SHAPESHIFTER

Returning after a decent week with 15 of 17 horses identified as 'weak faves' not hitting the line first.

But when looks at the results of the reads, when you see that a third of the selections came in 2nd, one clearly sees the thin line that runs between success and failure when taking on the horses. 

Those six horses that came in second probably offer more insight than the two that won or the balance that were unplaced when working towards improving.



WEAK FAVES based on the quality of their field in previous races:

AYR
3:05 Cheeky Wee Red
5:45 Chapellerie

SOUTHWELL
2:40 Bring Sweets
4:20 Monzino
4:55 Soopacal

Best of luck on your week ahead.

RESULT: Until today, all 16 selections on Monday had been successful but Soopacal won and won well.  So 4 out of 5 weak faves didn't win, 3 unplaced.

My record at Ayr remains clean for July with 8 selections.

Brighton is one of those tracks that takes the affects of landscape and weather to the extreme.

Imagine the originators of the track sitting in a pub and discussing what could be built on the plot of land.

After several ideas and as many pints, one said "a race course!"  So enthusiastic were they about the idea that when the bell rang for last orders, they headed out in the dark with a handful of posts and walked around without a torch banging stakes into the ground.

And, voila, a race course was born.

Any time I play Brighton, I feel that I, too, need a torch to see my way through the card.


Weak faves based on the quality of their previous fields:

Brighton
2:15 Pharoh Jake
3:45 Mark Anthony
4:15 Do More Business

Hamilton
3:30 King Of Paradise
5:00 Lord Franklin

RESULT: 3 for 3 at Brighton but when you look at the results, only 2 of 8 fave's won at the track today and both those were odds on. 

Brighton is an anomaly that can pay dividends if you can find the winner.

Hamilton, Lord Franklin won at 3.5 BFSP.  All day, it had been steady at that price. I didn't see the race so not able to give any feedback on the result.

Looking through the cards, there are no real 'stand out' prices where one could say a "value lay".

But nonetheless, a combination of horses beating 'okay' runners while taking on either improving or solid fields.

Perhaps not a lay, but the option of looking EW in the field, especially in Catterick.

Catterick
2:40 Llewellyn
3:10 Gowanharry
4:10 Red Tyke

Lingfield
3:30 Trovare
5:30 Mitch Rapp


RESULTS 4 of 5 were successfully flagged up.

In the 4:10, up till a few minutes before the race, the front three in the betting were within two ticks of each other till the money came for Mango Channing and Red Tyke drifted out to just over 5/1. 

One of the better races of the day, both Fleeting Fashion and Mango Channing went to 1.60 and 1.10 respectively in-running but Jimmy Quinn timed the last efforts to perfection and Red Tyke won with heart at a price of 6.20 BFSP.

To date, I have never posted the amounts that I risk when investing.  There's no point.  I'm not into the 'bravado' that goes with a big bet.  My personal 'rush' is when a read on an event goes right, regardless of the return.

For my 'lays', if one of the horses wins, I'll post the betfair SP as a guide.

Granted, there are a dozens of ways of creating more value or diminishing the risk of a bet with betfair, achieved by either trading or by using parallel markets on an event.

But why do people feel they need to "push up" their numbers? Reality is the best gauge of how you are at punting.

When I see blogs or sites posting results, why not stick to reality?  It's part of the game.

Several weeks ago, I came across 'Bet Share'.  Essentially it's a group of on-line tipsters who put up their NAP, Next Best and 'In With A Chance' for 5, 3 and 1 points respectively.

My main reason for watching the site was because to get a view on the 'wisdom of crowds', to see how selections where several "tipsters" all selected independently on the day.

What I noticed was various prices being posted on the same horse.  Some were overnights. Some morning.  Fair enough since, well, tipsters like to post "price at the time advised" that went into your e-mail at 3:30 AM.

But what wasn't happening was there was no "reductions" being put into the prices for non-runners after the time of posting.

The race that caught my eye yesterday was the 2:45 at Ffos Las and I wanted to see how it would be reported if the horse won.

