Horse Antepost
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
I am looking for 6-10 people who want to join a little group that tries to make their own books for a couple of races each week. All you need to do is to be able to commit enough time to try to make a genuine 100% book based on your own opinions (without looking at odds on any bookie or exchange) for two races a week (mostly these will be on Saturdays for convenience). As soon as enough people have declared an interest, I will update.
What I am proposing is that those who join this group will email their books by a deadline and I will then summarise these and return the summary to all who contributed. Specifically, I'm aiming to come to an average price for each runner based on our own opinions, which should hopefully then yield a few value bets when looking at the real market(s). Once everyone who contributed has received the summary, I am happy to make our book publicly available on here and on a blog - providing everyone involved is happy with that. I will not name any names in anything that is written, so even if I show all 6-10 books and the master average book, nobody will know who put the 3-1 jolly in at 14s!
The thinking behind this is that it should appeal to those who want to improve their skill at making a book. I have selected the figure of 6-10 individual contributions because that should provide sufficient variation to guard against one or two bad ricks screwing things badly out of line, without having such a large sample of books that we end up with a mirror of the exchange odds.
Obviously, the master book will only be as good as the individuals involved, but am hoping those who want to join will be disciplined enough to at least try to put some effort into this. There is of course no pressure, and I'm sure there will be plenty of errors along the way. Just hope this might prove useful in developing a key skill in the punting armoury, and might also provide plenty of fun and a few winners along the way.
For those interested, just send a very short email and let me know (valueclub AT hotmail.co.uk). More information is available on the Value Club page of my blog, which is: thomasdeaneracing.wordpress.com
Am sure there will be a few mistrusting folk but can assure all that nothing is being sold, or will be sold as a result of this. It's just a genuine little project for anyone committed to trying to learn how to make a book.
What I am proposing is that those who join this group will email their books by a deadline and I will then summarise these and return the summary to all who contributed. Specifically, I'm aiming to come to an average price for each runner based on our own opinions, which should hopefully then yield a few value bets when looking at the real market(s). Once everyone who contributed has received the summary, I am happy to make our book publicly available on here and on a blog - providing everyone involved is happy with that. I will not name any names in anything that is written, so even if I show all 6-10 books and the master average book, nobody will know who put the 3-1 jolly in at 14s!
The thinking behind this is that it should appeal to those who want to improve their skill at making a book. I have selected the figure of 6-10 individual contributions because that should provide sufficient variation to guard against one or two bad ricks screwing things badly out of line, without having such a large sample of books that we end up with a mirror of the exchange odds.
Obviously, the master book will only be as good as the individuals involved, but am hoping those who want to join will be disciplined enough to at least try to put some effort into this. There is of course no pressure, and I'm sure there will be plenty of errors along the way. Just hope this might prove useful in developing a key skill in the punting armoury, and might also provide plenty of fun and a few winners along the way.
For those interested, just send a very short email and let me know (valueclub AT hotmail.co.uk). More information is available on the Value Club page of my blog, which is: thomasdeaneracing.wordpress.com
Am sure there will be a few mistrusting folk but can assure all that nothing is being sold, or will be sold as a result of this. It's just a genuine little project for anyone committed to trying to learn how to make a book.
Show More
I was always fond of the LORD OF THE RINGS books myself,can i write a 4th one of those,will be happy to add some odds into the story if thats what your looking for
I have been making my own tissue prices for quite sometime now.
Now, I may have misunderstood what you are trying to do, but for me the whole point of creating your own 'book' is for those occasions when you have put the 3-1 jolly in at 14's.
I once published my own tissue on the horse racing forum and was widely ridiculed because it differed from the Racing Post one, and then the actual bookmakers odds. Very few people seem to understand that this is exactly what you are trying to achieve. If you believe the 3-1 jolly is a 14-1 shot then you should be laying it at 3's. Similarly, if a hoss you have at 3-1 on your book is priced up at 14-1, why think of it as a 'rick'? If you're any good at what you do then betting under such circumstances should lead to long term profits.
