Comprehensive Odds Line That Rocks

[john messina]

Although I'm a new member to the forum I've enjoyed reading the many posts on Odds Lines and value. My intent in this post is not to argue to the accuarcy or the effectiveness of such lines. However, I will present a comprehensive odds line that does the unthinkable with extremely good accuaracy. I use the term good because I'm not here to boast.

A little about myself. John Messina is not my real name. I have nothing to sell, since I make my living from wagering. I bet primarily exacts, trifectas, and superfectas and quite successfully for many years.

The odds line, I will present is comprehensive, because it provides odds for the win, win-place, win-place-show, place and show as well as a dark horse when it shows itself.

Since, I'd rather keep private my actual website. I have created a simple website on a free server just to present to you the oddsline for several tracks.

Now, for some definitions:

PN -> Program Number
W -> Win Odds
W-P -> Win-Place Odds
W-P-S -> Win-Place-Odds
P -> Place Odds
S -> Show Odds
Dark Horse -> Horse to fear at any odds ( great key horse)

I propose no actual betting constructs, because that is not the intent. However, any experienced play can construct their own bets.

Now, why am I doing this?

Answer is fairly simple. There is so much misinformation about odds line and how to create them.

Factors that went into creating this odds line:

Pace NO!
Recency NO!
Trainers and jockeys NO!
Past Track Odds NO!
Morning Line Odds NO!
Speed Ratings NO! Not as you know them to be defined
Betting Pools NO!
Class NO!
Mathematical Equations Like Harville NO!
Breeding/Pedigree NO!
Post Position NO!
Surface NO!
Distance Changes NO!

Here's the link to the webpage for your viewing.

http://optimusracingnetwork.netfirms.com (http://optimusracingnetwork.netfirms.com/)

If you're interested in any track running today. Post it and I'll post the Oddsline on the webpage.

Instead of me going on and on about the oddsline, take a look and provide me with some feedback. I'm certain you'll be impressed.

[john messina]

Castlinghigh... will do.

Any other tracks? I will accomodate.

[vanilla]

I would appreciate seeing Gulfstream.

vanilla

[GaryG]

Factors that went into creating this odds line:

Pace NO!
Recency NO!
Trainers and jockeys NO!
Past Track Odds NO!
Morning Line Odds NO!
Speed Ratings NO! Not as you know them to be defined
Betting Pools NO!
Class NO!
Mathematical Equations Like Harville NO!
Breeding/Pedigree NO!
Post Position NO!
Surface NO!
Distance Changes NO!
So.....what are these odds based on?

[kenwoodallpromos]

"I will present a comprehensive odds line that does the unthinkable with extremely good accuaracy.>
I checked your website for several tracks and was blown away by the accuracy of the longest 1 or more shots in the race, which lists the odds as "99"! One race has 2 low-odds horse and several others all at 99-1!

[Dave Schwartz]

WIth all due respect, these appear to be "picks" rather than an "odds line."


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[john messina]

Withn all due respect, how do you come to that conclusion.

Add up the probabilities and they add up to one.
Of except when there are first time starters.

[Dave Schwartz]

So, if I took the 99-1 shots and added up there actual wins I would find that they win about 1% of the time?

[john messina]

My answer may seem dismissive, but here it is:

You're more interested in validating the tail end of a sample derived probability curve, instead of concentrating on the top end where the data is much more valid. In other words you're more concerned with noise than the actual signal.

What value does knowing if a 99 -1 shot actually wins at the rate of 1%.
Are you going to bet on that 99-1 shot. I don't think so. Plus the sensitivity at that end of the odds scale is so large, an odds assignment is nearly meaningless.

Sorry buddy, but I'm not one to tackle on the question of probability or statistics.

Get out of noise and get into the area where the signal to noise ratio is high.

[shamrock]

:ThmbUp: good pickin on your dark horses.

[GaryG]

Get out of noise and get into the area where the signal to noise ratio is high.I will have to use this line some time....:lol:

[Dave Schwartz]

While I must respectfully disagree with your definition of "comprehensive odds line," I can certainly recognize your intention.


I wish you well in your endeavors.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[DanG]

While I must respectfully disagree with your definition of "comprehensive odds line," I can certainly recognize your intention.

