ODDS ON SELECTIONS TRIAL

[black rabbit]

12 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

There seems a contradiction in those sort of market moves being observed and the notion of "no-one" wanting to back odds on shots. Maybe a case of a lot of punters tending to leave them alone but some seriously shrewd money being piled on the "good" ones. So all you need to do is identify the ones that are going to shorten drastically before they actually do!

really well good luck with that ?     id rather try and find  hens teeth ?

[Zilzalian]

On 8/15/2022 at 7:55 PM, harry_rag said:

There seems a contradiction in those sort of market moves being observed and the notion of "no-one" wanting to back odds on shots. Maybe a case of a lot of punters tending to leave them alone but some seriously shrewd money being piled on the "good" ones. So all you need to do is identify the ones that are going to shorten drastically before they actually do!

Might i suggest "the bots" kick in when price hits a certain point in value? @MCLARKE

Edited August 18, 2022 by Zilzalian

[MCLARKE]

2 hours ago, Zilzalian said:

Might i suggest "the bots" kick in when price hits a certain point in value?

How do we know when that point in value has been reached ?

[Zilzalian]

15 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

How do we know when that point in value has been reached ?

not sure how they work just know a bloke (ex jockey) that was part of a syndicate that did it.

heres my theory of general idea. you set up a comp program that backs the tissue then you instruct the bot/program to place or lay the bet. lets say for arguments sake tissue is offering 1/1 it becomes value/no value at 11/10 (no one backing it) or in reverse it becomes value/no value at 10/11 (people backing it). so the program starts backing and or laying everytime a criteria is met. sound plausible?

Edited August 18, 2022 by Zilzalian

[MCLARKE]

Sounds a bit complicated to me.

That's probably why it's so difficult to make a profit these days, too many clever people doing things like that.

[black rabbit]

2 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

Sounds a bit complicated to me.

That's probably why it's so difficult to make a profit these days, too many clever people doing things like that.

the clever people stay away from lumping on "odds on " shots ?

[MCLARKE]

1 hour ago, black rabbit said:

the clever people stay away from lumping on "odds on " shots

Who are these "clever people" ?

And what difference is there between a 10/11 shot and a 1/1 shot ?

[harry_rag]

40 minutes ago, black rabbit said:

the clever people stay away from lumping on "odds on " shots ?

I can't add any value to the arguments either way on backing odds on shots in horse racing but I can say with 100% certainty that one of the most profitable avenues of betting that there is involves placing bets where the maximum downside is far bigger than the potential upside.

I guess it comes down to the maxim that you're more likely to make money betting on things that other people don't want to bet on. (Backing unders rather than overs, selling on the spreads rather than buying). What I can't get my head round is where odds on favourites falls on that spectrum. My gut feel is that any edge will be very small and quite hard to take advantage of.

It's easier to find value bets in markets that are inaccurate and "dishonest", by which I mean the bookies struggle to price them accurately in the first place and, because they know that most punters will only want to bet in one direction, they are happy to move the price so that any value tends to be on the side that no-one wants to bet on.

I guess there's a huge difference between racing markets and the sort of sports markets I'm more familiar with, but I'm inclined to think that the optimum approach to "specialising" in odds on shots would involve being equally willing to lay them as to back them.

[Zilzalian]

3 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

Who are these "clever people" ?

And what difference is there between a 10/11 shot and a 1/1 shot ?

The clever people dont back horses ? Not really a lot to do with odds on with me (altho i dislike all favs as a default) its all about value eg if alpinista had been 11/10 or 10/11 i would have still lumped on.

[MCLARKE]

4 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

I guess it comes down to the maxim that you're more likely to make money betting on things that other people don't want to bet on.

That is the basic logic to this. A lot of people will not bet odds on, they perceive it not to be value.

There is no range of odds that you can make a profit betting blind but you will lose less betting odds on than odds against. It's therefore a good starting point.

4 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

The clever people dont back horses ? Not really a lot to do with odds on with me (altho i dislike all favs as a default) its all about value eg if alpinista had been 11/10 or 10/11 i would have still lumped on.

Very true. They invest it on shares.

As always value is difficult to quantify. 

I have made profits for each of the last 7 years so I assume I must be finding value somewhere.

[Zilzalian]

46 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

That is the basic logic to this. A lot of people will not bet odds on, they perceive it not to be value.

