekeeper.

     
  2. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from MCLARKE in 10 ways to improve your punting   
    1/4 shots have an implied probability of 80% therefore should  lose approx 20% of the time
    In 1000 bets there will be approx 200 losers not 4
    Its the 200 losers that have an Implied probability losing sequence ratio of 4 (4.29) in 1000 bets
     
    I believe that's the same advice advocated by Dave Nevison (Failed Gambler,failed tipster) in one of his books who now sells his wares on Racing TV as some sort of expert mustn't be paying him that much as he looks like a tramp whose just slept in a skip when Ive seen him on tv.
    Mind you John McCririck made a decent living out of talking crap and he was a failed bookie as well so couldn't do it as a pundit a poacher or a gamekeeper.

     
  3. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from MCLARKE in Racing Chat- Wednesday 2nd December   
    I don't know what's in the updated version , but the version I had recommended Lotus 1-2-3 for the spreadsheets

  4. Like
    Valiant Thor reacted to Trotter in Racing Chat- Wednesday 2nd December   
    A quick way which I used when I looked at lots of races ........ 
    Look at the runners in your race and just put them in order of preference ....... so your first choice is 1 and your second choice is 2 etc
    Then take a reputable site like the Racing Post and look at their forecast odds and put the odds for their favourite against your number one, the odds for their second favourite against your number 2 and so on
    So you're using the 'expert' odds compiler to give you the overall shape of the market but substituting his order of market position for your order
    take an example ......... if your number 1 is 4th in the forecast at 7/1 and you can get 7/1 then it's probably good value if your assessment that it's number one is correct
    if the odds compiler has a horse as 2/1 Fav and you have 4th on your list it's probably bad value
     
  5. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from MCLARKE in Racing Chat- Wednesday 2nd December   
    I wouldnt worry about it too much if I were you, I know people who cant even price up a £5 note, never mind a horse-race despite 20+ years of trying.
    I had it priced @ 9/4 and even using a cheap and nasty method using RPR's (below) it was a  5/2 shot, so I thought you were a bit OTT looking for 4/1 but practice makes perfect. 👍

    (anyone with basic stats should be able to work the above out and how I came about it)
    If you want to do what you say you want to do dont get disheartened if things dont work out straight away, & dont do what 99% do and take the easy way out and throw the towel in after a few week and go back to knee jerk selections.
    The more work you put in the better you'll get its not an overnight project
    This is regarded as the BIBLE OF FORECASTING I bought it many moons ago and is an excellent book quite expensive now but if you can get hold of one cheaply its highly recommended , plus bin the pen and pad crap , sort yourself out and get excel its soon to be 2021 you know 😂
    ATB
    VT
  6. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from Villa Chris in Racing Chat- Wednesday 2nd December   
    I wouldnt worry about it too much if I were you, I know people who cant even price up a £5 note, never mind a horse-race despite 20+ years of trying.
    I had it priced @ 9/4 and even using a cheap and nasty method using RPR's (below) it was a  5/2 shot, so I thought you were a bit OTT looking for 4/1 but practice makes perfect. 👍

    (anyone with basic stats should be able to work the above out and how I came about it)
    If you want to do what you say you want to do dont get disheartened if things dont work out straight away, & dont do what 99% do and take the easy way out and throw the towel in after a few week and go back to knee jerk selections.
    The more work you put in the better you'll get its not an overnight project
    This is regarded as the BIBLE OF FORECASTING I bought it many moons ago and is an excellent book quite expensive now but if you can get hold of one cheaply its highly recommended , plus bin the pen and pad crap , sort yourself out and get excel its soon to be 2021 you know 😂
    ATB
    VT
  7. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from gg-77 in VT's NFL Selections   
    WEEK 11
    Think Ive found the problem, The date and time for the games downloaded from 1 site were causing an error when looking for the odds on another site due to time/date of game being changed or in a different format. (times and dates for the games have been published in advance and any changes are beyond my control)
    Anyway see how it goes .
    **Weeks 9 & 10 will be missing from the Season to Date results as no selections were made due to no spreads being recorded.**

    Just the NAP bet this week
  8. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from The Equaliser in GENERAL RACING CHIT CHAT   
    Its down to what weighting the cd winner has or has not got over non cd winners
    Lets look at some imaginary data from 295 10 horse races (2950 runners no dead heats so 295 winners)
    From the 2950 runners we have 550 previous cd winners of which go on to win 65 of these races (11.8% sr)
    That leaves 2400 non previous cd winners that win 230 of these races (9.6%)

    So to find a weighting for a previous cd winner you divide the races cd winners 65 by races total winners 295 =.22%
    then divide total previous cd winner runners 550 by the total runners 2950 = 19%
    Finally  divide cd winners total 22% by runners total 19% = 1.18 which is your weighting (1 being the mean)
    So by being a previous cd winner you are 18% more likely to win than a non cd winner (1.18-1=18%)
    so therefore when rating a race and 1 runner is prev cd winner then you multiply your base rating by the cd weighting 1.18
    All being equal a weighting of 1 is the mean so >1 positive rating <1 negative rating
    So if your base rating was 100 then a prev cd winner would have an improved rating of  100*1.18= 118
    Obviously the rating would be the inverse if it was a negative weighting of say 0.84 then it would be 100*.84= 84
    this can be done for multiple factors , jocks ,trainers,beaten favs, etc etc once you find the important ones then your rating start to take a shape which can the be used to produce a viable tissue .
    hope this helped a bit.
    ATB
    VT
     