Also, it is very hard to create a book to 100% on the big Saturday handicaps where the bookies are making theirs to 120%. In my experience you will find very few bets unless you are only looking for marginal differences (personally, I look for a variance of at least 5%).
Good luck, though, at what is a worthy attempt to improve your punting.
Now, I may have misunderstood what you are trying to do, but for me the whole point of creating your own 'book' is for those occasions when you have put the 3-1 jolly in at 14's.
I once published my own tissue on the horse racing forum and was widely ridiculed because it differed from the Racing Post one, and then the actual bookmakers odds. Very few people seem to understand that this is exactly what you are trying to achieve. If you believe the 3-1 jolly is a 14-1 shot then you should be laying it at 3's. Similarly, if a hoss you have at 3-1 on your book is priced up at 14-1, why think of it as a 'rick'? If you're any good at what you do then betting under such circumstances should lead to long term profits.
Also, it is very hard to create a book to 100% on the big Saturday handicaps where the bookies are making theirs to 120%. In my experience you will find very few bets unless you are only looking for marginal differences (personally, I look for a variance of at least 5%).
Good luck, though, at what is a worthy attempt to improve your punting.
Thanks for your input, Leo.
I totally understand in essence what you are saying is of course right, but am thinking of this project being aimed at the newcomers who want to start making their own tissue. I have been doing my own for around two years now and have certainly improved greatly in that time, although I do still make the odd error. So this is not necessarily about making profits (although that would be nice), but about seeing how opinions differ over certain horses, which should be a valuable exercise.
For example, it would be interesting to know why someone thinks the 3-1 jolly is a 14-1 poke when most others disagree. Of course you can just listen to people's opinions regarding individual horses in the horse racing forum, but these usually come from a perspective on just that one horse and not from someone having made a book on the whole race (which is quite different in my opinion).
I was thinking the big Saturday handicaps would prove beyond the goal of this, too. Am looking at the higher-class, 6-10 runner contests as I think they give the best chances to learn this skill. When I have used my books to seek value in the past, I usually set a minimum of 10-15% differences before considering a bet/trade, which means I place fewer bets but am usually more happy in my decision to do so.
Glad to read a really useful post, and hope you have continued success with your methods. Good luck.
I totally understand in essence what you are saying is of course right, but am thinking of this project being aimed at the newcomers who want to start making their own tissue. I have been doing my own for around two years now and have certainly improved greatly in that time, although I do still make the odd error. So this is not necessarily about making profits (although that would be nice), but about seeing how opinions differ over certain horses, which should be a valuable exercise.
For example, it would be interesting to know why someone thinks the 3-1 jolly is a 14-1 poke when most others disagree. Of course you can just listen to people's opinions regarding individual horses in the horse racing forum, but these usually come from a perspective on just that one horse and not from someone having made a book on the whole race (which is quite different in my opinion).
I was thinking the big Saturday handicaps would prove beyond the goal of this, too. Am looking at the higher-class, 6-10 runner contests as I think they give the best chances to learn this skill. When I have used my books to seek value in the past, I usually set a minimum of 10-15% differences before considering a bet/trade, which means I place fewer bets but am usually more happy in my decision to do so.
Glad to read a really useful post, and hope you have continued success with your methods. Good luck.
I do this anyway for any race i bet on (only Group Races).
I convert my existing ratings for the horses into odds, rather than start from scratch for each race, so as to try and be consistent. I only consider my rating and ignore all other factors . Handicap Races would be much more time consuming to do this for, and i don;t have much interest in those.
These are my ratings/prices for The International..... .
I can e mail you tommorow sometime Tom .
Agree, good post Leo.
I convert my existing ratings for the horses into odds, rather than start from scratch for each race, so as to try and be consistent. I only consider my rating and ignore all other factors . Handicap Races would be much more time consuming to do this for, and i don;t have much interest in those.