I wish you well in your endeavors.

Regards,
Dave Schwartz
That’s called taking the high road… :ThmbUp:

http://www.ovi.ch/b377/articles/carpet/highRoad.jpg

[GaryG]

While I must respectfully disagree with your definition of "comprehensive odds line," I can certainly recognize your intention.


I wish you well in your endeavors.


Regards,
Dave SchwartzDave, this sounds like a letter of rejection from a prospective employer.....

[john messina]

Gary, I agree. I didn't know I was seeking employment. Rejected before seeking.

Dave, I play "with intentions". I wager with real money... and fortunately I get paid with real money.

But hey... we can disagree. However, disagreement doesn't explain why you question an odds line that is visible to anyone to look at and call it anything but an odds line. Oh, I see it doen't fit your definition.

Dave, good luck in your endeavors. I'll keep cashing in.

Let's just be friends.

[kenwoodallpromos]

No problem- I just like to bet multiple longshots in certain races so I was checking that end out. And since your original post touted your accuracy I decided to check out your link. Now that you post the line- "the top end where the data is much more valid." that seems more like morning linemakers do on the back end, I wil leave you alone!

[pandy]

Withn all due respect, how do you come to that conclusion.

Add up the probabilities and they add up to one.
Of except when there are first time starters.


I don't get it John. Special Format looked pretty good today at Aqueduct and he won by 7 lengths at 6-5, your line has him at 99-1. I bet TELLITO-EM and he won at 4-1, your line has him at 99-1. How is that a probability line?

[john messina]

Hey,

Are you the Pady from PA that had a large database and allowed people to run their "systems" through it?

[pandy]

Hey,

Are you the Pady from PA that had a large database and allowed people to run their "systems" through it?


No

[Cheap Speed]

How many factors are you using to make your line?

[john messina]

ONE!

[ryesteve]

ONE!
Then doesn't that make your odds line the opposite of "comprehensive"?

[john messina]

Ryesteve,

An excellent question. It deserves a serious answer. Firstly, comprehensive in the fact that I generate odds for place and show. As you probably know, it is much more difficult to produce an odds line for horses to finish second or third. It isn't automatic that a horse with low odds will necessarily carry those odds over to secod, third or fourth place finishes. The dynamics are not that simple.

Secondly, comprehensive in the sense that because of the place and show odds line, I have an odds line for exactas, trifectas, and superfectas. And it is this area that I excell.

If you notice, I didn't suggest a specific wagering strategy. However, if you study the odds line, you can se how bets would be constructed. And then choose to wager on the profitable combinations.

You can make win bets, place bets, show bets or any type of bet. The oddsline will guide for any bet you choose to make. The real advantage I have with the oddsline is knowing which horses to place in the second, third and fourth slot.... know when to key as well as part wheel or simply make some large straight bets.

Lastly, although I use ONLY 1 factor the computation requirements are extensive.

Regards,
John

P.S. I've been cleaning up at Charlestown tonight. Take a moment and look at the Charlestown Line. I'm sure you can see why I'm doing quite week. Ealier I was asked "How can I have several 99-1 shots in the same race". Actually the answer is very simple. I have chosen to deal with the 2.5 sigma case. It isn't critical to know if the horse is 79-1 or 80-1 or any similar odds. The noise at that odds level is too high to get an accurate rating. The probability of all the independent win, place, and show probabilities add up to one as expected (WOW just crushed the exacta, trifecta and superfecta at Charletown 9th race... go to the odds line and see how I did it). And then explain it to me.

[njcurveball]

WOW just crushed the exacta, trifecta and superfecta at Charletown 9th race... go to the odds line and see how I did it). And then explain it to me.

I certainly could not explain it, if I were using your odds line. I have copied it below.

#10 was scratched, which made #9 an incredible win standout. If the horse was 1-2 in real odds and a 5-2 scratched, it would be 1-9. Which gives it a 90%+ chance of winning if your odds are correct. I also see 0.1 for place, and 0.1 for show.

So HOW would I structure a bet leaving this horse out if I trust this line?