There is no range of odds that you can make a profit betting blind but you will lose less betting odds on than odds against. It's therefore a good starting point.

Very true. They invest it on shares.

As always value is difficult to quantify. 

I have made profits for each of the last 7 years so I assume I must be finding value somewhere.

Value is dependent on the evaluator so is different for everyone, i give u an example from my perspective, Alpinista i thought should have been evens i got 9/4 which for me is value, tomorrow Stradavarius is 11/8 fav, Trueshan 11/4 2nd fav, idealy trueshan needs softer ground, Stradavarius is at the end of its career so the book is set up for popularity rather than the chance of the horse so is bad value, if it threw it down overnight trueshan would be value at said 11/4 but as it stands neither is value. i sit and reason Quickthorn is value ew at 16/1 or even tashkan at 9/1. and even reshoun at 50/1. in an 8 runner race.

[black rabbit]

18 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

Value is dependent on the evaluator so is different for everyone, i give u an example from my perspective, Alpinista i thought should have been evens i got 9/4 which for me is value, tomorrow Stradavarius is 11/8 fav, Trueshan 11/4 2nd fav, idealy trueshan needs softer ground, Stradavarius is at the end of its career so the book is set up for popularity rather than the chance of the horse so is bad value, if it threw it down overnight trueshan would be value at said 11/4 but as it stands neither is value. i sit and reason Quickthorn is value ew at 16/1 or even tashkan at 9/1. and even reshoun at 50/1. in an 8 runner race.

all very valid including m clark/ harry's comments ?  / but in respect of myself i go back to my comments few weeks ago

" i would rather shit in my hands and clap than punt short priced horses" but thats only IMO   to each his own

[harry_rag]

45 minutes ago, black rabbit said:

" i would rather shit in my hands and clap than punt short priced horses" but thats only IMO   to each his own

Only valid as a metric to those who know you well! 

[Valiant Thor]

4 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

And what difference is there between a 10/11 shot and a 1/1 shot ?

About 10% edge ?

[MCLARKE]

13 minutes ago, Valiant Thor said:

About 10% edge

Depends on which horse you are backing.

You could have a 15% edge on a 10/11 shot and a 5% edge on a 1/1 shot.

So why would you not back the 10/11 shot ?

 

[Valiant Thor]

19 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

So why would you not back the 10/11 shot ?

you asked what was the difference between 10/11 and 1/1

which I took to be the edge between the 2

on book prices would be  .052 %

But you swap between book then betfair so you'd most probable get 11/10ish on BF so around 10%

19 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

You could have a 15% edge on a 10/11 shot and a 5% edge on a 1/1 shot.

I find it more informative if you start with the full question rather than adding on bits as you go.

To answer the Q

You should back both if you have any sense as they are +EV

Edited August 18, 2022 by Valiant Thor

[MCLARKE]

3 minutes ago, Valiant Thor said:

I find it more informative if you start with the full question rather than adding on bits as you go.

To answer the Q

You should back both if you have any sense as they are +EV

I assume you don't understand the point of this topic.

Some people would not back the 10/11 shot, even if it had a positive edge.

[Valiant Thor]

I dont see what the problem with backing  odds on or longshots +ev is the same whatever you decide

Say X =1000 over time

You bet X amount on odds on @ expected odds and end up 1040 your 4%+ev

You  Bet X amount on 10/1 shots @ expected odds and end up 1040 your 4% +ev

Spend more time accurately pricing up a race rather than trying to let the forecast do it for you as all the forecast is is WOM - bookies vig

Edited August 18, 2022 by Valiant Thor

[Valiant Thor]

5 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

Some people would not back the 10/11 shot, even if it had a positive edge.

Thats there problem

[MCLARKE]

2 minutes ago, Valiant Thor said:

Thats there problem

But does it create an edge for those who do back odds on ?

[harry_rag]

15 minutes ago, Valiant Thor said:

you asked what was the difference between 10/11 and 1/1

The question was asked of an “odds on denier” in terms of why you might back one but not the other if both were perceived as value.

3 minutes ago, Valiant Thor said:

Thats there problem

Yes, you’re singing from the same hymn sheet.

[Valiant Thor]

10 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

But does it create an edge for those who do back odds on ?