These are my ratings/prices for The International..... .
| Juddmonte International | Rating | Price | |
| Midday | 123.5 | 2.74 | |
| Await The Dawn | 122.5 | 3.27 | |
| Twice Over | 121.5 | 3.90 | |
| Roderic O'Connor | 115.5 | 15.5 | |
| Zafisio | 104.5 | 133 | |
| Windsor Palace | 85 | 2047 |
I can e mail you tommorow sometime Tom .
Agree, good post Leo.
Betting is totally price orientated , which often people forget(including myself) and in reality a horse
shouldn't be discussed as to if you think it will win but on what is the probability of it winning and
whether it is under or over priced by the bookies. I have been ridiculed by people for suggesting that
a horse in a 16 runner handicap had a 4/5 chance of winning when the bookies are offering 5/1 but accept
thats part of the game.
If you came on here and everyone agreed with your prices then you would be in trouble
shouldn't be discussed as to if you think it will win but on what is the probability of it winning and
whether it is under or over priced by the bookies. I have been ridiculed by people for suggesting that
a horse in a 16 runner handicap had a 4/5 chance of winning when the bookies are offering 5/1 but accept
thats part of the game.
If you came on here and everyone agreed with your prices then you would be in trouble
Dead right tinkler. I do my own time ratings. I've found that much of the time my figures don't seem too dissimilar from such as Timeform or official ratings (although when I've looked they've usually had more in common with Timeform's form ratings rather than their timefigures, which have never really impressed me). This is frustrating but it's got to be expected. These people are obviously competent at their jobs on the whole and if my ratings were always massively different than theirs then it's clear I'd be doing something wrong. However, enough times during a season there is a significant difference. Sometimes they're proved right and I'm wrong, nevertheless, it is these situations that provide the source of my biggest profits. I'm not averse to backing favourites as they can still sometimes be overpriced but I don't see how anyone can regularly beat the market by consistently making bets that are in agreement with the consensus of opinion.
figgis
I used to follow times very closely in the 1990's and found them a very good source of profit but since
then gradually noticed that more and more people where closely following them and prices eroded.
I still look at them now as they can be a good measure of a horses ability but have since started to
try and introduce some subjective sectional times amongst other things. Personally I hope they don't
introduce electronic sectionals as that will gradual erode any profits on them.
Its getting increasingly difficult to find an edge and anyone who is making consistent profits is doing well.
I used to follow times very closely in the 1990's and found them a very good source of profit but since
then gradually noticed that more and more people where closely following them and prices eroded.
I still look at them now as they can be a good measure of a horses ability but have since started to
try and introduce some subjective sectional times amongst other things. Personally I hope they don't
introduce electronic sectionals as that will gradual erode any profits on them.
Its getting increasingly difficult to find an edge and anyone who is making consistent profits is doing well.
With almost 200 views and only two people wanting to do this, I'm guessing the answer my original question is "pretty much no-one"!
Come on ladies and gents, there must be a few more interested folks, no?
Come on ladies and gents, there must be a few more interested folks, no?
I'd definitely be up for doing it. I can't promise that my results will be great but I'll give it a go. I'll send you an email.
Great idea. I know youre looking for interest first but have you got a plan in mind? Some people might get put off if they think 'commitment' and 'discipline' means you post friday night to price up a maiden for saturday.
My experience is that you will be wasting your time making a book from scratch. It's too time consuming and impossible to cope with when there's a lot of racing. The market is the most reliable guide so start there. Find the horses which are seemingly out of betting order or where there is just too much difference between one horse and the next. Concentrate on those. Ask why the market might be wrong? What is being over/under evalauted.
Anyway, GL. It's a good learning approach and worthwhile if you have never done it.
Anyway, GL. It's a good learning approach and worthwhile if you have never done it.
Just restricted to Group Races i find it doesn't take up too much time.
You'd have to be full time and working 60hr weeks at it to do it for all UK Racing.
You'd have to be full time and working 60hr weeks at it to do it for all UK Racing.
