Value Betting line development

[Frankie D]

How would one study effective betting line creation.

My play gives anywhere from 1 to 5 horses each race, one of which is picked to win based on relative strength. Works well.

What I now need to do is create a betting line to ensure I am always going for value - an overlay.

1. Do I just base it on my contenders? (I am pretty confidant on my non-contenders tossed out.

2. Is it just an estimation, MY estimation, based on the relative strength as my handicapping indicates? Would 10 different people come up with 10 different estimations of a value betting line?

3. Are there some really authoritative books or writings of betting value line? Maybe Pizzola or Cramer? Any software that does this, or is this just the programmers estimation based on his handicapping

4. Any shortcuts that get you the same results?

I have been trying to find a way to bet on overlays all the time... your ideas welcome and THANKS.

[jay68802]

Convert your odds on every horse to percentages, after all the odds have been converted to percentages, then add them all together. They should come to 100 + or - a couple of points. Add take out to the total, divide 100 by the sum of the odds percentages + take out.

Example.

Your odds line for the race is 102%. The take out is 18%. total is 120%. 100 / 120 = .83%

Now divide your odds for each horse by .83 and that should be your value line.

[headhawg]

2. Is it just an estimation, MY estimation, based on the relative strength as my handicapping indicates? Would 10 different people come up with 10 different estimations of a value betting line?

3. Are there some really authoritative books or writings of betting value line? Maybe Pizzola or Cramer? Any software that does this, or is this just the programmers estimation based on his handicappingFor #2? Probably yes if we're talking about assigning odds to contenders. Definitely yes if it has to be done for all of the horses in a race.

For #3? If you haven't read Steve Fierro's The Four Quarters of Horse Investing then I suggest you do. Then try assigning odds based on his templates. It's harder than it seems. After that you have to track your odds assignments with actual win percentages. Do your 2-1s win 33% of the time? Do your 4-1s win 20% of the time? Do your 6-5s come in at 45%? You get the picture. If they don't, how can you bet overlays when there's no way of knowing if you have one?

And it just gets more difficult as the odds increase. There's less than a 2% difference between a horse at 6-1 and 7-1. Is your handicapping prowess and fair odds assignment good enough to differentiate the 2%?

[Frankie D]

For #2? Probably yes if we're talking about assigning odds to contenders. Definitely yes if it has to be done for all of the horses in a race.

For #3? If you haven't read Steve Fierro's The Four Quarters of Horse Investing then I suggest you do. Then try assigning odds based on his templates. It's harder than it seems. After that you have to track your odds assignments with actual win percentages. Do your 2-1s win 33% of the time? Do your 4-1s win 20% of the time? Do your 6-5s come in at 45%? You get the picture. If they don't, how can you bet overlays when there's no way of knowing if you have one?

And it just gets more difficult as the odds increase. There's less than a 2% difference between a horse at 6-1 and 7-1. Is your handicapping prowess and fair odds assignment good enough to differentiate the 2%?


Thanks HH. I believe I will try to find the Fierro book. A template system that you learn t o fit sounds like a good idea.. Could be simple when you learn it and get reliable.

I will need to break down race type, relative strength of the remaining contenders after selection, and follow with fitting of the template.

Review race, and repeat

BTW, I didn't even notice the 4 page thread on this subject when I posted. Duh!

Thanks you guys!

[CincyHorseplayer]

Frank good to hear from you brother! My only suggestion is to not get carried away with value. Don't bet marginal contenders because their odds are big. They don't win often enough to justify it. My top contenders win about 55% of the time. My marginal contenders win about 30% of the time. If you are picking and choosing the latter group is a tough nut. Only bet the best horses in the race at odds you like or pass. Personally I am getting greedy in m old age. I want multiple outcomes with at least 6-1 in return. Or I will just sit here like a lump and not bet!

[Prof.Factor]

Frank good to hear from you brother! My only suggestion is to not get carried away with value. Don't bet marginal contenders because their odds are big. They don't win often enough to justify it. My top contenders win about 55% of the time. My marginal contenders win about 30% of the time. If you are picking and choosing the latter group is a tough nut. Only bet the best horses in the race at odds you like or pass. Personally I am getting greedy in m old age. I want multiple outcomes with at least 6-1 in return. Or I will just sit here like a lump and not bet!

I'm just the opposite .... I play mostly bombs, and if I'm doing good they'll hit 8% of the time. IF! ... LOL

[Frankie D]

I'm just the opposite .... I play mostly bombs, and if I'm doing good they'll hit 8% of the time. IF! ... LOL

at what odds do you define bombs? obviously there is a lower limit, but is there an upper limit applied?