A Question of 'Value'

[The Saint]

As a punter getting 'value' over your horse racing selections is the only way to make the game pay... Unless you are a trainer or jockey and have a direct influence and inside info but that's not what I want to discuss... When I want to back a horse I have a price in mind that I think a horse should be - in a 100% book. However, if I am to back this horse, I have first considered that it has a chance of winning, I then look to achieve at least 5% above my tissue price or the price I think the horse in question should be. In the modern day betting world of prices lasting about 3 minutes and accounts being shut down at the drop of a hat if you dare to beat SP more than once, do you think this approach is too old fashioned, too conservative or not tight enough? ie - I should be looking for 10% above my tissue price (100% tissue by the way). I am certainly leaning towards 10% but this will decrease bets drastically and dictate that I would rarely back anything at 10/1 or bigger. Added to which, as I may have discussed, I cannot increase staking to a higher level - getting a bet on at the price you want would become impossible for inflated stakes for one and phchologically I am too weak to do so anyway. Becoming a 'layer' is becoming more attractive all the time.... If you can learn to lay at value prices then at least you can't get banned.... Any thoughts? :)

[BillyHills]

Re: A Question of 'Value' Saint, forgive my ignorance but i dont understand what you mean by 5% above your tissue price? is this 5 percentage points as in 5/1 is 16.67% and you would want 8/1 (11%) or Do you want 5% more of 16.67% which is about 11/2? Value is a funny thing and interpreted differently by everyone as you know but if i was making a tissue and really fancied a horse and estimated it to be a 5/1 shot and it opened up at that price then why would you not back it, unless you are betting on the exchanges with a 5% commission of course. Why the need to want another 5 or 10%. I personally wouldnt reduce your chances of a bet by increasing the percentage, i'm more the other way and would be looking to increase the amount of bets as long as your happy with your selection process. Good luck:ok

[jayalexander]

Re: A Question of 'Value' I got news for you sonny, if you're laying, you're obviously carrying out your activities on the exchanges and you ain't never gonna get banned from betfair and the like even if you're backing...plus there's every opportunity to gain your 'value' prices as it's easier to get better odds.

[The Saint]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

I got news for you sonny' date=' if you're laying, you're obviously carrying out your activities on the exchanges and you ain't never gonna get banned from betfair and the like even if you're backing...plus there's every opportunity to gain your 'value' prices as it's easier to get better odds.[/quote'] Not laying Jay - not yet.... The reason I do ok is because I back and tend to beat SP - hence accounts shut down - therefore, I may have to start laying. The Bookmaker prices that are 'wrong' the night before are very, very rarely available on Betfair to any level of liquidity if at all. If the price you want is still there come the 'off' then you possibly have to start wondering why and more to the point, bets would be few and far between. Maybe it's just me but the horses I back that are subseqyently backed are the ones that tend to win - the ones that drift are usually losers. Not always, but the market speaks volumes nowadays - in my opinion anyway.

[The Saint]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

Saint, forgive my ignorance but i dont understand what you mean by 5% above your tissue price? is this 5 percentage points as in 5/1 is 16.67% and you would want 8/1 (11%) or Do you want 5% more of 16.67% which is about 11/2? Value is a funny thing and interpreted differently by everyone as you know but if i was making a tissue and really fancied a horse and estimated it to be a 5/1 shot and it opened up at that price then why would you not back it, unless you are betting on the exchanges with a 5% commission of course. Why the need to want another 5 or 10%. I personally wouldnt reduce your chances of a bet by increasing the percentage, i'm more the other way and would be looking to increase the amount of bets as long as your happy with your selection process. Good luck:ok

Hardly an ignorant question BH - my post could have been percieved either way. If I make a horse a 7/2 chance, I want 5.7 or just over 9/2 before I will back it. That's the theory anyway. In your example, if I made the horse 5/1, I'd be after 7.6/1 to strike a bet. (I'm ignoring commission at the moment as I am using traditional bookmakers at the moment) I feel that if I make a horse 5/1(in a 100% book) and then back it at 5/1, if my forecast is accurate then I will break even long-term. If I back it at 4s I will lose and if I back it at over 5/1 I will win. This of course assumes that luck is neutral long term which is debatable!!:lol Thanks for the input.

