There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
OR CAN THE BOOKMAKERS DECIDE WHATS GOING TO WIN
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 23
|
By:
Their is no script when commentators describe the race that's all I know..
|
|
By:
Why bother fixing it? It's the same as people who are convinced online/machine roulette is fixed; why do that when a completely honest Random Number Generator will give you 2.7% margin day in day out.
|
|
By:
they know which ones are fit.
|
|
By:
careful longbridge, a sensible post on here
 |
|
By:
why would anyone back a short priced fav if it was completely random ?
no ..that cant be correct ,the fav must be given a higher percentage chance in the selection process of the winner ,kind of like reels in a fruit machine ,the fav must have more spots on the reels imo remember reading on here the percentage of favs running 2nd at the cartoons was very highest across all racing ,was a few years ago |
|
By:
*was the highest
|
|
By:
its a numbers draw bnb, the fav the most, next in the betting the second most, down to the outsiders having the least. they make the draw then make the race
|
|
By:
The non triers always carry there whip in the left hand.
 |
|
By:
Being completely random doesn't men there isn't a favourite, just means it's not directed what wins.
Say for instance you give each horses an average speed and a standard deviation to describe how broadly distributed his actual speeds are around the average. Then every second you fire a random number generator at those normal distributions and move each horse forward by the appropriate distance. Yes, it's completely random in the sense of the OPs question, but the short-priced favourite's winning chances will reflect his odds. Someone was telling me that shop customers like virtual horses as a filler between real horseraces as it's perceived as being more honest than dogs, which is the alternative. |
|
By:
When we then asked why they were able to offer odds of 3-1 on a horse in a 12-horse field, the startling answer was that they were giving the chosen horses a 20 per cent loading of having a better chance. The bookmakers were thereby admitting that they were lying; they were intercepting the system. One would expect in those circumstances to see the incidence of winning favourites to match the 20 per cent or so which applies to live, breathing racehorses in proper races. In fact, it comes out at 16 per cent; that is, nearly four points below the average for living racehorses. It is even more remarkable that the clear favourite, if it is winning only 16 per cent of the races, is coming second in 17 or 18 per cent of them. God forbid that I should be accused of being a cynic, but if I were, I would say that the bookmakers are getting it both ways. They are encouraging bets to be laid and then avoiding the necessity of having to pay out on the horse that is the favourite because the software system is in some way stopping it winning. That is as much a corrupt process as slipping dope to a horse or getting a jockey to pull it. What on earth are the bookmakers doing ?
lifted this from here http://www.bettingmarket.com/fobts.html cant find the article that had the statistical analyse of the virtual racing results ,it made it pretty clear the favs have a poor record and come 2nd more than anywhere else ,of course all completely random . |
|
By:
some coont did stats on em.
|
|
By:
to prove they were b e n t yes
|
|
By:
what I mean to say if the bookmakers sees there is lots of money going on one horse can they decide what horse is going to win the race in these computer races
|
|
By:
max, no they cant, although im sure some will have a different opinion
|
|
By:
the shills are out
|
|
By:
the stewards at these virtual races are a joke, never seen one get thrown out yet.
|
|
By:
there used to be virtual racing on betfair
|
|
By:
shame they are not b e n t can get a fair bet.
|
|
By:
It cannot be wholly random as you would eventually win by backing the absolute 'outsider'in every race.There has to be a quota system for each price range to give the bookies their percentage.
|
|
By:
People are confusing "random" with "giving every horse an equal chance" - the two aren't the same - see my post above for one way of doing it.
|
|
By:
How many cartoon hosses named after East Enders characters got short headed last week, you think that's coincidence?
|
|
By:
Oh, and BF do have Virtual Racing
https://www.betfair.com/sport/virtual-sports Counts as Games, which I've self-excluded from so can't express an opinion if it's any good or not. |
|
By:
Jollies or long shots, I've come up with a winning system that returns between £50-500 a day :) Naturally I won't be divulging it, as it would soon break down if it became widely known and many started following it...
|