Bent AW Racing.....

[jayalexander]

Ahhh that's better ;)

[bartrum]

Re: Bent AW Racing..... i decided today that if u cant beat them join them - tidals baby at lingfiled trained by our mate carrol, drifted overnight from 8.6 to 14.6 on betfair and then backed into 5to1 2nd fav i get on at all prices as i looked ath horse who liked the c&d, last winning jockey on board and weight of cash im happy!! all goes to plan flies down the outside and then the fav stays on, on the rail ( a rarety at ling) and does me by a short head!!

[bartrum]

Re: Bent AW Racing..... just like to add i am[now done with ****ty AW..... lesson learnt!!! As for my bet in "best bets" namely Rich again gets beaten by frognal again which i cannot believe.. Actually left the bookies talking to myself!!! # AW is driving me fu..ing mad so im out!!!

[stat man]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

Well that was an informative morning!! In light of some of the above I have gone through every single bet I've had on the AW for the last 2 years and found the following; [ATTACH]4127[/ATTACH] The Strike Rate and ROI were almost identical in CLASS 5 and above as they were in CLASS 6 and below... It was only when I broke the results down into 2012 and 2013 that I was somewhat alarmed by what I found; [ATTACH]4128[/ATTACH] The SRs for 2012 and 2013 were almost identical concerning the Higher Class of Racing. Most alarming was the abject failure to make any in roads in CLASS 6 and below during 2013. These results include a 14/1 winner amongst the 4 and without that the figures would be even more catastrophic. It's a small sample but what can I conclude? The easiest and probably most accurate conclusions are that it is now impossible to make it pay through form analysis in Class 6 and below races. My technique, form reading/analysis has not changed a bit so it's plain to see (to me anyway) that corruption at these levels has increased dramatically. Overall, form is not the most important thing at this low level - nowhere near. I will continue to bet on some Class 6 events but they will be few and far between and involve horses that are proven to be consistent at the level and not just put in a 'flash in the pan' performance. Tricky, tricky times. Not looking forward to going through turf results with relation to Class later!!!! :eyes

The following horses were found, according to the BHA, to have been ridden corruptly: Edith’s Boy 2:50 Lingfield 1 March 2009 – Class 5 Terminate 2:55 Bath 29 July 2009 – Class 6 The Staffy 9:20 Wolverhampton 5 March 2009 – Class 5 On this basis, not only should you avoid Class 6, you should avoid Class 5 also. Further, the results of your Class 5 bets should be as bad as those for your Class 6 bets. However, absence of evidence does not imply evidence of absence. Just because there may not be any evidence to indicate that Classes 4, 3, 2 and 1 are corrupt does not imply that they are not. This begs the question: Where do you draw the line in terms of Classes that you will bet on and those that you will not?

[Aidymac]

Re: Bent AW Racing..... I remember in my local bookmakers a few years back, I was working behind the till for them answering the phone taking the phone bets. A client/friend of the owner rang in and told him that the fav would not win such a race, I will never forget it was a Group 3, forget the name of the horse, but the horse was 4/7 and it finished 4th of 5.. Skullduggery goes on at every level, you would be surprised.=, but more-son in lower grade. In my opinion, even Group 1's are not free of skullduggery, but that's the nature of the sport.

[mowgli77]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

It's a small sample but what can I conclude? The easiest and probably most accurate conclusions are that it is now impossible to make it pay through form analysis in Class 6 and below races. My technique, form reading/analysis has not changed a bit so it's plain to see (to me anyway) that corruption at these levels has increased dramatically. Overall, form is not the most important thing at this low level - nowhere near. I will continue to bet on some Class 6 events but they will be few and far between and involve horses that are proven to be consistent at the level and not just put in a 'flash in the pan' performance. Tricky, tricky times. Not looking forward to going through turf results with relation to Class later!!!! :eyes

I think you've hit the nail on the head and that's why I avoid this low level sand racing. I've seen results that look like shocks, a horse winning at huge odds rather than a crooked gamble. I've looked back at the race, the result and the horses form and still been left puzzled as to how it's won. No logic to it at times, no form at all to suggest it could win at this trip, this track, off this rating etc etc. Sometimes you can say it benefitted from a step up in trip, different tactics, new jockey etc but some of these results leave you scratching your head. The inconsistency at this level is frustrating and it often seems that any horse can beat any other despite what any form book suggests.