[south_eastern_ram]

Re: A Question of 'Value' Have you got records of your bets with your tissue price and the price you took? If so, just analyse all your bets and work out your ROI if only betting on the 10% bigger prices.

[The Saint]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

Have you got records of your bets with your tissue price and the price you took? If so, just analyse all your bets and work out your ROI if only betting on the 10% bigger prices.

Yep! In the process of doing so - it's not surprising that the higher the value (% increase) the greater my ROI - obviously fewer bets though. The ones that are being filtered out are unsurprisingly the bets I was never quite happy with regardless of whether or not they won. Thanks:ok

[mowgli77]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

As a punter getting 'value' over your horse racing selections is the only way to make the game pay... Unless you are a trainer or jockey and have a direct influence and inside info but that's not what I want to discuss... When I want to back a horse I have a price in mind that I think a horse should be - in a 100% book. However, if I am to back this horse, I have first considered that it has a chance of winning, I then look to achieve at least 5% above my tissue price or the price I think the horse in question should be. In the modern day betting world of prices lasting about 3 minutes and accounts being shut down at the drop of a hat if you dare to beat SP more than once, do you think this approach is too old fashioned, too conservative or not tight enough? ie - I should be looking for 10% above my tissue price (100% tissue by the way). I am certainly leaning towards 10% but this will decrease bets drastically and dictate that I would rarely back anything at 10/1 or bigger. Added to which, as I may have discussed, I cannot increase staking to a higher level - getting a bet on at the price you want would become impossible for inflated stakes for one and phchologically I am too weak to do so anyway. Becoming a 'layer' is becoming more attractive all the time.... If you can learn to lay at value prices then at least you can't get banned.... Any thoughts? :)

I think you are right by sticking to your principles of finding value bets. Sometimes there won't be a bet though because of the overrounds so our 100% books are quite unrealistic to a bookmakers one that is to around 115% and it may be a case of finding one just above the price we have allocated for it. I noticed you mentioned wanting 9-2 for a 7-2 shot and I work in the same way. I had Olympic Glory as a 5-2 chance because I felt Ghurair was an awful price at 9-4 and should have been nearer 9-2/5-1. I can often find an overrated favourite that is way too short in the betting but then as a backer I am trying to find something to back against it when the most simple thing would probably be to just lay the favourite. The whole concept of value is different from one punter to the next when pricing up a race. My 5-2 chance could be someone elses 5-1 chance based on how you have analysed a horses run and what notes you have on a horse or a race. An example would be Harris Tweed, I have it as a listed/group 3 horse that would be suited to an easy 14f or to 12f on soft ground when likely to get an easy lead but I don't fancy it at a higher level unless it's a particularly weak looking Group 2 for example. I had it as way too short in the Yorkshire Cup at York despite the track likely to suit and the fact that many fail to win from behind there, just lacks that class difference for me. Are you finding the lack of bets a problem or is it more to do with getting on? It would possibly be worth comparing your tissue the night before with one or more other punters, possibly by PM if you didn't want to share it on an open forum the night before. If a price looks too big I often think I've missed out a vital piece of info like a penalty or something and double check. The one thing I have noticed the night before is that the outsiders are way too short. There are horses priced up at 16-1 that I have at around 25-1 or bigger and sure enough the next day they are around 33-1. It is often reflected on Betfair when a 100-1 chance is around 250.0 on the exchanges. I think you are right to try and get a price just above your allocated odds because you have to always be looking at the long term rather than just the race in question. There have been a few horses lately that I've fancied but the odds were 2-3pts below what I considered value. I don't mind seeing a winner go unbacked if I feel the price is all wrong, especially in races with several improving sorts. I'm currently struggling to price up the Richmond Stakes today and don't really see why Ahern is 2-1 and "hold up" Spencer on board over 6f would worry me. The laying side of racing interests me but there don't seem to be many on forums that do it.