Two tipsters selected Astra Hall as their 5 pt NAP:
letsgettipped
and
RacingT1pster on twitter

RacingT1pster put his out at around 8:45AM at 11/10 (2.10) which, in fairness, was attainable in the morning prior to 8:30. 

I don't know the time that letsgettipped advised, but it appeared on the 'bet share' forum in the morning at 2/1 (3.0)

Both these prices were posted as is on the 'bet share' forum.

With three non-runners by 9AM, the price was adjusted and was trading at around 1.60-1.70 on betfair roughly 4/7.

So any bets placed prior to 9AM, either 11/10 or 2/1 would, of course, need to be adjusted because of the reductions.

I repeat:

any bets placed prior to 9AM, either 11/10 or 2/1 would, of course, need to be adjusted because of the reductions.


Astral Hall won the race.

This morning, I returned to see how the winnings would be presented:

RacingT1pster on twitter:
Advised at 11/10
No web-site but tweeted:
Hope you took early prices on astra hall !!!!

letsgettipped (who is a subscription tipster)
Advised 2/1 (3.0)
web-site shows 2/1 +10 pts
No indication of the reductions involved

But, for me, what stood out was what 'bet share' did with the results.

Not only did 'bet share' keep letsgettipped at 2/1 showing a 10 pt gain but they CHANGED RacingT1pster from 11/10 to 2/1 (his original 11/10 still on his twitter).

'Bet share' is a site keeps a collective running on how their tipsters do each month.  It attracts people to the site which is driven by advertising and/or supported by the industry.

Collectively, this ups their tally for the month by 2 tipsters times +- 7 pts = 14 pts.

Surely the returns on their bets that day would have shown the adjustments.  But no one stepped forward to present the proper figures.

It's too bad.  A collective site with decent tipsters contributing isn't a bad thing.  But one with 'make believe' numbers doesn't give a proper perspective on how tough this game is.


This post isn't about 'debunking' tipsters. To each their own and 'buyer beware'

But, for me, it's an example of how gamblers feel the need to 'bend' their results rather than present their true abilities.

I truly believe integrity is one of the elements you need to take on board to become a better punter.  Sites, blogs and forums aside, take it on board for your own approach to gambling: if you lie to yourself, twist the numbers to up the 'bravado' of your presentation, it simply distracts you from improving or finding the markets you do well in.

It feels really good when it all comes together in a 'real way'.

The one thing I have learnt is not to 'force' yourself to take a view on a race.  More and more, I am glancing at the field including jockeys and trainers, the amount of form, the ratings then I don't feel there is enough solid substance to dive into, then you need to flip forward onto the next race.

I'm also finding that going from six to eight races is increasing the number of races on a card by 33% and this I feel can be more of a distraction than offering up more opportunities.

Just three stand out for the afternoon today.

Beverley
2:00 Miss Ella Jade

Ffos Las
3:45 Villa Royale
5:15 Top Frock

RESULT 1 of 3 placed but none succeeded in winning their race. Unfortunately, Villa Royale pulled out of the race and was put down at the track.

So a 3 for 3 day but not on the best of terms.

Weak faves identified for today:

AYR
2:35 The Nifty Box
3:35 Kimbali
4:35 Hawdyerwheesht

SOUTHWELL
2:15 Relight My Fire


RESULTS
4 for 4 failed to win their race, though two remained competitive finishing 2nd.

I recently started looking at horse racing from a few different angles and one I have been looking at is identifying horses that are listed as faves but when looking at their previous runs, found their runs were against a mainly poor field.

I determine this by taking a favorite then selecting races where it ran well (not necessarily the previous run) then looking at how the horses it beat did after that.

Simply put, if a horse finished 3rd in the first week of April, I look at how the horses it beat performed AFTER that date. 

If the horses it beat barely placed, then it was weak competition.

If the horses it ran better than ran better after that, winning and solidly placing against various fields, then it was a stronger field and the favorite is possibly more deserving.

This is simply a starting point to create a long list.   But they do stand out very quickly.

From there, a simple lay may be in order.  Or it may be looking down the field and finding a horse of value to take on the fave.

It's simply one more tool to help make selections for a day.