Of course it does if your maths are better than the crowds

From what I can see your looking @ forecast odds on selections and then trying to find the value rather than pricing up the days races & finding your odds on shots (if any) then looking for any value opportunities in the markets.

 

Edited August 18, 2022 by Valiant Thor
spelling

[MCLARKE]

22 minutes ago, Valiant Thor said:

From what I can see your looking @ forecast odds on selections and then trying to find the value rather than pricing up the days races & finding your odds on shots (if any) then looking for any value opportunities in the markets.

No.

I am purely looking at odds on shots and seeing if I can make a profit by backing them at early prices on BET365.

I am only using the forecast odds as a short cut to find selections, other than that the forecast odds play no part in this exercise.

[Valiant Thor]

9 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

No.

I am purely looking at odds on shots and seeing if I can make a profit by backing them at early prices on BET365.

I am only using the forecast odds as a short cut to find selections, other than that the forecast odds play no part in this exercise.

So basically a random selection (Darwin eat your heart out)

Then I'd be surprised if you make a profit

Ps

If its any consolation  I dont think Darwins ideas stand up to much either ?

ATB

VT

Edited August 18, 2022 by Valiant Thor

[Zilzalian]

10 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

No.

I am purely looking at odds on shots and seeing if I can make a profit by backing them at early prices on BET365.

I am only using the forecast odds as a short cut to find selections, other than that the forecast odds play no part in this exercise.

I wouldn't mind betting that your experiment if on French racing (bet365) would come out well on top of the UK racing. they seem very lax to me in their pricing up of french races.

[MCLARKE]

1 hour ago, Zilzalian said:

I wouldn't mind betting that your experiment if on French racing (bet365) would come out well on top of the UK racing. they seem very lax to me in their pricing up of french races.

Interesting. I'll have a look at that. 

[Bang on]

13 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

Depends on which horse you are backing.

You could have a 15% edge on a 10/11 shot and a 5% edge on a 1/1 shot.

So why would you not back the 10/11 shot ?

 

The basics are that the 10/11 chance is valued as a 52% chance, and the 1/1 is a 50% chance, so very little. 

I do though agree with you that odds on, even though it is 10/11, does put some people off as it is often said "I don't bet odds on chances". I also think that the bookmakers know this very well, and will often make a selection slightly odds on to put as many as possible off. It would be rare for me to back odds on, but occasionally, there are selections that look to have no real opposition to speak of. I have backed these and when the money comes for higher priced selections, the odds on shot drifts and becomes even better value. 

Are you looking at odds on in the betting forecast, or odds on when the markets have settled ? It could be interesting.

I would do your study and see how it works out in real time.

[Zilzalian]

2 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

Interesting. I'll have a look at that. 

Prime example of value comming up Mike, Trueshan is odds on, King has pulled this horse out 6 times because of ground concerns is 8/11 value? nope. No mention of soft in the discription. Update. He pulled it just after I wrote this i think that may prove my point, 20 mins before the race how many have backed against it at prices that will now get murdered with a rule 4. Even though all the information was out there still people were foolish enough to back it.

Edited August 19, 2022 by Zilzalian
update

[MCLARKE]

2 hours ago, Bang on said:

The basics are that the 10/11 chance is valued as a 52% chance, and the 1/1 is a 50% chance, so very little. 

I do though agree with you that odds on, even though it is 10/11, does put some people off as it is often said "I don't bet odds on chances". I also think that the bookmakers know this very well, and will often make a selection slightly odds on to put as many as possible off. It would be rare for me to back odds on, but occasionally, there are selections that look to have no real opposition to speak of. I have backed these and when the money comes for higher priced selections, the odds on shot drifts and becomes even better value. 

Are you looking at odds on in the betting forecast, or odds on when the markets have settled ? It could be interesting.

I would do your study and see how it works out in real time.

I am only using the betting forecast to highlight horses that will probably be odds on. The only rule is that the first show on BET365 is odds on.

I am doing the study in real time, I am putting the shortest priced horse up as my nap in the naps competition.

[MCLARKE]

8 hours ago, Zilzalian said:

I wouldn't mind betting that your experiment if on French racing (bet365) would come out well on top of the UK racing. they seem very lax to me in their pricing up of french races.

What time do BET365 price these races up ? They don't seem to quote them on oddschecker.