[harrisman]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

I think you are right by sticking to your principles of finding value bets. Sometimes there won't be a bet though because of the overrounds so our 100% books are quite unrealistic to a bookmakers one that is to around 115% and it may be a case of finding one just above the price we have allocated for it. I noticed you mentioned wanting 9-2 for a 7-2 shot and I work in the same way. I had Olympic Glory as a 5-2 chance because I felt Ghurair was an awful price at 9-4 and should have been nearer 9-2/5-1. I can often find an overrated favourite that is way too short in the betting but then as a backer I am trying to find something to back against it when the most simple thing would probably be to just lay the favourite. The whole concept of value is different from one punter to the next when pricing up a race. My 5-2 chance could be someone elses 5-1 chance based on how you have analysed a horses run and what notes you have on a horse or a race. An example would be Harris Tweed, I have it as a listed/group 3 horse that would be suited to an easy 14f or to 12f on soft ground when likely to get an easy lead but I don't fancy it at a higher level unless it's a particularly weak looking Group 2 for example. I had it as way too short in the Yorkshire Cup at York despite the track likely to suit and the fact that many fail to win from behind there, just lacks that class difference for me. Are you finding the lack of bets a problem or is it more to do with getting on? It would possibly be worth comparing your tissue the night before with one or more other punters, possibly by PM if you didn't want to share it on an open forum the night before. If a price looks too big I often think I've missed out a vital piece of info like a penalty or something and double check. The one thing I have noticed the night before is that the outsiders are way too short. There are horses priced up at 16-1 that I have at around 25-1 or bigger and sure enough the next day they are around 33-1. It is often reflected on Betfair when a 100-1 chance is around 250.0 on the exchanges. I think you are right to try and get a price just above your allocated odds because you have to always be looking at the long term rather than just the race in question. There have been a few horses lately that I've fancied but the odds were 2-3pts below what I considered value. I don't mind seeing a winner go unbacked if I feel the price is all wrong, especially in races with several improving sorts. I'm currently struggling to price up the Richmond Stakes today and don't really see why Ahern is 2-1 and "hold up" Spencer on board over 6f would worry me. The laying side of racing interests me but there don't seem to be many on forums that do it.

HI as always an interesting discussion. I have to say my way of interpreting value is rather different these days. And this applies to all sports I bet or trade on. Namely do I think the make up of the particular events lend themselves well at the particular odds in question to yield a reasonable profit. it's quite possible to do a combination approach if you are laying for example and you could choose to dutch to oppose a favourite you felt was too short at different amounts maybe backing one of outsiders also for a place. I'm a great believer in thinking outside the box when using the exchanges-there are many techniques which can be used to give your self a chance of yeilding a profit from the event. OK you won't always be succesful but you can often lessen your liabilities but maximise your potential profits. personally I am more and more interested in looking at the tracks and races that often have quite un-competitive events cutting out a lot of complex form study etc. perth the last two days has been brilliant for that for example, as opposed to the Goodwood lottery.

[The Saint]

[Kithanga]

Re: A Question of 'Value' I recognise all of what you ask so it's not an uncommon challenge and you're not alone. I hit the problem of limits back in the early 90's and then opted for a more and more selective approach looking for a better strike rate and bigger margins. It worked financially but not from an enjoyment perspective as I found I'd cut out too many types of bet / race. I did get bored and tried many time to expand the number of bets but usually unsuccessfully. I hit a bad run at one point and due to the small number of bets it lasted a long time and hit my morale. The same thing happened in 2010. After a really good 2009 and a 60+% ROI the following year was awful as I expanded the number of bets and so I took a break. I've tried a few different approaches since and even dropped the stakes right back and had a few weeks of 'quick glance' based on rating and prices available to try and loosen up the approach a bit. Surprisingly it was successful so did make me think again about price being all important. Currently I'm having more bets and basing selections purely on price, looking for a third or more over the possible value and it seems to be going well. I'm putting less effort into pricing the race up and going for more of a gut feel and pricing each animal in a range. For example Tuesday race 1 I backed Landaman. I was worried about the weak competition it had beaten and the lack of a recent run so taking a negative view it could easily be opposed if it were short. However you could also take a positive view of the form and say it was on the up and had been laid out for the race. I actually only backed it because it was trading at 18.0 on the exchanges which I though was too big even based on my most pessimistic view of the form. The horse I fancied finished mid field and, to my surprise, Landaman won it. I've found plenty of bets using this approach. The hardest thing is putting the money down because most of the time I'm backing a horse with a good chance of being there or there about's which I think probably won't win for the same reasons as others. However it's that very aspect that pushes the price out as everyone sees the same concerns. The only positive is that I'm in profit so as illogical as it seems to back one with doubts it seems profitable. The approach also takes the pressure of 'getting on' and studying the night before as I'm mainly backing when a decent market has formed. I can literally pick up a race at any time and base my decision on the market as it stands at that time. Hope you understand that as it's difficult to explain in words

