The Derby and Oaks experiment

[harry_rag]

By highest individual rating...

#	Horse	Odds	BF	MaxAv
1	YLANG YLANG	3.25	3.1	122.4
2	EZELIA	5.5	5.7	114.0
3	YOU GOT TO ME	15	16.5	113.3
4	RUBIES ARE RED	5.5	5.9	112.0
5	DANCE SEQUENCE	26	23	111.5
6	TREASURE	19	18.5	109.4
7	SECRET SATIRE	13	15	109.0
8	CAUGHT YOU LOOKING	67	42	107.2
9	MAKING DREAMS	67	100	107.0
10	WAR CRIMES	101	22	104.3
11	FOREST FAIRY	9	10	101.8
12	SEAWARD	67	50	100.5

and the lowest...

#	Horse	Odds	BF	MinAv
1	YLANG YLANG	3.25	3.1	106.1
2	YOU GOT TO ME	15	16.5	102.6
3	RUBIES ARE RED	5.5	5.9	101.8
4	TREASURE	19	18.5	98.6
5	CAUGHT YOU LOOKING	67	42	96.7
6	SECRET SATIRE	13	15	94.2
7	DANCE SEQUENCE	26	23	93.8
8	FOREST FAIRY	9	10	91.8
9	SEAWARD	67	50	88.8
10	MAKING DREAMS	67	100	86.2
11	WAR CRIMES	101	22	82.4
12	EZELIA	5.5	5.7	50.4

So just the 3 that everyone regards as above average.

[harry_rag]

My bets then.

Fiver win on Ambiente Friendly at 14/1 using my weekly "Epic" boost.

36p e/w You Got to Me at 14/1 (4 places). Thanks for the largesse Paddy, hopefully get a bit more on nearer the time at decent price/terms

Small e/w bet Dance Sequence at 25/1 (should've been 28s but I cocked up with the boost) Reasonable on the ratings and looks like it's shortening.

[harry_rag]

Ok, here's the main ratings again but with a value rating added, which attempts to factor in our overall rating AND the price. Suggested best value 100, the closer to that figure the better the value. Let me know how well (or otherwise) you think that number compares to your subjective assessment. I think it's not bad though it's still influenced by a big price to an extent. (It only looks at the runners with a 100+ rating.)

#	Horse	Odds	BF	AvAv	V#
1	YLANG YLANG	3.25	3.1	113.0	36.5
2	YOU GOT TO ME	15	16.5	107.7	100.0
3	RUBIES ARE RED	5.5	5.9	106.5	31.1
4	DANCE SEQUENCE	26	23	104.4	99.9
5	SECRET SATIRE	13	15	103.9	43.8
6	TREASURE	19	18.5	103.0	49.6
7	CAUGHT YOU LOOKING	67	42	100.6	35.6
8	FOREST FAIRY	9	10	97.0
9	SEAWARD	67	50	95.3
10	MAKING DREAMS	67	100	94.3
11	WAR CRIMES	101	22	89.4
12	EZELIA	5.5	5.7	84.8

#	Horse	Odds	BF	AvAv	V#
1	AMBIENTE FRIENDLY	8	7.8	117.9	42.8
2	ANCIENT WISDOM	6	6	110.2	18.3
3	ILLINOIS	41	60	108.2	100.0
4	CITY OF TROY	4	4.7	107.2	8.5
5	DANCING GEMINI	13	17	105.3	20.4
6	SAYEDATY SEDATY	67	80	101.5	30.8
7	MACDUFF	15	15	98.9
8	MR HAMPSTEAD	151	150	98.0
9	BELLUM JUSTUM	26	29	96.9
10	LOS ANGELESE	5	5.3	97.0
11	DIEGO VALAZQUEZ	34	110	96.8
12	DEIRA MILE	26	30	94.7
13	PORTLAND	101	70	94.2
14	GODS WINDOW	101	80	93.5
15	EUPHORIC	41	50	91.9
16	DALLAS STAR	41	46	87.9
17	KAMBOO	151	170	86.8
18	PADESHA	101	500	86.6
19	VOYAGE	26	24	83.5
20	TABLETALK	101	150	80.7

[Zilzalian]

40 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

I don't think you could prove he's wrong as such, I think you're both right really. You can prove with mathematics that you're more likely to get value each way the more places you get/the smaller the field (or the better % of the field that the place terms give you) but it doesn't mean that you can't get value from an overpriced selection with skinnier place terms. I seem to remember we did quite well without an extra place in the 1000 Guineas.

If you take an overly mathematical approach to it you'll probably miss some great each way bets. If you don't give the field size and place terms adequate consideration you'll probably make a fair few poor value bets. You need to get the psychology and the maths right to get the optimum returns. The main psychological issue is the fear of losing or not getting at least some return.

