Daily Analysis Of Horses To Lay Between The Prices Of 1.70 & 4.2

[The Equaliser]

Hi Guys,

I am just wonderring if anyone is interested in helping me with daily analysis to find decent "lay" bets at short odds between 1.7 - 4.0 for lay betting purposes.

The night before racing I can list about between 20 - 30 horses for usual racing days and of course there are more on a Saturday.  I use Betfair and cross check with Oddschecker making a note of the lowest and highest price bearing in mind that the Bookies don't like to offer generous odds about anything at that time of night.

Anyway, the analysis involves cheking out track suitability, weight, draw (if applicable) mark, pace, distance, going and class.  There also has to be at least two other horses in the race who are considered to be live contenders whose individual odds do not exceed 10.0.

This is not rocket science and at this time of year "form book" analysts quite often get slaughtered in trying to either find winners or losers until the flat form truly sorts itself out.

I must admit that one has to be bold sometimes e.g. I laid Ten Sovereigns in teh 2,000 guineas because it was well known about its stamina problems but its price was short because a lot of people thought that its calss would see it though to win.  I also found it intersting that Istimraar was running for Dan Skelton last night in teh 6.10 at Worcester; it was 4/5 favourite and even teh commentators were expressing doubts about it winning this handicap chase.  But just because it was a Skelton horse the short price remained even in-running for a very long while during the race.

There are very many horses that run at cramped odds that are poor value for money where when the basic criteria above is applied they do not represent a good bet but instead a good opportunity to "lay" and make some money.

I could possibly analyse one meeting and come up with suggestions of good "lay" bets whilst others could analyse other meetings.  Obviously the horse(s) with the least going for them at the shortest prices are the ones to "Lay".

If anyone is interested in carrying out a bit of the work and sharing thenm please let me know?

Regards,

The Equaliser

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 10, 2022 by The Equaliser

[BillyHills]

Welcome to PL @The Equaliser

Not sure if we have many layers on the forum but feel free to post any possible pre-race selections in the daily Racing Chat thread. Be interested to see the strike rate you can achieve

 

[The Equaliser]

Hi Billy,

Many thanks for your reply.

Understandable if the Forum doesn't have too many layers; do you know one that has?

I do back horses as well.

My favourite bet is a daily £1 Trixie bet on Sports Book.

The liability is just £4 but the rewards are much greater if all three come in.

I can start a different topic called "Daily Trixie" and start posting from tomorrow or Monday. 

I can't guarantee a posting every day as sometimes I get occupied with other things.

This could be interesting for your members.

I can make the selections and post them up each day and keep a running tally on profitability.  If I miss a day I just will pick up from my previous day's total.

I rarely cash out on the second leg should the first horse win as the return is awful.  I sometimes I cash out on the 3rd leg bet if I can recover my £4 stake.  If the first two horses lose then I place a £2 stake on the third horse to recover my Trixie stake.  I don't usually pick selections at a price less than 3/1 so should the first two horses lose then I can usually recover my multiples stake if teh third horse wins.  Just as an extra bit of meaness, I generally put a lay bet in on the 3rd horse so as to retrieve my stake of £4 but also set the odds so that if the horse gets matched in-running but doesn't win I get my initial stake of £2 back.

If you think that people on the Forum may be interested in this then I can start posting up soon

Regards,

The Equaliser

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Escaping Captivity]

Your odds range is good and I believe a  profit can be made from laying but does it surmount as the best way to bet on horses? Not for me because there's too much emphasis on strike rate rather than value. There needs to be more of a balance as laying above 2.00 equates to backing at odds-on. I think BACKING two horses (not dutching) where at least one of the selections predominantly has some "meat on the bone" is a better strategy. The size of the field in each race is vital though.

You also need to take into account how long it takes to find your selections for each race. Is it worth the effort for the ROI? As they say "time is money!".

Perhaps lighten your workload by concentrating solely on handicaps for laying. Novice and maiden races for example are easier to predict for the backer especially if they have ran well in their previous race.

[The Equaliser]

Very many thanks for your very down to earth advice.

I am not so much interested in a strike rate for my "lay"bets but far more interested in matching my bets at a price which reflects value.  I also adjust my stakes according to odds so as to in effect even out successes to failures over a long period of time.