[mowgli77]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

Great post Mowgli – reflects nearly all of how I am thinking and do act. The problem is that by increasing ‘value’ against my book there are fewer and fewer bets that qualify. It’s hard to imagine that I can increase stakes much further – both from a psychological point of view and a ‘getting on’ point of view. Inevitably, accounts are closed if you are beating SP and that is why I am trying to move my methodology onto ‘laying’ where I can’t be banned. I will obviously try to get more accounts open in time but I pay a commission to willing participants and there are only so many friends and relatives to go round! It’s an absolute disgrace that Bookmakers are able to dictate who they do and don’t want as a customer and yet spend fortunes advertising FOBTs, multiple bets and the like. It is something that ‘racing’ should address. I believe that there should be a mimimum amount they will lay to any customer - it doesn't have to be massive amounts - not at all - even a token 'score' would be something - but to shut accounts or limit them to actual pennies is really immoral imho. At least it is while they are prepared to take fortunes from mugs and FOBT addicts. I concur that outsiders are very often too short in the betting – it’s not unusual for me to have something priced up above 250/1 and then find it being offered at 33/1. As a percentage that’s less than 3 though which is why I will and do play largely towards the front of the market? Hyped horses such as Ghurair and Michaelangelo offer value as lays on what they have actually achieved. Golden Lilac was another that springs to mind that became artificially short. Has to be the way forward!

Michelangelo is a good example as it is one I opposed yet tried to find one to back against it rather than laying it instead. Bookmakers are a business, they don't want people taking money off them. I know it's ridiculous when they make so much off mugs on FOBT's but sadly it's what punters are up against. Out of interest how would people price up today's Richmond Stakes, bearing in mind the form is all ove the place this season due to soft/heavy ground? Here is my write up on the race firstly: http://www.punterslounge.com/goodwood-betting-fahey-s-outsiders-could-be-each-way-value-in-richmond-stakes This is how I priced it up to 101%: Ahern 5-2 Cay Verde 7-2 Euxton Hall 16-1 Ginger Goose 16-1 Heavy Metal 11-1 Master Of War 4-1 Secret Sign 25-1 Top Boy 16-1 I don't fancy Ahern at 15-8 at all. I respect Hannon/Hughes record in this race and might have got MOW all wrong. Heavy Metal looks poor at Group 2 class but with the yard banging them in I'm worried it should be shorter. Euxton Hall and Ginger Goose look like value to me as outsiders but if I was looking at the front of the betting I'd prefer Cay Verde to Ahern and probably should back Cay Verde/Ginger Goose when looking at the prices available.

[The Saint]

Re: A Question of 'Value' It's a good job it's a game of opinions!! To be fair, it's not my kind of race. If I rated Top Boy on his Heavy Ground form then he would be around 5s and a definate value bet at the available prices. I do find these 2yo races quite difficult though and whilst my ratings show Ahern as value, I don't generally play under 11/4 and the race will be a 'no bet' for me. As are most races.... Ahern 5/4 Cape Verde 9/2 Heavy Metal 13/2 Toy Boy 10/1 Master Of War 15/2 Euxton Hall 19/1 Ginger Goose 54/1 Secret Sign 110/1 If I had to bet in the race, I'd lay the Hannon horse at 4.4 - but I don't - and won't be!

[mowgli77]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

It's a good job it's a game of opinions!! To be fair, it's not my kind of race. If I rated Top Boy on his Heavy Ground form then he would be around 5s and a definate value bet at the available prices. I do find these 2yo races quite difficult though and whilst my ratings show Ahern as value, I don't generally play under 11/4 and the race will be a 'no bet' for me. As are most races.... Ahern 5/4 Cape Verde 9/2 Heavy Metal 13/2 Toy Boy 10/1 Master Of War 15/2 Euxton Hall 19/1 Ginger Goose 54/1 Secret Sign 110/1 If I had to bet in the race, I'd lay the Hannon horse at 4.4 - but I don't - and won't be!