[stat man]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

I think Cowan is spot on Can I share my experience? Last year my son created a spreadsheet to record our bets including an historical record. It proved really valuable in helping identify the areas where our method worked best and by concentrating on those areas we have been able to improve our margins. One jaw dropping stat that analysis of the results revealed was the massive difference between the ROI on our class 5 and higher selections and the ROI on class 6 and 7 bets.The former was 21% and the latter 6.5% both achieved using the same method both in terms of selection and price benchmarking.I should add that the class 6 ROI was boosted by a 66/1 winner at Southwell(backed EW) .Without this the class 6 ROI would have been barely positive. Our sample size might be too small (925 selections class 5 and higher , 702 class 6 and 7)maybe a mathematician could advise but assuming the figures are representative the conclusion is clear. Avoid Class 6 and 7

To judge, mathematically, how representative your results are, you need to calculate the Chi Squared value for each sample. To do this, Google ‘Archie Score’. This will tell you how likely it is that your results have come about by pure chance. Also, whenever you use a sample of data, there is a Margin of Error associated with the results. The MoE is given by 1 divided by the square root of the sample size. The MoE on your Class 5 and above results is 3.3%. Your true ROI therefore lies somewhere between 24.3% and 17.7%. The MoE on your Class 6/7 results is 3.8%. Your true ROI therefore lies somewhere between 10.3% and 2.7%.

[Primevil]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

To judge, mathematically, how representative your results are, you need to calculate the Chi Squared value for each sample. To do this, Google ‘Archie Score’. This will tell you how likely it is that your results have come about by pure chance. Also, whenever you use a sample of data, there is a Margin of Error associated with the results. The MoE is given by 1 divided by the square root of the sample size. The MoE on your Class 5 and above results is 3.3%. Your true ROI therefore lies somewhere between 24.3% and 17.7%. The MoE on your Class 6/7 results is 3.8%. Your true ROI therefore lies somewhere between 10.3% and 2.7%.

This is how Eddie Ahearn works out his probability, In fact his Law team has this as a major mitigating circumstance.

[dboth]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

To judge, mathematically, how representative your results are, you need to calculate the Chi Squared value for each sample. To do this, Google ‘Archie Score’. This will tell you how likely it is that your results have come about by pure chance. Also, whenever you use a sample of data, there is a Margin of Error associated with the results. The MoE is given by 1 divided by the square root of the sample size. The MoE on your Class 5 and above results is 3.3%. Your true ROI therefore lies somewhere between 24.3% and 17.7%. The MoE on your Class 6/7 results is 3.8%. Your true ROI therefore lies somewhere between 10.3% and 2.7%.

Thanks for the advice stat man

[bartrum]

Re: Bent AW Racing..... aegean king for wigham smashed in!!!!!!!!

[bartrum]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

aegean king for wigham smashed in!!!!!!!!

and no where.... hilarious!!! haha

[Aidymac]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

and no where.... hilarious!!! haha

Which proves the point. Trainers and owners can lose a fortune as well as make a fortune. Not so bent today eh?

[bartrum]

Re: Bent AW Racing..... yes very true.. quite entertaining with no financial interest!!!!!

[fintron]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

To judge, mathematically, how representative your results are, you need to calculate the Chi Squared value for each sample. To do this, Google ‘Archie Score’. This will tell you how likely it is that your results have come about by pure chance. Also, whenever you use a sample of data, there is a Margin of Error associated with the results. The MoE is given by 1 divided by the square root of the sample size. The MoE on your Class 5 and above results is 3.3%. Your true ROI therefore lies somewhere between 24.3% and 17.7%. The MoE on your Class 6/7 results is 3.8%. Your true ROI therefore lies somewhere between 10.3% and 2.7%.

Thanks for posting this. I have heard Archie mentioned before, but never sat down and applied it to data. I have done chi square tests before, back in A level Biology, so understand the principals, so how do you apply that to punting results? Can you compare an overall strike rate vs average odds or do you need to work stuff out for each individual bet?

[The Saint]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

Thanks for posting this. I have heard Archie mentioned before' date=' but never sat down and applied it to data. I have done chi square tests before, back in A level Biology, so understand the principals, so how do you apply that to punting results? Can you compare an overall strike rate vs average odds or do you need to work stuff out for each individual bet?[/quote'] http://www.hoof.demon.co.uk/archie.html Enjoy!! It's not so hard going once you have it set up on excel!! Don't know if it says on the attatched but I think it best to use Betfair SP as that book is to 100% as a rule. Stat Man knows thus stuff backwards and am sure he wil confirm!! The man is a machine!! :ok

[stat man]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

Thanks for posting this. I have heard Archie mentioned before' date=' but never sat down and applied it to data. I have done chi square tests before, back in A level Biology, so understand the principals, so how do you apply that to punting results? Can you compare an overall strike rate vs average odds or do you need to work stuff out for each individual bet?[/quote'] You compare the overall strike rate with the average odds.

