investor
lets pretend
a law comes out today that all exchanges are illegal and have to be closed down
how will your betting change without them?

Re the OP

I can't see why anyone wants to dispute the figures.

There again, I can't see why anyone would want to post them anyway unless it's to prove that the length of one's figure is bigger than someone else's.

Too much information. Some things are best left hidden.

Well done anyway Dr J.

For any doubters out there, the 88 months match up pretty closely to the expected results using an analysis of Benford's law.

http://green-all-over.blogspot.com/2009/03/benfords-law.html

Thanks for doing this, cpfc4me. I'd never heard of Benford's Law but it's fascinating stuff, and your blog explains the principle very eloquently.

DR J - If you were laying in win market on say 335 races that you specialise in........how many points would you expect to win in total from the market you tackle.

( Just trying to compare against some test results using my "system" stats and applying certain strategies to selected races.......where 159 points in win market and 78 points in place market appear to be achievable from 335 races checked)

I know this is a crude question....but an answer would be appreciated.

I'm afraid I don't really know quite how to go about answering this, DFC. It's complicated for me because of multiple lays in individual races, and I wouldn't want to give you a ballpark answer just for the sake of it.

You say that your figures bring you out 3% below Betfair SP. Well done - that's great stuff! I'd estimate that my lays would average 1.5 - 2.5% below, though even this is a very crude approximation.

I can't see why anyone would want to post them anyway unless it's to prove that the length of one's figure is bigger than someone else's.

I posted my P&L figures to get mythical prince off my back. When I made the OP my hope was that it might trigger an interesting discussion about the psychology of long-term betting. It did, and I've thoroughly enjoyed reading the responses. It's reassuring to know that there are others who do the kind of thing that I do, and, moreover, that their motivations, fears, successes and failures are akin to my own.

Dr J

Your OP was I'm sure for the noblest of motives and my comment was purely facetious.

I can tell you that from a long-term perspective, gambling is a lot easier when you are only semi-serious, in that you have another source of income behind you, and indeed have other interests that are more important than gambling.You are surely correct in keeping things that way.

When gambling becomes one's main activity,the fun disappears, the stress increases and the volatility can be difficult to live with, especially with a family. I guess for those on here who are not really gamblers but are really IT money-managers who work to small % on t/o and who live off the back of the gamblers, that may not apply and for them going full-time represents less of a risk.Personally, and with no intention of being disparaging,I do not regard them in the same light.

At some point in the future, you may decide that you can take the chance of doing this full-time, just for the hell of it. But, I would wait until you have seen the kids through uni, paid off the mortgage and feel like taking early retirement.After doing that for a while, you may return to it being semi-serious as you may not want it to take up that much of your life again.

At least, that's been my experience.

Thanks Dr J for replying to "crude" question.

It has taken me ages to gather stats from races run through system, and since my post above I have now applied certain LAY strategies to 499 races ( previously 395 races).....so my stats have changed on ROI .......now nearer 2.7% . Main thing is points profit now increased from 159 to 199 in WIN market and from 78 to 94 in PLACE market.

This is only back testing strategies ( FIXED ones based on odds , position in ratings etc depending on  race types), but at least it indicates the system is up to reasonable standard re ratings for LAYING ....particularly in WIN market.

As the "system" was devised to get higher odds winners rated in top part of ratings, then the LAYING use for it was not part of my mindset. Certain strategies were used in PLACE MARKET in 2008 for LAYING , but it was not very "successful".................and I had accepted that if an experienced layer did not believe it was worth continuing on PLACE lays using system ratings, then that use was not worth pursuing.

In effect i did not use system til MARCH 2009 ...........and not at all in 2010 or 2011. I then decided to analyse in depth all rated races........but in order to do that i had to detail actual SP odds against every rated horse ( over 10,000 )...plus a lot of other information detailed on ratings. THIS JUST TOOK AGES! My enthusiasm had been dented in 2008 re using it for PLACE lays.

By doing the analysis work on ratings and how they performed, I got a clearer picture on how the ratings performed on different race types. As the system was devised to get WINNERS in top part of ratings , then it is no surprise that the previous PLACE LAYING strategies used in 2008 were unlikely to "work" well. Main thing was winners were generally in top rated....but horses would still PLACE in bottom part of ratings ......but generally they did not WIN!