Ada Lovelace one of the greatest mathematicians of the last century  lost all her money betting on horses using the mathematical approach. I sometimes think Micheal misses the point with his staunch belief in his mathematical approach in that betting on racing is not a science, mathematics is a useful tool but the most useful tool is eyesight and being able to interpret what you see and then using science/math to see if you can confirm/support your belief. Memory is even more essential to making money betting long term in my opinion. The best tool i have is my notebook it always has been even though i produce my own speed figures and my Math is reasonably good. An interesting point is the Psychology aspect of betting and the fear of losing which for me disappeared once i didn't need to win to feed the kids blah blah or to put in a better light, when i could afford to lose. That freedom is what enables me to bet without fear within the stakes i am comfortable with, for example no matter how strong a bet you think you have, putting £1000 quid on an event (which i have done on no more than a few occasions) brings back all those psychological disadvantages. The fools in the game are those (Terry Ramsden) that can just shrug off losing without understanding why they are losing and or refuse to at least leave losing strategies behind in favour of trying a new approach or reducing their stakes to a manageable level. It seems Micheal has found a way using Math to make a profit and that is something no one can knock but most punters are crap at maths so he would be an exception to the rule in my opinion.

[MCLARKE]

The maths works for me most of the time, personally I'm not good at interpreting a race visually, I prefer set rules.

According to the wife, who used to teach autistic children, I'm quite high on the scale !

[harry_rag]

16 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

The maths works for me most of the time, personally I'm not good at interpreting a race visually, I prefer set rules.

According to the wife, who used to teach autistic children, I'm quite high on the scale !

Some people suggest you need to watch a lot of a sport to know enough about it to do well betting on it and I suspect it would improve my betting if I watched more games but I don’t really have the time and I’m too tight to pay to watch sports! 

I’m currently watching the Europa Conference League final but I probably watch less than 1% of the things I bet on. I suspect a lot of people lose at betting because they feel they know their sport well but have no understanding of odds, probabilities and markets. I like the idea of being able to bet on something I know very little about and beat the odds because I’ve figured out how the market works and can identify value prices. I’m enjoying the rugby league betting this year because it’s entirely automatic based on prices. There’s no looking at any statistics or anything (I used to lose quite heavily when I tried that approach) and I know very little about the sport. I’m intrigued to see if the current returns are sustainable. Another 4 seasons like this and I’ll probably be in front on the sport! 

[Zilzalian]

14 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

Some people suggest you need to watch a lot of a sport to know enough about it to do well betting on it and I suspect it would improve my betting if I watched more games but I don’t really have the time and I’m too tight to pay to watch sports! 

I’m currently watching the Europa Conference League final but I probably watch less than 1% of the things I bet on. I suspect a lot of people lose at betting because they feel they know their sport well but have no understanding of odds, probabilities and markets. I like the idea of being able to bet on something I know very little about and beat the odds because I’ve figured out how the market works and can identify value prices. I’m enjoying the rugby league betting this year because it’s entirely automatic based on prices. There’s no looking at any statistics or anything (I used to lose quite heavily when I tried that approach) and I know very little about the sport. I’m intrigued to see if the current returns are sustainable. Another 4 seasons like this and I’ll probably be in front on the sport! 

I have said a few times on here that you have got to know your sport i don't watch a lot of horse races except i watch all the Group races  but i do study results and times and i watch a lot of golf and i do well on both however i don't watch much football any more and i have managed to win our super six league (35 players) with a little trick i came up with, I managed to lead from week 2 back in august now i am intrigued to see if i can do the same next season. 😁 The sport you watch/concentrate on is the gun but it needs ammunition and thats were the types of betting comes in. 

[richard-westwood]

Going had been updated to good/sft and that looks accurate with hopefully no more rain so that's worth bearing in mind with bets 

Edited May 30 by richard-westwood

[MCLARKE]

I actually have City Of Troy top rated on good to soft going. Never straight forward horse racing !

[richard-westwood]

Whatever hAppens .....will the o brien horses stay and show their true form .....is something going to blitz out the pack ...plenty of runners ....2 very exciting races wherever you stand .....just what racing and the doctor ordered 😁😁

Edited May 30 by richard-westwood

[MCLARKE]

Indeed, this is the most highly anticipated Derby I've known

[yossa6133]

Get on Radio 2 now. Having a talk about spreadsheets.

[Zilzalian]

Okay now all the Talk is out the way time to declare where i am putting my wonga. Already had a few bets, the following are what i am going to do now all the calculations are in.