[stat man]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

You compare the overall strike rate with the average odds.

One word of warning: Archie compares the actual strike rate with the theoretical strike rate (based on the average odds of the selections) and gives a measure of how likely it is that the actual results have come about by chance. Basically, the higher the Archie Score, the less likely it is that the results have come about by chance and the more likely it is that similar results to the past will be observed in the future. What it doesn't do is to provide a measure of how profitable a system is likely to be. A system could have a high archie score and still lose.

[stat man]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

http://www.hoof.demon.co.uk/archie.html Enjoy!! It's not so hard going once you have it set up on excel!! Don't know if it says on the attatched but I think it best to use Betfair SP as that book is to 100% as a rule. Stat Man knows thus stuff backwards and am sure he wil confirm!! The man is a machine!! :ok

Correct Mr Saint, good sir! Use the Betfair SP NOT the Industry SP.

[bartrum]

Re: Bent AW Racing..... basingstoke in the 6.35 wolves........ i took 3to1 20 mins before the off, 5 mins before the off it went into 2to1, infact prob a minute before the off it was still 5/2. Anyway i looked at betfair and there was still 5.0 available for plenty.... it then ran a shocker and to me looked a non trier although fanning did his best to look like he was trying..... anyway i am more interested in the price diff between the exchange price and sp. can someone explain wahts happened there as i dont really understand it....

[BillyHills]

Re: Bent AW Racing..... No punters at Wolverhampton probably;)

[Primevil]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

basingstoke in the 6.35 wolves........ i took 3to1 20 mins before the off, 5 mins before the off it went into 2to1, infact prob a minute before the off it was still 5/2. Anyway i looked at betfair and there was still 5.0 available for plenty.... it then ran a shocker and to me looked a non trier although fanning did his best to look like he was trying..... anyway i am more interested in the price diff between the exchange price and sp. can someone explain wahts happened there as i dont really understand it....

It was an iffy race, did you notice the liquidity? Even worse was the following 4 runner race, The fav backed all day from odds against to 1.29 on the off, the other 3 horses connections knew their jobs, have a look on how the 2nd runs, and tell me if he was supposed to win. Shane Kelly must of cacked himself for a few strides. And when they pull up, you can clearly see him say to sweeney.."thanks"..Love this game!:lol

[stat man]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

basingstoke in the 6.35 wolves........ i took 3to1 20 mins before the off, 5 mins before the off it went into 2to1, infact prob a minute before the off it was still 5/2. Anyway i looked at betfair and there was still 5.0 available for plenty.... it then ran a shocker and to me looked a non trier although fanning did his best to look like he was trying..... anyway i am more interested in the price diff between the exchange price and sp. can someone explain wahts happened there as i dont really understand it....

Bartrum My laying system picked this up as a probable non-trier. It has a long track record for doing this and is a trusted system of mine. This is just a theory but I reckon that someone put the word out on the grapevine that the horse was gonna come in - hence the short price with the bookies, especially at the track (came in from 3/1 to 2/1). Word then spread and the odds just kept coming down. Why was the horse 5.0 with Betfair when it ought to have been 3.3-ish? Because those in the know knew it would lose and were laying it for all that they were worth on the exchanges - hence the Betfair odds of 5.0. So, the good folks at the track were backing it the odds were coming in and the 'in crowd' were laying it on the exchanges and the odds were increasing. This, IMHO, caused the difference in price between the bookies and the exchanges. As I say - just a theory.

[bartrum]

Re: Bent AW Racing..... primevil - yet another example of why this s....ty all weather racing should be left alone!!!! terrible... stat man - yeah that makes sense, i was also thinking what if the initial paper fav and eventual winner had been backed off course so the money was down. however, the people involved then back basingstoke at th track which contracts the starting price and therefore your initial fav driftsand means a bigger sp of the winner..... doubt it would take much money at wolves on thursday night to contract the price of basingstoke and thats why the price of basingstoke was still 5.0 on betfair... another theory

[stat man]

Re: Bent AW Racing.....

primevil - yet another example of why this s....ty all weather racing should be left alone!!!! terrible... stat man - yeah that makes sense, i was also thinking what if the initial paper fav and eventual winner had been backed off course so the money was down. however, the people involved then back basingstoke at th track which contracts the starting price and therefore your initial fav driftsand means a bigger sp of the winner..... doubt it would take much money at wolves on thursday night to contract the price of basingstoke and thats why the price of basingstoke was still 5.0 on betfair... another theory

Bartrum As I understand it, there's a lot of corporate entertaining goes on at Wolverhampton. This means a bunch of twa*ts with more money than sense and it wouldn't take much, I reckon, to persuade the muppets to stick a shed load on a loser.