Due to the way ratings are put together, there is a bias on certain horses being given more points than others due to some subjective factors being used.....thus certain horses end up in bottom part of ratings that have some factors in favour, giving them a chance to PLACE....but they are less likely to WIN....( my observations on certain other RATINGS from a well known site indicate they also show this bias that can skew ratings......especially in certain race types.)

There were far more than 499 races rated, but , having carried out all this "analysis" work, I now have a far better understanding of how my ratings perform in certain races.......It means that , on average, I might be rating only 5/6 races a day for LAY purposes. Thank feck for that ![:D]

As usual, due to "work commitments" and also I need to get certain parts of computerised system "adjusted", I won't be in a position to use the "system" til end MAY. However, I now know that the strategies to be employed should "work", as no real changes in how races are being run in BRITAIN, barring more Irish trainers coming over here for NH and TURF and AW racing.......but i am "aware" of this factor


To wait to confirm "edge" by rating 100,000 races would lead to me being dead before completion..................taken long enough just get the 499 races fully analysed etc etc....

Thought I'd post this to try to give some encouragement to others who get "knock-backs" along the path towards the holy grail

GL Dr J towards next hurdle.

no offence john but you sound like a robot

birch, the degree to which an edge can be quantified varies by strategy. An arber won't need many bets to show that what he is doing is working. And his edge is the probably very close to his ROI. For a straight bettor it may or may not be very different, depending on odds bet at and number of bets.

I wrote something about this in my post at 03 May 11 23:48

Birch2 - I and anyone serious about making money has zero interest in proving an edge or theoretical definitions which can rarely be proved in real life situations by most punters.

Could you stop generalising like that. Just because you're gambling on a sport where guesswork beats difficult analysis, doesn't mean everyone is.

^
Obviously if you get 10s on a 4.5 shot, you should be staking more than if you get 6 on a 4.5 shot.

I can easily price certain markets to the nearest pecentage point by the way. Correct score 2 in football is a good example

I think the point you're missing racingguru is that derivative markets can be priced up more accurately than main markets. To use a horse racing example, I can price up the place market accurately from the win market. Some of the win market prices may be way out, and indeed are, but the vast majority of my place prices will be highly accurate.

RG - You say -

"IR is a different animal altogether and the odds IR are always wrong to some degree and is a gold mine for those who have superior feeds and equipment and knowledge on how certain horses run. Again, I'm not in the position to take advantage of this but you are incorrect in saying "With the "mechanical" system approach........it can be  relying on horses in top 3 rated to run well enough for odds to reduce consistently IR etc etc. You don't have to "spot" "wrong" odds to have a bet etc etc" as the market is always wrong then and you are relying on so many factors that make people bet at wrong odds in running."
=================================================================

Main thing is usually all 3 of horses in top 3 rated run well enough for their odds to reduce well below BF SP.................The system is "good" at having such horses in top 3 rated.......so the MARKET is very very likely to back them IR.......

So I would rather rely on my system ratings than go by trying to spot "wrong" odds etc etc BEFORE the race.......Therefor I trust you appreciate in my circumstances why I don't have to spot "wrong" odds IR........or before the race.

As my system takes over 100 FACTORS into account when rating a race, and IMO those FACTORS are more important than what the market "thinks"/"does" , whether PRIOR to a race , or IR......then it is this "complexity" that leads to the system arriving at horses in top 3 rated that are likely to RUN WELL enough for their odds generally to reduce IR .

Your edge maybe 2% or 20% long term but what does that have to do with that event other than your confidence in your analysis?....None.

I'm not talking about my long term edge, I'm talking about my edge on an individual bet.

The more accurately you can price things up (and you can calculate your error margins easily enough in a lot of situations), the closer to full kelly you can bet.

Lori - Horse racing is difficult to be "accurate" on pricing odds .......

Say for example the top 3 rated horses BF SP odds are

3.7
17.5
4


3.7 being top rated etc.

Which one is likely to be close to winning or winning.......?

How would you back them?

I do admit to not understanding how horse racing works other than at the most obvious level.

In most sports you simply can't back 9/2 shots at 10/1 but it seems from reading several regular posters on this forum that that's commonplace in racing.

The markets I play, I'd get killed if I mispriced 1.6 as 1.7 on a regular basis yet it seems that's run of the mill in racing.

It just never dawned on me that MOST of top 3 rated for races of at least 6 runners ( excluding certain races ) reduced in odds substantially......

I appreciate that most will back horses where they believe the odds are in their favour................spotting "wrong" odds using their knowledge/edge etc.....However, it appears my system has horses in top 3 generally that do reduce in odds substantially enough IR for a "trading" strategy to "work"........So I don't "need" to spot "wrong" odds prior to race!