As far as I'm concerned if my "back" selections were say 2/1 then, if I was seeking value I would try and back three 2/1 chances at higher odds so as to get it.  This being so, I would ask for something like 3/1 or 4.0 for each horse.

One still has the problem of determining what is a true 2/1 chance though when making selections.

It seems easier for me to find possible weaknesses in a horse's chance of success as opposed to calculating a specific chance of it winning.

Since this Forum does not seem to support much in the way of "laying" I have reactivated my blog on teh Betfair Exchange Forum where Ironically I am now posting up a daily Trixie which is meant to be paid for by either "Lay" or "Back" bets.

I use the name of "The Equalser" should anyone be interested?

Once again, many thanks for the warm welcome given to me.

The Equaliser

 

[Snoopdog]

I'm interested in a lay thread. In fact there used to be a regular thread on here called "Binchy's Lays". As I recall, it did well for a while, then seemed to lose its edge.

I've been thinking about developing a blind lay system of say anything shorter than  (say) 1/3 at certain tracks. Eg, Fakenham seems to have a lot of ultra shorties get beat. In fact when I check the reults, I'm amazed how many ultra shorties get beat. It really needs someone with some good skills on analysing lots of race data.

Anyway for now, I'll follow your Betfair Forum Lay thread as "The equaliser". Good luck.

[The Equaliser]

Well good luck with that Snoopdog;  I tend not to go against horses at less than 1.70.  If I did, I would still need to see vulnerabilty in the favourite plus at least two other horses as main live contenders neither of them being offerred at odds exceeding 10.0.  This is a tough ask.

 

[Systemight]

Read somewhere about a guy who made over a million pounds simply by laying both the favourite and one of the outsiders in the same race!.

It makes sense really as  both horses cant win,and even if one did,by laying in this manner you would help offset some of the liability.

Personally i don't lay horses, but if i did,this would be one avenue that i would look to pursue.

[The Equaliser]

An interesting proposition Systemight, however the liability on the outsider could be such that if it did win (which it would do now and again) then it would wipe out all previous gains.  For example (Ignoring commission) if you laid £10 on the favourite at evens and say £20 on the outsider at say 20/1 so as to make a good profit should the jolly old favourite get beat then should the favourite win yo would lose £10 and gain £20 less commision (net) on the outsider.  However, come the day that the outsider trots up and wins then you would gain £10 on the favourite and lose £400 on the outsider.  Hence, 39 times you would have to get it right to allow for the day when you lose.  I don't know how this chap made his million pounds but he sure must have had a great method of avoiding outsiders winning.

I sincerely hope that you stick to backing horses in the future as you have done up to now.

This doesn't seem to me a sure fired way of making money by laying horses.

Many thanks for your thoughts; it is only by exchanging ideas that we make progress in our battle to make money in this betting game.

 

 

 

 

 

[Escaping Captivity]

On 5/27/2019 at 12:23 PM, The Equaliser said:

One still has the problem of determining what is a true 2/1 chance though when making selections.

 

 

That 'problem' is a punters window of opportunity. Nobody can define the true odds of a horse. All we can do is make an estimation. If the market at the time says 2/1 which equates to a probability of 33.33% and you estimate it at say a 50% chance of winning then you've projected a value bet. Easier said than done though.

In contrast, columns in roulette offer the odds of 2/1 and the probability of winning is not even 33.33% because of the house edge. On a European wheel with a single zero the probability is 32.40% - and these are true odds.

[Escaping Captivity]

23 hours ago, Snoopdog said:

I'm interested in a lay thread. In fact there used to be a regular thread on here called "Binchy's Lays". As I recall, it did well for a while, then seemed to lose its edge.

I've been thinking about developing a blind lay system of say anything shorter than  (say) 1/3 at certain tracks. Eg, Fakenham seems to have a lot of ultra shorties get beat. In fact when I check the reults, I'm amazed how many ultra shorties get beat. It really needs someone with some good skills on analysing lots of race data.

Anyway for now, I'll follow your Betfair Forum Lay thread as "The equaliser". Good luck.

Short-term patterns like that can put us in a false sense of security that's why it's very important to gauge the criteria over a lengthy period such as 500 instances. You also need to take into consideration the regularity of the bets. For example, if you were to punt at those odds on horses only running at Fakenham, how many betting opportunities would you have over a year?