Thanks everyone for your interest. We now have 7 people that are part of this endeavour, so that's plenty to start with. First couple of races will be on Saturday, August 27. Hopefully we'll come to a consensus on Tuesday as to which these will be.
An ante post book for the Arc would be a decent addition to this endeavor imho
Celebration Mile is a must. Maybe The Prestige Stakes, though 2YO Racing tough.
A 100% Book on The Arc is tricky in August, i would have a go later in the week.
A 100% Book on The Arc is tricky in August, i would have a go later in the week.
Unless you use a race where there are no access to present odds you are going to get people using the odds
currently available as a marker ,this defeats the object.
7 people creating a book independantly on a race is likely to see widely differing prices if no comparison
is used which is as it should be as horseracing isn't an exact science and very subjective.
The only way to solve this is to avoid Ante post races and make the book before betfair have formed a market
and/or the bookies have, basically 2 days before.
Well done to those who are giving it a try and i hope you gain some insight and financial reward.
currently available as a marker ,this defeats the object.
7 people creating a book independantly on a race is likely to see widely differing prices if no comparison
is used which is as it should be as horseracing isn't an exact science and very subjective.
The only way to solve this is to avoid Ante post races and make the book before betfair have formed a market
and/or the bookies have, basically 2 days before.
Well done to those who are giving it a try and i hope you gain some insight and financial reward.
tinkler, I agree with all you've said.
Although I would have loved to have chosen the Celebration Mile to price up this weekend I don't believe it is possible for racing fans not to have read or heard somewhere how the market has been fluctuating and for that reason I sidestepped it. I'm aiming to select good quality races but not so good that they have been discussed in the media to a large extent prior to our attempt at pricing them up. Fingers crossed it works!
Although I would have loved to have chosen the Celebration Mile to price up this weekend I don't believe it is possible for racing fans not to have read or heard somewhere how the market has been fluctuating and for that reason I sidestepped it. I'm aiming to select good quality races but not so good that they have been discussed in the media to a large extent prior to our attempt at pricing them up. Fingers crossed it works!
Tom
I think this is a great idea. It's certainly the right, and best, way to approach betting
in my opinion. I'd like to join in. I probably don't have the time/knowledge to do a good
job, but it's worth a go. I'll email you.
I think this is a great idea. It's certainly the right, and best, way to approach betting
in my opinion. I'd like to join in. I probably don't have the time/knowledge to do a good
job, but it's worth a go. I'll email you.
Thanks for your email Tom. Started looking at the GW race. It's almost impossible to
avoid seeing prices. Just have to try and shut your mind off.
avoid seeing prices. Just have to try and shut your mind off.
I have sent off my 2 .
Stupidly, due to misreading which meeting the Group 3 was at, i originally spent an hour struggling with a 2YO Race . Have no ratings for 2YO , there was fk all form and i never bet on them .Finally completed and then realized it was the wrong race ffs [;)]
These were my odds for what it's worth....
Stupidly, due to misreading which meeting the Group 3 was at, i originally spent an hour struggling with a 2YO Race . Have no ratings for 2YO , there was fk all form and i never bet on them .Finally completed and then realized it was the wrong race ffs [;)]
These were my odds for what it's worth....
| 2:50 Goodwood | Rating | Price | |
| Questing | 109.5 | 2.36 | |
| Regal Realm | 106 | 4.86 | |
| Lily's Angel | 104 | 7.38 | |
| Rakasa | 103 | 9.2 | |
| Lady Gorgeous | 101 | 14.9 | |
| My Queenie | 99 | 24 | |
| Nayarra | 94 | 69 |
B4 here 
Went shortest price Motrice but backed Akmal [;)]
Went shortest price Motrice but backed Akmal [;)]
| Celebration Mile | Rating | Price | |
| Poet's Voice | 120.5 | 1.75 | |
| Dubawi Gold | 114 | 7.20 | |
| Premio Loco | 113.5 | 8.10 | |
| Beacon Lodge | 113 | 9.10 | |
| Emerald Commander | 107.5 | 30 | |
| Set The Trend | 104.5 | 57 | |
| Riggins | 98 | 176 |
B3 here. I made Motrice favourite and didn't have the sense to bet it either!
