General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 103 comments are related to the topic:
Gambles on horses that are wrong
Gambles on horses that are wrong
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 103
|
By:
It's also a good question, whether market 'drifts' are the same as market 'gambles' in terms of change in relative chance. I think people look at drifters like that one with more suspicion in many ways - guess trying to 'win' isnt really as frowned on.
|
|
By:
for obvious reasons!
 |
|
By:
Good depictions on the 'drifters' side yes. However, this post was originally about the other side - the gambles.
|
|
By:
5.40 Carlisle: Big drifter Gran Canaria Queen - wins by 4lengths, Fave backed heavily 4th place.
|
|
By:
like i said earlier on the thread, dont look out for slow horses
 LINE OF REASON 1ST 4/1 fast 0.15 |
|
By:
winners is not what we are looking for -- it is horses that should be a lower price than they actually are . QED
|
|
By:
see what you mean
 made that an even money shot yesterday |
|
By:
LINE OF REASON form franked today with DISCUSSIONTOFOLLOW winning today
|
|
By:
100
|
|
By:
Monday gambles
2.5 L 3.7 L 3.9 L 4.5 L 4.2 L 3.7 L 2.9 L Tuesday gambles 2.0 L 1.9 WON 4.8 L 3.5 L 4.4 L 4.9 L 5.1 L 4.5 WON 1.8 L 2.5 WON 3.8 L 4.7 L 4.7 L |
|
By:
Tues evening
2.6 L 4.2 L 5.2 L |
|
By:
I used to use an active spreadsheet that took readings 12 minutes before the off.
Then, if anything moved in 25% (i.e. 4.00 to 3.20), I laid it. If it moved out and another hit 25%, it then backed the first one and laid the second. etc. Depending on field size (don't remember exactly), it was the 'third' one that hit 25% that usually won and only if it went further down than 30%. Theory was: a) if a fave, if the fave lost in the previous race, usually fave backers chasing. b) first two were usually headlines on the day (jockey, trainer winning) c) heavy lays on another horse initially shifted market d) third was truer money, usually last minute 'get on' rather than steady movement in. Parameters changed. This was five, possibly six years ago, I believe. Not sure it would work now since several horses moving 25% these days. |
|
By:
Tues evening
2.6 L 5.2 L 4.2 L Wednesday's gambles 4.9 L 4.1 L 4.2 L 3.3 WON 3.5 WON 4.7 L 4.9 L 3.8 L 3.3 L |
|
By:
gambles landed in last 8 days 9/76 11.84% -42pts
|
|
By:
Blimey Tamethetiger - if those figures you're quoting are accurate, that's the sort of run that got me thinking (and posting this) in the first place! How did you calculate the 'gamble' though, on what parameters if you don't mind me asking?
|
|
By:
Interesting post Shapeshifter - just wondering, was there a reason to pick the 25% figure for movement, or just a choice?
|
|
By:
I set my own parameters that took me ages to work out through trial and error. 4/9 have been landed so far today so its swings and roundabouts
|
|
By:
Yep, obviously sample size comes into play, but still a pretty poor run for supposedly 'supported' horses.
|
|
By:
Do you have any views about your defined gambles over a longer term, from your own stats?
|
|
By:
those figures are exceptional rather than the norm. They do prove that all gambles are not the real deal though.
|
|
By:
stu I know exactly what you mean - unlike most early responders on this thead : you get an enormous number of heavily backed horses which do nothing at all.
|
|
By:
4 landed out of 34 last 2 days, -18 if backing
|
|
By:
5/28 landed Sat/Sun -4 if backing
|
|
By:
Interesting updates Tamethetiger - I wonder if you have any thoughts/stats about timing of the gambles - later money better was always the theme in the past touted. I'm still not convinced though.
Thanks for reminding me I wasn't mad for posting about this too Desperatemunter! |
|
By:
|
|
By:
and i thought there was only me
|
|
By:
Would be interested in anyone's opinion on 3.10 Lingfield 17th Jan.
Glastonbury won the race, but proceeded to drift pre race from (approx) 12.00 to 24.0 max. Any view how that could be an 'efficient' market would be welcome, for those who say it always is above. |
|
By:
Obviously that example is an example of the reverse 'wrongness' of a market, when a horse drifts and then wins..
|
|
By:
Betfair SP Overround/Underround: 101%
Industry overround: 117% =========================================================== The BOOK indicates an efficient market on the race......FACT. Horses drift and also shorten for numerous reasons...... The trainer of Glastonbury has a pretty "good" win rate.....though not too many races recently. The horse had a pretty good strike-rate. The jockey is a good jockey for this type of race...sprint..... DRAW was a good one. Horse had been running in better class races generally since last time it won.....and running over further distances in a couple races. Many factors in favour..... and at the odds was good value as a bet on taking factors into account. Why it drifted ...who knows ! Going described as "fast" on TF site.......perhaps punters believed an older horse would not win if "fast" ? Perhaps some punters did not like to back a horse that had not placed in previous 4 races......though having won a Class 4 race over distance at Kempton prior to those races, then it had shown some ability to win over the distance early in year ! VALUE is generally always in most races.....even if BOOK shows efficient market. Just got to have a way to recognise it. |
|
By:
Thanks for that DCF, some interesting points there I agree.
|
|
By:
DFC even, sorry.
|
|
By:
I sometimes think that a market is always both 'right' and 'wrong' at the same time - the bigger prices on a winner were essentially wrong for layers and right for backers, and vice-versa. But in addition to this the higher prices that were matched were more wrong than those matched at lower prices. So, markets may be efficient like you say in some ways, but at the same time represent both right and wrong prices.
However, I'm still fascinated when the market takes a strong view (ie backs or drifts a selection very powerfully), but gets it wrong. |
|
By:
Now there, this just has to be a one of these:
6.45 Wolves - Opus Dei, backed on here from around 8.0 into nearer 3.0 just now, huge chunks, bookies prices smashed into 7/4 Ran like a complete drain, and beat one horse home in the race. Some mortgages have gone missing on that one. |
|
By:
Have to admit I fancied it at 7/1, but still...
|