[Escaping Captivity]

10 hours ago, Systemight said:

Read somewhere about a guy who made over a million pounds simply by laying both the favourite and one of the outsiders in the same race!.

It makes sense really as  both horses cant win,and even if one did,by laying in this manner you would help offset some of the liability.

Personally i don't lay horses, but if i did,this would be one avenue that i would look to pursue.

Although I do firmly believe a stream of money can be made from gambling, I'm still sceptical of people's claims.

The most famous being the bird from Latvia who has a staking plan named after her. Reckoned she won £97,000 over a period of 10 months by laying horses. First bet was £30. Average laying odds 6.00 approx. Apparently! Hmmmm.

[The Equaliser]

Well, when it comes to staking plans my hero of all time has to be Phil Bull of Timeform fame.  He used to get loads of people writing in to him with lots of hair brained schemes.  All he used to do was re-arrange the sequence of winners and losers and prove that they were all faulty.  He used to say that if selections could not show a profit using level stakes then no amount of juggling about with increased staking would work.

I rather favour staking in accordance with a horse's chance of success so as to cushion the ups and downs of results.  However, although this means that if I had a £100 bank I would be placing say £20 on a 5/1 shot, £2 on a fancied 50/1 outsider and £50 on an even money shot one would be foolish not to allow for an increased bank so as to accomodate the winning and losing sequences even say on even money shots.

Once again as you mentioned above it is very difficult to determine what is say a true 50% chance and ripping a bookmaker's arm off to get a 2/1 price about it.

One would have to develop a criteria that shows over a period of time that given specific conditions a horse will win say 50%, 40%, 30%, 20% and possibly 10% of the time. Then one could just request higher odds (if backing) and be guranteed to make money.

There are so many variables when it comes to a horse being entered into one of the many types of races over courses that are very different up and down the country I don't think that it can be done.  If you find anyone who is able to do it then please let me know?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BillyHills]

On 5/25/2019 at 3:39 PM, The Equaliser said:

 

If you think that people on the Forum may be interested in this then I can start posting up soon

Regards,

The Equaliser

  

 

Hi mate, just put any Trixie selections in the daily Racing Chat threads for now, you will get more coverage.

[Systemight]

On 5/28/2019 at 10:26 PM, The Equaliser said:

An interesting proposition Systemight, however the liability on the outsider could be such that if it did win (which it would do now and again) then it would wipe out all previous gains.  For example (Ignoring commission) if you laid £10 on the favourite at evens and say £20 on the outsider at say 20/1 so as to make a good profit should the jolly old favourite get beat then should the favourite win yo would lose £10 and gain £20 less commision (net) on the outsider.  However, come the day that the outsider trots up and wins then you would gain £10 on the favourite and lose £400 on the outsider.  Hence, 39 times you would have to get it right to allow for the day when you lose.  I don't know how this chap made his million pounds but he sure must have had a great method of avoiding outsiders winning.

I sincerely hope that you stick to backing horses in the future as you have done up to now.

This doesn't seem to me a sure fired way of making money by laying horses.

Many thanks for your thoughts; it is only by exchanging ideas that we make progress in our battle to make money in this betting game.

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you for your thoughts about me sticking to backing horses Equaliser, i bow to the master.

Unfortunately i think you got the impression that the person involved would be laying the outsider to the same kind of stake as he would have on the favourite,which of course is totally wrong and would be financial suicide.

I know of no serious bettor who would consider staking anything like the ridiculous example in which you submitted.That is even if there was enough liquidity to get large stakes on at big prices, which i sincerely doubt.(and he would have needed to stake big to win a million pounds).

Clearly he would be betting only a proportion of it.Only guessing here but perhaps his stake would be split 85%/15% maybe less, who knows?,you certainly wouldn't expect him to impart on all of his methods now would you?.

As E.C rightly states we can all make these"winning" claims and most if not all have to be taken with a pinch of salt.But this guy wasn't selling tips so why lie?.Besides, the article i read was in a newspaper who had followed him for over a month, so maybe just maybe it has a hint of credibility.They don't normally follow tipsters around to the best of my knowledge.

Anyway who cares as to whether it's "au fait" or not,i know i most certainly don't.

its whether there is any value in the idea or not which most interests me..