B8 (for the Goodwood race) and B7 (Windsor) not sure why but cheers Tom for sorting all this out. Yes, I'm the goon who had the highest price on Motrice (7s). I felt Akmal may have a chance running over a distance it had won over 3 times previously and hadn't run at for a while and there was something I'd read about Prescott's horse (can't remember what now) that put me off it. Still, I enjoyed the process and it did make me look more closely at the races in question. For example, I didn't want to touch the Windsor race with a bargepole - too many imponderables for my liking. However, my Motrice debacle has made me realise just how badly I can get things wrong. Ah well, ever onwards, ever upwards...
I couldn't have got the 6:40 much more wrong that that
29/1 the winner
15/1 2nd
finished miles clear SPs 14/1 and 10/3 fav
29/1 the winner
15/1 2nd
finished miles clear SPs 14/1 and 10/3 fav
tom - still confussed ,what is your end goal,lets say we as a group make perfect correct books,fav wins every race,is this any use,
your adventure isnt taking into account ,deliberate false favourites,deliberate drifting winners,the bookies could if they wanted to price the winner up as fav every race,but then all the punters would just back the fav,
so we need to make 2 books - actual chance of winning,likely price it will be.
if successful what do you want to achieve with this - whats your mission statement(ha ha)
your adventure isnt taking into account ,deliberate false favourites,deliberate drifting winners,the bookies could if they wanted to price the winner up as fav every race,but then all the punters would just back the fav,
so we need to make 2 books - actual chance of winning,likely price it will be.
if successful what do you want to achieve with this - whats your mission statement(ha ha)
Fascinating stuff for sure - only one of us managed to get the Prince Siegfried price about right but otherwise, as a group, we weren't too far out. At least Hot Prospect was unplaced as we were all way longer than the market on him! Look forward to next week's races.
Oh, and by the way, the reason you were different numbers for the two races armpits is just that someone else whose odds I put in first could only do the one race this week. Thanks for your efforts everyone.
Oh, and by the way, the reason you were different numbers for the two races armpits is just that someone else whose odds I put in first could only do the one race this week. Thanks for your efforts everyone.
hi guys b1 here. I found the 'bettingmad percentage calculator' a big help for producing a 100% book its a free download if you need a bit of help like I did. b6 I noticed you went best price on Prince Bishop,was this because you thought it would need the run?
scoop 6
B6 here.
Re: Prince Bishop
My odds are derived from ratings and the ratings don't take in to account whether the horse is likely to need the run.
B6 here.
Re: Prince Bishop
My odds are derived from ratings and the ratings don't take in to account whether the horse is likely to need the run.
I find it very hard to rate Godolphin horses tbh.
Hard to factor in the potential decline of anything that ends up there.
Hard to factor in the potential decline of anything that ends up there.
tobermory,
I find the Godolphin horses a nightmare to price up. They almost all seem to have two ways of running (I'd say more often than not you get great performances or absolute carp). Poet's Voice and Prince Siegfried were classic examples today - the former had to have an outstanding chance in the Mile but trailed home last of all, while the latter hasn't shown any sparkle for eons but beat a good Group Three field.
All good fun though!
I find the Godolphin horses a nightmare to price up. They almost all seem to have two ways of running (I'd say more often than not you get great performances or absolute carp). Poet's Voice and Prince Siegfried were classic examples today - the former had to have an outstanding chance in the Mile but trailed home last of all, while the latter hasn't shown any sparkle for eons but beat a good Group Three field.
All good fun though!
To Tom & the other bookmakers.
Any analysis of our books has surely been rendered useless due to the impact of the non-runner in the Goodwood race and the two non-runners in the Windsor race. The non-runners serve to increase the probability % figures of the remaining runners.