Not my kind of race either. I prefer all age races with plenty of form to go on and less guessing. I also get what Kithanga is saying above, that's how I do it when glancing through a race, by basically placing a horse in a box as either front of the market, outsider or a price somewhere usually between 10-1 and 16-1 and try to have a rough idea of what odds I'm looking for before I see even the RP forecast tissue. Saint - if you want to lay me 54-1 on Ginger Goose I'll gladly take some of that. :)

[The Saint]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

Not my kind of race either. I prefer all age races with plenty of form to go on and less guessing. I also get what Kithanga is saying above' date=' that's how I do it when glancing through a race, by basically placing a horse in a box as either front of the market, outsider or a price somewhere usually between 10-1 and 16-1 and try to have a rough idea of what odds I'm looking for before I see even the RP forecast tissue. Saint - if you want to lay me 54-1 on Ginger Goose I'll gladly take some of that. :)[/quote'] I'm sure you would.... The highest I will lay at is 6.0 though and I'm thinking I should probably drop that to be honest!! I can't be done with the Long losing runs and lays being wiped out by one wrong at longer prices so I avoid and that's another reason I like the percentage approach.

[The Saint]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

I recognise all of what you ask so it's not an uncommon challenge and you're not alone. I hit the problem of limits back in the early 90's and then opted for a more and more selective approach looking for a better strike rate and bigger margins. It worked financially but not from an enjoyment perspective as I found I'd cut out too many types of bet / race. I did get bored and tried many time to expand the number of bets but usually unsuccessfully. I hit a bad run at one point and due to the small number of bets it lasted a long time and hit my morale. The same thing happened in 2010. After a really good 2009 and a 60+% ROI the following year was awful as I expanded the number of bets and so I took a break. I've tried a few different approaches since and even dropped the stakes right back and had a few weeks of 'quick glance' based on rating and prices available to try and loosen up the approach a bit. Surprisingly it was successful so did make me think again about price being all important. Currently I'm having more bets and basing selections purely on price, looking for a third or more over the possible value and it seems to be going well. I'm putting less effort into pricing the race up and going for more of a gut feel and pricing each animal in a range. For example Tuesday race 1 I backed Landaman. I was worried about the weak competition it had beaten and the lack of a recent run so taking a negative view it could easily be opposed if it were short. However you could also take a positive view of the form and say it was on the up and had been laid out for the race. I actually only backed it because it was trading at 18.0 on the exchanges which I though was too big even based on my most pessimistic view of the form. The horse I fancied finished mid field and, to my surprise, Landaman won it. I've found plenty of bets using this approach. The hardest thing is putting the money down because most of the time I'm backing a horse with a good chance of being there or there about's which I think probably won't win for the same reasons as others. However it's that very aspect that pushes the price out as everyone sees the same concerns. The only positive is that I'm in profit so as illogical as it seems to back one with doubts it seems profitable. The approach also takes the pressure of 'getting on' and studying the night before as I'm mainly backing when a decent market has formed. I can literally pick up a race at any time and base my decision on the market as it stands at that time. Hope you understand that as it's difficult to explain in words

Another good post.... As you identify, tightening up leads to a probable increased ROI but I can't realistically go much higher staking wise.... Overall - I understand all you are saying - difficult to put into words I know. I had 2 methids running - one based on what I feel is value and one based on ratings alone - basically trying to pick winners without goinfg below 11/4. They are both showing a profit but I fear the later may be as much to good luck and coincidentely getting value as opposed to knowing that you are getting it (I know one mans value back is another mans value lay). The going gets tough after a run of losers as we disscussed on the turn of the year but all good - it's part of it I suppose. Am happy taking a watching brief and researching my previous bets at the moment. There is a massive increase in my ROI at 10% above my tissue price - with a ridiculous SR too but I'd be down to around 30 bets a year. I'm not prepared to stake as much as I would need to on those figures. 5% seems to be looking like the best cut off point at this stage. I understand about the 'feel' you discuss - I think you know when you have placed a good bet(win or lose) and so far my past bets that I have looked at again have all qualified. It's a more objective view of my subjective ratings and will hopefully take the emotion out of the 'shall I, shan't I, does that represent value process'.. I hoep this makes some sort of sense - it's about 4/6 it doesn't :)

[mowgli77]

Re: A Question of 'Value' Ahern last. I think my 5-2 and your 5-4 were both worth laying. Spencer holds it up, gets no run and it looked well beaten anyway. Knew the Johnston horse was the danger, my two folded badly and only the Hannon/Hughes one was pushing it close.