Here are the WEEK checked odds for comment.......( might get some useful feed-back).......

IMO the top 3 rated horses odds do reflect what I have stated above.....generally they reduce SUBSTANTIALLY IR......

Am I "correct" re my view?


BF SP    LOW
ODDS    IR ODDS
MINUS 1    MINUS 1
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
6.69    0.61
3.51    3.4
4.1    2
   
   
7    0.7
86.31    59
35    20
   
   
3.7    1
17.5    11
4    0.67
   
   
2.83    1.72
40.75    10
14.5    1.72
   
   
   
   
   
0.64    0.63
   
27.66    18
19.87    1.52
7.4    0.05
   
   
2.94    2.2
   
3.48    1.36
35    24
   
   
1.76    0.57
13.19    8.4
6.76    0
   
   
   
   
   
13.5    13
7.4    7.2
17.09    7
   
   
2.15    0.81
293.66    179
   
20.8    2.2
   
   
28    19
45    15
11.34    0.32
   
   
   
   
1.8    0.6
28    2
23    9
   
   
1.86    0.7
67.23    39
1.47    0
   
   
12.5    2.15
7.02    0.8
10.44    4.5
   
   
   
   
   
   
2.66    1.84
4.3    4.1
3.9    0
   
   
4.19    1
73.88    59
2.76    0
   
   
8.6    8
7    9
   
13    2
   
   
1.88    0
11    1.8
3.9    2
   
   
   
   
5.02    3.7
7.2    6
9.5    9
   
   
0.46    0.31
66.67    41
2.73    0
187.9    15
   
   
22    17
   
2.35    1.2
61.11    4.2
   
   
   
1.68    0.71
22    10
27    14.5
   
   
1.9    1.82
4.1    1.1
29    20
   
   
   
6.4    0
0.42    0.11
99    94
8.91    6
   
   
42.06    15
12.5    7.2
13.46    8.4
   
   
   
   
1.34    0
2.65    0.48
6.89    4
   
   
12    8
2.79    0.21
3.04    0
   
   
2.5    1.2
2.16    0.61
   
5.95    0
   
   
   
   
1.36    0.3
3.91    1.3
21    11
   
   
1.67    0.51
9.95    0.12
   
8.2    0
   
   
   
   
   
21    1
5.4    2
12.59    0
   
   
1.76    0
2.79    0.21
5.6    5
   
   
   
   
9.5    2.25
5.5    4.1
50    35
   
   
14.5    9
5.6    0
14.59    0.1
   
   
   
   
0.26    0
36.8    22
129    45
13.5    10.5
   
   
   
6.4    2
11.31    7.2
168.68    1000
   
   
20.72    7
3.9    3.7
12.5    1.8
   
   
   
   
   
   
3.4    2.3
4.8    0
1.48    0.67
   
   
16.6    11
22.95    22
4.44    1.5
   
   
11    1.1
9    7.8
6.29    5.8
   
   
14.43    1.26
2.85    0
23.31    21
   
   
   
   
15.89    4.2
16.79    2.3
27.63    29
   
   
17.59    15
   
12.5    9.5
43.21    29
   
   
7.01    4
22.04    3
39    37
   
   
16.04    14
99    79
19    4.6
   
   
   
   
   
22.89    8.4
5.4    3.1
4.2    1.42
   
   
18    14.5
78.68    64
5    5.6
   
   
   
   
4.14    3.5
9    9
11.5    2.15
   
   
8.8    3.6
4.06    2.6
20    11
   
   
2.8    0.5
   
3.4    2.95
73.05    33
   
   
   
   
   
   
0.93    0
6.8    2.2
5.2    4.8
9.19    10
   
   
0.85    0.55
2.75    0
9.01    3.5
17.41    18.5
   
   
1.88    0
4.32    4
33    10
   
   
   
   
4.73    0
7.64    9
4.06    2
   
   
1.36    0.25
3.1    0
49    54
   
   
   
   
8.24    4.7
2.85    0.71
120.6    29
   
   
   
4.96    1.5
16.5    1.26
   
10    0
   
   
12.67    8
2.49    0
   
8.77    8
   
   
   
   
31.09    0
218.04    109
13.64    13.5
   
   
8.02    3
5    4.5
65.25    37
   
   
7.2    0
3.1    2.1
7    6
   
   
58.61    54
11    9.5
33    9
   
   
   
   
4.46    0
2.45    2.5
1.62    0.91
   
   
   
39.68    23
4.5    0.04
   
13    4.5
   
   
0.6    0
10.36    9
2.9    2
   
53.88    54
   
   
16.16    0.3
5.8    3.1
8.2    0
   
   
   
   
1.84    0.9
19    14.5
7.98    0
   
   
3.3    2.25
1.2    0
10.5    10
   
   
36.69    25
3.8    1.12
149    119

Lori, of course there are sundry times in racing when you can back true 9-2 shots at 10-1 and be right--and also times when you can think a true 33-1 shot is 9-2.