The Derby-

£20 win        Ambiente Friendly     6/1

£2.50 EW     Mr Hampstead          150/1

£1.50  R/FC. &  £1R/EX

The Oaks-

£20 win     You Got To Me         10/1

£5   win     Dance sequence      14/1

£1.50  R/FC &  £1R/EX

Total=£60.00

Edited May 30 by Zilzalian
Before the pedantic gets me

[harry_rag]

#	Horse	Odds	BF	AvAv	V#
1	AMBIENTE FRIENDLY	7.5	7.8	121.6	50.2
2	ANCIENT WISDOM	7	6.6	113.8	29.9
3	CITY OF TROY	5	4.9	110.6	16.4
4	DANCING GEMINI	13	15	108.7	34.9
5	SAYEDATY SEDATY	67	65	104.8	100.0
6	MACDUFF	15	16.5	102.1	9.5
7	MR HAMPSTEAD	151	130	100.9	42.4
8	BELLUM JUSTUM	23	24	99.9
9	LOS ANGELESE	5	5.7	99.9
10	DEIRA MILE	29	32	97.7
11	GODS WINDOW	67	60	96.5
12	EUPHORIC	34	30	94.6
13	DALLAS STAR	34	30	90.7
14	KAMBOO	101	80	89.4
15	VOYAGE	21	21	86.0
16	TABLETALK	101	85	83.0

Updated table for the Derby to reflect the withdrawals. I'm not persuaded that Sayedaty Sedaty is the best value in the field, Clarkey's ratings reputation on the line depending on how that one does as him having it in 2nd place has dragged it up the table.

[harry_rag]

Will stick with my fiver on Ambiente Friendly at 14/1 in the Derby.

You Got to Me at 18 on the exchange plus the pence e/w at 14s and Dance Sequence e/w at 25/1 (only 3 places) in the Oaks.

That'll do in the absence of any significant market moves.

[MCLARKE]

3 hours ago, harry_rag said:

#	Horse	Odds	BF	AvAv	V#
1	AMBIENTE FRIENDLY	7.5	7.8	121.6	50.2
2	ANCIENT WISDOM	7	6.6	113.8	29.9
3	CITY OF TROY	5	4.9	110.6	16.4
4	DANCING GEMINI	13	15	108.7	34.9
5	SAYEDATY SEDATY	67	65	104.8	100.0
6	MACDUFF	15	16.5	102.1	9.5
7	MR HAMPSTEAD	151	130	100.9	42.4
8	BELLUM JUSTUM	23	24	99.9
9	LOS ANGELESE	5	5.7	99.9
10	DEIRA MILE	29	32	97.7
11	GODS WINDOW	67	60	96.5
12	EUPHORIC	34	30	94.6
13	DALLAS STAR	34	30	90.7
14	KAMBOO	101	80	89.4
15	VOYAGE	21	21	86.0
16	TABLETALK	101	85	83.0

Updated table for the Derby to reflect the withdrawals. I'm not persuaded that Sayedaty Sedaty is the best value in the field, Clarkey's ratings reputation on the line depending on how that one does as him having it in 2nd place has dragged it up the table.

Form not been franked with the horse it lost to at Newmarket finishing 6th of 7 in it's next race

Also badly drawn but worst of all it's name is not in the top half of the alphabet

My £10 will be on Ambiente Friendly, I might have a few small each way bets on the day if I can get the best prices

[MCLARKE]

My £10 in the Oaks is going on RUBIES ARE RED at 10/1 with BETMGM (I also have an offer with BETMGM of a £5 free bet on the CL final if I bet £10 on the Oaks and Derby.

I have RUBIES ARE RED joint top of my speed figures and it is also the only horse that meets all the criteria in my trends analysis.

[harry_rag]

Wow, the fav has been shortening quite a bit but Dance Sequence is in to 10/1 now! Reviewing the race from the "experimental" value rating, You Got to Me remains the best bet at current prices but Treasure at 25/1 and Rubies at Red at 10/1 now look more appealing than they did. 

Not tempted to back another runner yet though I'd be backing Treasure at 25/1 e/w if it was combined with the better place terms.

[LEE-GRAYS]

War chimes for me 40/1 e/we 5 places

[Zilzalian]

47 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

Wow, the fav has been shortening quite a bit but Dance Sequence is in to 10/1 now! Reviewing the race from the "experimental" value rating, You Got to Me remains the best bet at current prices but Treasure at 25/1 and Rubies at Red at 10/1 now look more appealing than they did. 