[The Saint]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

It's a good job it's a game of opinions!! To be fair, it's not my kind of race. If I rated Top Boy on his Heavy Ground form then he would be around 5s and a definate value bet at the available prices. I do find these 2yo races quite difficult though and whilst my ratings show Ahern as value, I don't generally play under 11/4 and the race will be a 'no bet' for me. As are most races.... Ahern 5/4 Cape Verde 9/2 Heavy Metal 13/2 Toy Boy 10/1 Master Of War 15/2 Euxton Hall 19/1 Ginger Goose 54/1 Secret Sign 110/1 If I had to bet in the race, I'd lay the Hannon horse at 4.4 - but I don't - and won't be!

:rollin Heavy Metal qualified as a back!! If only you could draw conclusions on the back of one race!! Hard, hard, hard game...:(

[The Saint]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

Ahern last. I think my 5-2 and your 5-4 were both worth laying. Spencer holds it up' date=' gets no run and it looked well beaten anyway. Knew the Johnston horse was the danger, my two folded badly and only the Hannon/Hughes one was pushing it close.[/quote'] Yep - u called it well m8. How do you price the Gold Cup? I fancy the front of the market are too short in the race. Absolutely not saying that they won't win - just that the prices seem short. That having been said, staying races are right behind 2yo races on my 'try to ignore' list!!

[mowgli77]

Re: A Question of 'Value' http://www.punterslounge.com/goodwood-betting-saddler-s-rock-can-reverse-gold-cup-form-with-colour-vision Saddler’s Rock 13-8, Colour Vision 3-1, Simenon 6-1, Lost In The Moment 12-1, Nehaam and Times Up 25-1, Askar Tau, Aaim To Prosper and Chiberta King 50-1, Electrolyser 80/1. The one I might have wrong is Lost In The Moment but on overall form I'd make it about 12's. I've been a fan of Times Up for a while but even so don't fancy it here today.

[The Saint]

Re: A Question of 'Value' My tissue on this race is an embarrasment. As the market stands I expect Naheen to outrun his odds. I don't like Simenon and the odds and would have laid last night at 5.1 if playing....

[richard-westwood]

Re: A Question of 'Value' ##

[mowgli77]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

My tissue on this race is an embarrasment. As the market stands I expect Naheen to outrun his odds. I don't like Simenon and the odds and would have laid last night at 5.1 if playing....

I see the front 2 both as Group 1 horses in a Group 2 race but one of them has a 4lb penalty. Just hoping the race pans out as expected with one of the outsiders going a decent gallop. If mine is beaten fair and square then I've overrated it, just hope there is no hard luck story with it.

[The Saint]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

I see the front 2 both as Group 1 horses in a Group 2 race but one of them has a 4lb penalty. Just hoping the race pans out as expected with one of the outsiders going a decent gallop. If mine is beaten fair and square then I've overrated it' date=' just hope there is no hard luck story with it.[/quote'] Very nice - seemed a fair race. Best horse won and most of the longer priced horses ran well too... Well done!

[richard-westwood]

Re: A Question of 'Value' '

[mowgli77]

Re: A Question of 'Value'

Very nice - seemed a fair race. Best horse won and most of the longer priced horses ran well too... Well done!

Cheers mate. Electrolyser ran a blinder from the front. I thought mine was treading water at one point but the trainer said it waits for the whip then responds and pulls away. Lost In The Moment was poor like I had expected/hoped. Form would look quite solid if it wasn't for the 2nd.

I am hoping Electrolyser or Chiberta King lead the way from the front at a decent pace.

That set up the race for me and was exactly what I had thought would happen. A lot of disappointing efforts really from the rest.

[BKI Punter]

Re: A Question of 'Value' It depends for me. With group races I can make my decision immediately because form is memorised. You just know when a price looks wrong. With handicaps, I narrow the field down with my own criteria and then attach a price to the remaining horses as the minimum I'd back them at as opposed to the price I'd give it to a 100% book. Then it's just about looking at where the market and your prices differ and backing accordingly.