Furthermore, the reason that those are the true prices of the horses is likely to be interpreted by non-horse bettors as some kind of corruption or shenanigans.

Imv the easiest (!) way to win in racing is to know on average when what's priced as a 6% chance is an 8% chance. You're right not based on past performance, but on some unquantifiable potential you've seen in the performance, or thru' yr knowledge of trainer habits, pedigree, jockey bookings, ground conditions, draw, pace or track bias or the horse's 'improvement' (wh/ also is not captured in past performances.)

Each to his own--but horse bettors find all these factors in 20+ runner fields more interesting than the variables in other sports.

Well.....naturally, I consider myself to be more  likely to be more "right" than "wrong"

some very good posts from racingguru and the Inventor.

To me it only reinforces that the OP has no edge whatsoever.

Maximum Joined: 28 May 02
Replies: 49 16 May 11 03:46 
Better to develop a vaccine for cancer?
=======================================================================================
As a general rule in life........stick to what you "know" about.

BILLIONS have probably been spent by charities on cancer research.....and thousands of people who "know" in depth about the various forms of cancer. They are the ones that are "best" sticking to their task. Not a lay person !
================================================================================

racingguru Joined: 06 Jan 01
Replies: 305 16 May 11 06:13 
DFCIRON  - your ratings are much different to mine in that you are looking for horses likely to run well and shorten whereas mine are looking for winners. For example i might have a horse 7th top rated but wouldn't dare lay him for a place as the ones I have above him might be inconsistent as hell or need to be excused a poor effort etc.

Each to their own - there is definitely an angle in what you are doing too.
=====================================================================================

The main object was to devise a system that does find winners RG.......and it does that in top 3. Not as often as I would want it to.......but it does get them ( on current check on 11 days in APRIL 2008 rated races it has 53 winners out of 113 races in top 3 rated ). However, as you have recognised there is "an angle" re the fact that odds on the top 3 rated generally reduce substantially IR........and as generally the highest odds horses that are placed are a high percentage of the time in top half of the ratings, though not always in top 3 rated.....unfortunately. No system is perfect! Thanks for encouraging words.
===========================================================================



johnizere Joined: 17 Mar 04
Replies: 7821 16 May 11 09:15 
DFC..
Looks to me like your 'eureka moment' happened some time ago, but you somehow missed it!
I think what you're basically saying is back to lay your top 3 rated, as it seems from your posted figures that they're all likely to shorten considerably IR.
BTO has been doing this for years (or so he claims) and been making vast fortunes .... Confused
Keep up the good work, hope all is well at home.
========================================================================================

Sorry johnizere.......never spotted your post ! YUP - A "good" trader would do well on such results....SO FAR.....However with me not having a trader's mindset, I have been very "slow" on realising just how "good" the system ratings are re having such horses in top 3 rated. I knew the system was operating to a high standard .........but not having all the DETAILS re ODDS IR noted against each horse rated was where I "MISSED" seeing how "good" it was on top 3 rated. Still gathering FACTS together and there would have been 4 losing days out of the 11 checked so far......but the good days are "very good"......and would notionally be well up.

The difference between BTO and me is my system indicates the top 3 rated horses are ones to bet on PRIOR TO RACE, and then IN RUNNING bets would be used. BTO I don't believe CAN do IR bets , as he is based in Australia? Though he did say he would be doing bets IR re LAYING below SP odds......so I still a bit confused by what he is doing as well J

My dad seems to be over his illness.....and is doing well. He is slowing down a bit ......but at 87 this year it probably is about time he did!!!

I 've binned my betting on FOOTBALL til I get HORSE RACING bets, using system, up and running ( likely in JUNE due to work commitments)......GL with SWANS play-off game to come....should be a good game !

I'd better get back to "work" nowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww........Cheers the nooooooooooooooo