I've reworked my figures to take account of the non-runners and as you can see there's quite a difference, particularly in the Goodwood race. Posting so far in advance of the race may prove to be a logistical stumbling block to the project taking off, which would be a shame.
Goodwood 2.15
Windsor 6.40
Does anyone have any thoughts?
Any analysis of our books has surely been rendered useless due to the impact of the non-runner in the Goodwood race and the two non-runners in the Windsor race. The non-runners serve to increase the probability % figures of the remaining runners.
I've reworked my figures to take account of the non-runners and as you can see there's quite a difference, particularly in the Goodwood race. Posting so far in advance of the race may prove to be a logistical stumbling block to the project taking off, which would be a shame.
Goodwood 2.15
| Horse | My original odds | Prob % | New Prob % | My new odds |
| Motrice | 3.64 | 0.27 | 0.30 | 3.32 |
| Drunken Sailor | 4.33 | 0.23 | 0.25 | 3.95 |
| Eternal Heart | 4.55 | 0.22 | 0.24 | 4.15 |
| Akmal | 5.69 | 0.18 | 0.19 | 5.19 |
| Mystery Star | 11.38 | 0.09 | N/R | N/A |
| Crocus Rose | 91.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 83.00 |
Windsor 6.40
| Horse | My original odds | Prob % | New Prob % | My new odds |
| Dux Scholar | 7.70 | 0.13 | 0.16 | 6.36 |
| Prince Bishop | 9.41 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 7.78 |
| Principal Role | 9.77 | 0.10 | 0.12 | 8.08 |
| Distant Memories | 10.16 | 0.10 | 0.12 | 8.40 |
| Hot Prospect | 10.58 | 0.09 | 0.11 | 8.75 |
| City Leader | 11.04 | 0.09 | N/R | N/A |
| Forte Dei Marmi | 12.10 | 0.08 | N/R | N/A |
| Mahbooba | 12.10 | 0.08 | 0.10 | 10.00 |
| Simon De Montfort | 12.10 | 0.08 | 0.10 | 10.00 |
| Prince Siegfried | 14.11 | 0.07 | 0.09 | 11.67 |
| Julienas | 18.14 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 15.00 |
| Zafisio | 254.00 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 165.35 |
Does anyone have any thoughts?
Just in case any of our bookmakers are not sure how to recalculate the probability % figure, I've found the following method to be the easiest.
1. Subtract the probabilities of the withdrawn horse(s) from 1.00
Let the resulting figure be the sum of remaining probabilities.
2. For each any horse whose rating you wish to recalculate divide that horse's original probability rating by the sum of remaining probabilities.
We now have a proportionally adjusted probability rating for the horse or horses in question.
Apologies to anyone where it's a case of teaching granny to suck eggs.
1. Subtract the probabilities of the withdrawn horse(s) from 1.00
Let the resulting figure be the sum of remaining probabilities.
2. For each any horse whose rating you wish to recalculate divide that horse's original probability rating by the sum of remaining probabilities.
We now have a proportionally adjusted probability rating for the horse or horses in question.
Apologies to anyone where it's a case of teaching granny to suck eggs.
Good point t2r. I hadn't really thought about the "rule 4". I suppose because I ended
up not betting in the races, it didn't really figure in my mind.
up not betting in the races, it didn't really figure in my mind.
Yes - I had thought about this being a potential problem and it was on Saturday. Hopefully, more often than not, there will not be any non-runners to deal with.
However, if everyone is aware of the calculations and how to readjust their books, it should be fine. We'll just have to keep a close eye on things - if a non-runner comes in before I send out the summaries, I will recalculate everyone's books using the formulae above, but if a non-runner comes in after that, I suppose you will all just have to be aware and be ready to recalculate your books. Maybe someone can do it on here if that is the case?
However, if everyone is aware of the calculations and how to readjust their books, it should be fine. We'll just have to keep a close eye on things - if a non-runner comes in before I send out the summaries, I will recalculate everyone's books using the formulae above, but if a non-runner comes in after that, I suppose you will all just have to be aware and be ready to recalculate your books. Maybe someone can do it on here if that is the case?