Not tempted to back another runner yet though I'd be backing Treasure at 25/1 e/w if it was combined with the better place terms.

psst rfc's

[harry_rag]

21 minutes ago, LEE-GRAYS said:

War chimes for me 40/1 e/we 5 places

I did think that "War Crimes" was a bit of a bleak name to give a horse! 

[MCLARKE]

TREASURE 22/1 BV 4 places

[Zilzalian]

22 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

TREASURE 22/1 BV 4 places

I am interested to know how you got to the point of having Treasure in front of  You got to Me Micheal.

[harry_rag]

Both runners placed for me though I wouldn't bend down to pick up my place return from Paddy on You Got To Me if I saw it lying in the street! 

The 25/1 on Dance Sequence was a bit more worthwhile at least.

An interesting mix here on the form v speed front I think. Quick commentary on the placed horses (at least one firm paid to 5th place).

1 - Ezeliya - Well done to RW who had it top rated with the fav (who could only manage 6th). Only 9th for the RP and bang last for the other two so ended up bottom of our "averaged" ratings. It showed up as 2nd in our highest individual rating table so at least showed the merit of looking from that angle.

2 - Dance Sequence - a nice solid e/w bet at 25/1 given the SP. 2nd for a couple of us but only 9th on the form figures. Unlike their consensus on the winner, Zil had this 2nd but Clarkey only 5th. Any obvious reason for that difference given they're both based on speed?

3 - War Chimes - a nice e/w return for the cash out king! Zil's 8th was the highest opinion any of us had on this one.

4 - You Got To Me - Needed it's extra place. Again our 2 speed-heads had the same rating and it was in everyone's top 5.

5 - Caught U Looking - Heavily backed in to 16/1. Not really on our radar but the RP figures had it in 3rd.

[Zilzalian]

I am quite happy to have 2nd and 4th as my top rated my initial bets 25/1 the 2nd and 18/1 on the 4th Well done to Richard for getting the winner.

[harry_rag]

5 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

I am quite happy to have 2nd and 4th as my top rated my initial bets 25/1 the 2nd and 18/1 on the 4th Well done to Richard for getting the winner.

And both flagged as the clear value selections by the "value number" at the opening odds.

[harry_rag]

Overall I think the honours went to the RP's ratings on this one. They had 3 of the top 5 in their top 5 (I think everyone else had 2). They were also furthest out (in terms of finishing position) on only 2 runners compared to 4-6 for everyone else.

What do we think is the optimum time to do this? We ended up doing the Oaks just after the 48 hour stage whereas we did the Derby (and both Guineas) just before and had to knock a few NRs out.

[Zilzalian]

15 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

Overall I think the honours went to the RP's ratings on this one. They had 3 of the top 5 in their top 5 (I think everyone else had 2). They were also furthest out (in terms of finishing position) on only 2 runners compared to 4-6 for everyone else.

What do we think is the optimum time to do this? We ended up doing the Oaks just after the 48 hour stage whereas we did the Derby (and both Guineas) just before and had to knock a few NRs out.

Not sure i agree with you on the RPR i think they were poor overall.  how did they do P/L to top 4 places/ratings say to either £20 win or £10ew where applicable?
In answer to your question 2) i think as Clarkey's Speed figures are in the main part experimental in my opinion he is factoring in too many variables and maybe needs to drop a few.

[harry_rag]

9 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

Not sure i agree with you on the RPR i think they were poor overall. 

Sorry I was referring to their stopwatch ratings (that we use in the "master rating"). I didn't look at the RPR figure as we weren't "weighing" it.

Your two top rated placed and that was it from the top 5, Clarkey had the same pair but one top rated and the other 5th. RW had the winner as joint top rated You Got To Me as joint 4th. Spotlight had your two as 2nd and 5th and also had Caught U Looking as joint 3rd rated.

The average rating gave your two as 2nd and 4th but rated them clear best value at opening prices.

[Zilzalian]

1 hour ago, harry_rag said:

Sorry I was referring to their stopwatch ratings (that we use in the "master rating"). I didn't look at the RPR figure as we weren't "weighing" it.

Your two top rated placed and that was it from the top 5, Clarkey had the same pair but one top rated and the other 5th. RW had the winner as joint top rated You Got To Me as joint 4th. Spotlight had your two as 2nd and 5th and also had Caught U Looking as joint 3rd rated.

The average rating gave your two as 2nd and 4th but rated them clear best value at opening prices.

Fair enough. When i first started doing speed figures (The year before Dr Devious won the derby) i used to have mine to half stakes and mine combined with SR for the other half, i still do on many occasions because i use SR to allow for going corrections if that makes sense. I have never been able to conclusively prove to myself that one is better than the other. Sometimes mine win out sometimes the combined wins out so spitting of stakes seemed the logical solution.