Edited May 29, 2019 by Systemight
slip of the old typing finger

[Escaping Captivity]

20 hours ago, Systemight said:

 

As E.C rightly states we can all make these"winning" claims and most if not all have to be taken with a pinch of salt.But this guy wasn't selling tips so why lie?.Besides, the article i read was in a newspaper who had followed him for over a month, so maybe just maybe it has a hint of credibility.They don't normally follow tipsters around to the best of my knowledge.

Anyway who cares as to whether it's "au fait" or not,i know i most certainly don't.

its whether there is any value in the idea or not which most interests me..

Ever come across this fraud before? Lied to everyone including his missus about winning the lottery - so attention seekers like him do exist!

Laying may look an easier way of doing things but like backing you still need to find value. Unfortunately it has a smaller window to find worthwhile bets, similar to the odds range stated in the thread title. With backing you can pretty much use the whole spectrum.

To look at it another way especially when it comes to outsiders, convert the laying odds to the backing odds.

Laying at 2.25 = 1.8

2.50 = 1.67

3.00 = 1.50

4.00 = 1.33

7.00 = 1.17

10.00 = 1.11

15.00 = 1.07

25.00 = 1.04

50.00 = 1.02

100.00 = 1.01

[The Equaliser]

I will come back to this later.

Meanwhile I will attempt to post my Trixie selections in a daily racing chat thread as suggested by Admin

 

 

[The Equaliser]

Hi Systemight and EC

Sorry if I got the wrong end of the stick about laying a favourite along with an outsider.

I have a multilay calculator which I can input horses in combination at various odds to arrive at different outcomes should say two lose or if one should win.

I put some figures in for a horse at even money with one other horse at 20, 10 and 5. I used 100 points for each race and my results do not allow for commission to keep it all simple.

At odds of 2.0 and 20,  I stake £90.91 at 2.0 & £9.09 at 20  The outcome is - £82 should either horse win or £100 if both lose.  At odds of 2.0 and 10, I stake £83.33 at 2.0 & £16.67 at 10.0.  The outcome is -£67 should either horse win or £100 if both lose. At odds of 2.0 and 5.0 I stake £71.43 at 2.0 & £28.57 at 5.0 The outcome is -£43 should either horse wins or £100 if both lose 

Interestingly enough I thought it may be a good idea to give an example of a lay bet with another at 3.0; after all the horse should stand a 33% chance of winning if the odds were true and, even better a 67% chance of losing.

At odds of 3.0 & 20 I stake £86.96 at 3.0 & 13.04 at 20. The outcome is -£161 should either horse win or £100 if both lose.         At odds of 3.0 & 10.0 I stake £76.92 at 3.0 & 23.08 at 10.0 The outcome is -£131 should either horse win or £100 if both lose.  At odds of 3.0 & 5.0 I stake £62.50 at 3.0 & £37.50 at 5.0. The outcome is -£88 should either horse win or £100 if both lose.

Whilst I still can't see how to make a million usung this strategy what does appeal to me is staking £83.33 at 2.0 and £16.67 at 10.0.  Although I will lose £67 should either horse win I will gain £100 (less commission) when I am right.  Definitely food for thought.

Many thanks for your comments.

 

 

 

 

 

[Systemight]

Hi Equaliser,

the article was written many years ago so i can't recall it word for word.

What I do recall was that the person involved stated that he lost over £60,000 at Royal Ascot that particular year,so while his stakes must have been high,my assumption is that there must also have been a large turnover of bets per day.Again,unfortunately i have no recollection of how long it took him to win this alleged million pounds(it could have been years).

Maybe he laid the favourite and a 10/1 shot in every handicap for instance,or maybe he just laid every favourite in every race( favourites on average only win one race in three) who knows?.

Maybe one day i will look at it more closely,but my view is punters only tend to start laying horses,when they realise they are pretty rubbish at backing them,so for now at least i will stick to betting on the blue side of the betfair exchange and leave the pink side for those better qualified. 

Nevertheless if my posting has given you and or any other member some food for thought,that's good enough for me...

[The Equaliser]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-05-03/the-gambler-who-cracked-the-horse-racing-code

Don't know if you will find this interesting.

I find it fascinating from the point of view that this seems to go on today.  This seems to be why one can see half a million matched on an ordinary race on an ordinary day in the UK.

I don't understand how the big traders do it.  Once people start talking about algorithms I tend to give up.

Anyway, fascinating stuff