If I may, I'd just like to make a point with regard to NR's and the effect they can have on your tissue.
IMO, it is not simply a case of the maths, but how the withdrawn horse may effect the shape of the race.
As an example (Please forgive the aftertiming) I priced up the 5:40 at Brighton last Friday at the 48 hour declaration stage. At the time of making my book the going was 'good' and there were 14 runners. By post time the going was soft and there were 8 runners.
I had originally discounted the hoss 'No Larking' as I believed he would be seen to best effect dominating a small field, and with 13 rivals I doubted he would be able to gain a soft lead, and would most likely be challenged for the lead. I priced him up as one of the outsiders. However with the dramatic change in the race conditions to soft (No Larking's sire Refuse To Bend has a 12% Strike rate on soft ground & 2 of his siblings had won on 'soft') and the fact that No Larking was likely to be unchallenged for the lead facing just 7 rivals, I ended up putting him in as favourite.
Simply using a mathematical formula to reduce my prices would not have seen such a positive outcome.
I accept the above is an extreme example as 6 withdrawals doesn't happen that often, but there are occasions when a couple of non runners may leave a front runner drawn next to a favoured rail or a likely pace dual up front becomes an unchallenged solo.
IMO, it is not simply a case of the maths, but how the withdrawn horse may effect the shape of the race.
As an example (Please forgive the aftertiming) I priced up the 5:40 at Brighton last Friday at the 48 hour declaration stage. At the time of making my book the going was 'good' and there were 14 runners. By post time the going was soft and there were 8 runners.
I had originally discounted the hoss 'No Larking' as I believed he would be seen to best effect dominating a small field, and with 13 rivals I doubted he would be able to gain a soft lead, and would most likely be challenged for the lead. I priced him up as one of the outsiders. However with the dramatic change in the race conditions to soft (No Larking's sire Refuse To Bend has a 12% Strike rate on soft ground & 2 of his siblings had won on 'soft') and the fact that No Larking was likely to be unchallenged for the lead facing just 7 rivals, I ended up putting him in as favourite.
Simply using a mathematical formula to reduce my prices would not have seen such a positive outcome.
I accept the above is an extreme example as 6 withdrawals doesn't happen that often, but there are occasions when a couple of non runners may leave a front runner drawn next to a favoured rail or a likely pace dual up front becomes an unchallenged solo.
Thought the Borough Cup was a right hard race to price up,but looking at the early odds I seem to have got the book just about right. I am surprised how similar the prices are and although I must be reading the form ok ,as Leo pointed out you want your prices to differ and steer you towards some value. After spending a few hours looking at the race I think TOMINATOR will go off at a shorter price than the currently quoted 8/1.
It's very interesting putting all these books together - I spend as long looking at how people's opinions differ over certain horses as I do compiling mine!
As I have said in the email I just sent out with the summary, I think I am going to put up a couple of 'paper bets' each week as a way of seeing whether my interpretation of the key things to jump out of these summaries could be profitable for punting purposes. I'll probably do a mix of backs and lays. I've never been a layer, but when I am way longer about a horse than the market, and everyone else in this little exercise is in agreement with me, I'll probably put them up as lays on here.
So, first two arrows for today:
Bet 1: 1pt Lay Dark Promise 2.00 Haydock at 9.20
Bet 2: 1pt Lay Shernando 2.30 Haydock at 11.0
I realise this has the potential to go horribly wrong but think it might just add a little interest to the effort of making these books and compiling a summary if there is something to follow over time - even if it is only 'paper betting' for now!
As I have said in the email I just sent out with the summary, I think I am going to put up a couple of 'paper bets' each week as a way of seeing whether my interpretation of the key things to jump out of these summaries could be profitable for punting purposes. I'll probably do a mix of backs and lays. I've never been a layer, but when I am way longer about a horse than the market, and everyone else in this little exercise is in agreement with me, I'll probably put them up as lays on here.