  9. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from gg-77 in VT's NFL Selections   
    Not neglecting this thread.
    A couple of weeks ago I changed the code to only get the spreads from uk books (see week 5), I also decided to upgrade the code from python 2 to 3 whilst I was at it and seem to have messed up somewhere along the line (not a pro coder, Im self taught) 
    Been on it on and off for past 2 week and think I should have selections back up and running next week
    Rule to self if its not broke dont mess with it
  10. Thanks
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from Villa Chris in GENERAL RACING CHIT CHAT   
    Its down to what weighting the cd winner has or has not got over non cd winners
    Lets look at some imaginary data from 295 10 horse races (2950 runners no dead heats so 295 winners)
    From the 2950 runners we have 550 previous cd winners of which go on to win 65 of these races (11.8% sr)
    That leaves 2400 non previous cd winners that win 230 of these races (9.6%)

    So to find a weighting for a previous cd winner you divide the races cd winners 65 by races total winners 295 =.22%
    then divide total previous cd winner runners 550 by the total runners 2950 = 19%
    Finally  divide cd winners total 22% by runners total 19% = 1.18 which is your weighting (1 being the mean)
    So by being a previous cd winner you are 18% more likely to win than a non cd winner (1.18-1=18%)
    so therefore when rating a race and 1 runner is prev cd winner then you multiply your base rating by the cd weighting 1.18
    All being equal a weighting of 1 is the mean so >1 positive rating <1 negative rating
    So if your base rating was 100 then a prev cd winner would have an improved rating of  100*1.18= 118
    Obviously the rating would be the inverse if it was a negative weighting of say 0.84 then it would be 100*.84= 84
    this can be done for multiple factors , jocks ,trainers,beaten favs, etc etc once you find the important ones then your rating start to take a shape which can the be used to produce a viable tissue .
    hope this helped a bit.
    ATB
    VT
     
  11. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from MCLARKE in Paddy Power Gold Cup   
    I dont think its harsh,
    The average horserace has around 9 runners (11%)
    A:4 wins from 10 runs = 40%
    B:72 wins from 400 runs = 18%
    A is trend data , B is race data from 400 similar 9 runner races ....which is a more accurate representation of a similar type race A or B?
    B is 10 times LESS likely to occur at RANDOM than A.
    Therefore is a more accurate representation of a likely outcome.
    Punters can do what they want as far as Im concerned its not my money, but if punters want to improve do your homework and dont fall for the crap .
    If they want trends just listen to the Blonde bimbo and her sidekick Jamie on ATR , Blah Blah Blah has a 33% sr at this track , you look they've had 3 races and won 1 whoopie f'kin doo lets pile on after all its a trend.
    If you want to check the trends go ahead , infact I think theres trend thread on here somewhere,but it stopped when they realised it was a pile of crap.
    Only trend Im interested in is how each horse could/should perform against each other in that particular race , Dobbins performance from 7 years ago has no influence whatsoever unless he/she is running in it.
    I bet the trend followers buy lotto systems as well
    ATB
    VT
  12. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from beaker1 in Paddy Power Gold Cup   
    Never in doubt
  13. Like
    Valiant Thor reacted to Villa Chris in Racing Chat - Saturday 13th November   
    On The Blindside saves the day. 25 points profit on the day 
  14. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from Trotter in Paddy Power Gold Cup   
    Never in doubt
  15. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from Villa Chris in Paddy Power Gold Cup   
    Never in doubt
  16. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from vikki37 in Paddy Power Gold Cup   
    Never in doubt
  17. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from vikki37 in VT's NFL Selections   
    Not neglecting this thread.
    A couple of weeks ago I changed the code to only get the spreads from uk books (see week 5), I also decided to upgrade the code from python 2 to 3 whilst I was at it and seem to have messed up somewhere along the line (not a pro coder, Im self taught) 
    Been on it on and off for past 2 week and think I should have selections back up and running next week
    Rule to self if its not broke dont mess with it
  18. Like
    Valiant Thor reacted to MCLARKE in Paddy Power Gold Cup   
    Thanks. I must admit I don't normally look at trends like these with such little data but I thought I'd give it a bash. Normally I like to have several hundred winners in my selection criteria before using it live.
  19. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from Villa Chris in Racing chat -friday 13th november   
    staked 41.68
    Returned 59.05
    profit 17.37 (41.67%)
  20. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from vikki37 in Racing chat -friday 13th november   
    100 pts staked
    141.68 returned
    41.68 profit
  21. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from Villa Chris in Racing chat -friday 13th november   
    100 pts staked
    141.68 returned
    41.68 profit
  22. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from richard-westwood in Racing Chat - Saturday 7th November   
    Staked 100pts
    Returned 157.36pts (11.24pts @ 10/1 as some odds had changed between posting and placing bets) 
     
  23. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from Villa Chris in Racing Chat - Saturday 7th November   
    Staked 100pts
    Returned 157.36pts (11.24pts @ 10/1 as some odds had changed between posting and placing bets) 
     
  24. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from vikki37 in Racing Chat - Saturday 7th November   
    Staked 100pts
    Returned 157.36pts (11.24pts @ 10/1 as some odds had changed between posting and placing bets) 
     
  25. Like
    Valiant Thor got a reaction from justice in Racing Chat - Saturday 7th November   
    4 races worth rating @ Donny


    12.55
    Revich 7pts ew @ 17
    Punchbowl Flyer 9.95pts ew @ 12
    1.30
    No bets
    2.05
    Chamade 12pts ew @ 10
    Moll Davis 9.95pts ew @ 12
    3.15
    Torcello 7pts ew @ 17
    Strawberry Rock 4.10pts @ 29
    100pts staked @ Skybet no BOG
    1 winner profit
    3 placed money back ish (depending which 3 place )
×
×
  • Create New...