So, first two arrows for today:
Bet 1: 1pt Lay Dark Promise 2.00 Haydock at 9.20
Bet 2: 1pt Lay Shernando 2.30 Haydock at 11.0
I realise this has the potential to go horribly wrong but think it might just add a little interest to the effort of making these books and compiling a summary if there is something to follow over time - even if it is only 'paper betting' for now!
Dark Promise seemed to outperform my price by some way 
Just seemed like a low 90s handicapper to me on my look through its form. For my method i have to be quite familiar with the runners to give them an accurate price, as all my prices are determined soley by the rating, and easy to be a long way out just glancing at resuilts without seeing the races, or the runs of the horses they have run against.
Takes less than 10 minutes for me to do a race where i have ratings already
Just seemed like a low 90s handicapper to me on my look through its form. For my method i have to be quite familiar with the runners to give them an accurate price, as all my prices are determined soley by the rating, and easy to be a long way out just glancing at resuilts without seeing the races, or the runs of the horses they have run against.
Takes less than 10 minutes for me to do a race where i have ratings already
| Irish Champion | Rating | Price | |
| So You Think | 129 | 1.30 | |
| Snow Fairy | 120.5 | 9.2 | |
| Roderic O'Connor | 116 | 23 | |
| Recital | 115.5 | 25 | |
| Famous Name | 113 | 39 | |
| Dunboyne Express | 109 | 80 |
Week Three is almost on us ladies and gents, so to keep the running bets going, this week's two are:
0.5pt back Measuring Time 2.20 Goodwood at 18.0
1pt lay Berling 3.30 Chester at 4.50
Last week's two lays failed to win so the running profit/loss is +1.9 points (after commission).
As I said in last week's post, this could go badly wrong but should be interesting to follow over time. It also reinforces one of the golden rules of making a book in the first place. Now I know I am using the average of our books to compare against current Betfair prices (and not my own book) but the principle of using a personal book to bet on the 'value' selections rather than the ones you fancy is the whole point.
For example, I would never have backed Measuring Time at Goodwood this week (and probably wouldn't have layed Berling at Chester) but the price discrepancies make these two the obvious choices for bets this week. Obviously this is only paper betting but it is still a good thing to get in the habit of betting the prices, not the horses.
0.5pt back Measuring Time 2.20 Goodwood at 18.0
1pt lay Berling 3.30 Chester at 4.50
Last week's two lays failed to win so the running profit/loss is +1.9 points (after commission).
As I said in last week's post, this could go badly wrong but should be interesting to follow over time. It also reinforces one of the golden rules of making a book in the first place. Now I know I am using the average of our books to compare against current Betfair prices (and not my own book) but the principle of using a personal book to bet on the 'value' selections rather than the ones you fancy is the whole point.
For example, I would never have backed Measuring Time at Goodwood this week (and probably wouldn't have layed Berling at Chester) but the price discrepancies make these two the obvious choices for bets this week. Obviously this is only paper betting but it is still a good thing to get in the habit of betting the prices, not the horses.
Week four is on the horizon, and this week's sole paper bet advice from our books is:
0.5pt back Masamah 3,40 Newbury at 18.0
Last week's lay duly missed the target but the back was beaten (although he certainly outran his price in 3rd), so the running profit/loss is +2.35 points (after commission).
Good luck all!
0.5pt back Masamah 3,40 Newbury at 18.0
Last week's lay duly missed the target but the back was beaten (although he certainly outran his price in 3rd), so the running profit/loss is +2.35 points (after commission).
Good luck all!
This week we have two lays -
1pt lay Farhaan at 4.30 in the 2.05 Newmarket
1pt lay Alanza at 4,30 in the 3.10 Newmarket.
Running profit = +1.85 points (after commission).
Good luck all!
1pt lay Farhaan at 4.30 in the 2.05 Newmarket
1pt lay Alanza at 4,30 in the 3.10 Newmarket.
Running profit = +1.85 points (after commission).
Good luck all!
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539