PN W PN W-P PN W-P-S PN W PN P PN S
-- - -- --- -- ----- -- - -- - -- -
9 0.5 9 0.1 9 0.1 9 0.5 10 1.3 5 4.2

10 2.7 10 0.4 10 0.2 10 2.7 9 3.6 2 4.6

3 61.5 3 8.9 5 2.5 3 61.5 3 10.7 3 5.3

2 71.1 2 9.4 2 2.7 2 71.1 5 11.0 4 6.2

5 81.4 5 9.5 3 2.8 5 81.4 2 11.2 10 6.8

8 99 8 25.8 4 4.7 8 99 4 28.4 9 16.8

4 99 4 26.0 8 11.0 4 99 8 32.9 7 18.7

1 99 1 49.3 1 13.4 1 99 1 54.4 1 19.1

7 99 7 62.6 7 14.0 7 99 7 65.4 8 20.7

6 99 6 99 6 99 6 99 6 99 6 99

[john messina]

Yes, the 10 scratched. So, you assume that his probability weight goes to the first choice. How do you make this assumption? I'll answer it. You are thinking linearly. If A is good , and B is ok, then if B scratches A is better. That isn't necessarily so. For example, if you were performing a Monte Carlo simulation on A B and others, you would have to re-analyze the match ups. You have no means to apportion probability to only A. However, you can say that the 2 and the 5 horse will improve their place and show odds.

We already know that the 9 is an overlay. But I also know that it is more difficult to assign odds for place and show(it is much more difficult to place exactly 2nd or 3rd... the real overlay is in the show and place position for the 2, 3 and 5.

I knew this in advance and alerted you to this fact.... look at the bottom of the odds line. ( Dark horses : 2 Northern Alert and 5 Trooping The Color).

The 9 horse is not the only overlay in the race. Often I don't even bet the short price overlay in the top spot in my bets. Unless it's at "decent" odds.
Not all overlays are equal.

All the odds are interconnected (dependent).

Someone made the comment earlier that oddline is not a "true oddsline", but a selection method. Can you understand how hilarious that statement is. Of course an odds line is a section method. Why else generate one!

Stop thinking of overlays existing only in the win slot. There are place and show overlays. That is what I'm geberating with the Oddsline. Look at todays Gulfstream Park Oddsline and some of the other cards I've posted and what I'm saying may become clearer to you.

Thank you for the interest and question. I hope I've made things clearer for you.

[john messina]

Excuse the spelling errors. It's been a long day.

[PaceAdvantage]

OK, so, any of the long time members of this board check out this "Comprehensive Odds Line?" I'm only interested in responses from folks who have more than 20 posts to their name....

[andicap]

When a horse is 10-1 in the "Place" odds line, what does that mean if you are betting on the race? Surely not that I should bet the horse to place if i can get more than 10-1 -- I figure some kind of clue on what to do in exotics, maybe?

Is it more the order of the horses in their respective (WPS) odds line that matter? I mean how could I tell by looking at that odds line in W,p,S that the 2 and 5 were overlays other than looking at your "Dark Horses?"

And how do I interpret the WP and WPS lines from the three lines discretely?

And if the odds line can change radically with the scratch of a top horse that doesn't help people who wouldn't know how you adjust it.

[njcurveball]

Often I don't even bet the short price overlay in the top spot in my bets. Unless it's at "decent" odds.
.

I think you know Yogi right? This was a good one! :lol:

[kenwoodallpromos]

9th works; 10th says "Webpage not found".
" PN W PN W-P PN W-P-S PN W PN P PN S
-- - -- --- -- ----- -- - -- - -- -
5 1.7 5 0.6 5 0.3 5 1.7 3 2.7 4 2.8

6 2.6 6 1.3 3 0.5 6 2.6 5 3.1 3 2.9

3 5.1 3 1.3 6 0.8 3 5.1 4 4.0 5 5.1
__________________
I'm wondering why the numbers go up then down on the #6 WPS, but go down then up on the WPS for the #4 horse (AQ 9th, 1st race). Thanks!

[john messina]

When a horse is 10-1 in the "Place" odds line, what does that mean if you are betting on the race? Surely not that I should bet the horse to place if i can get more than 10-1 -- I figure some kind of clue on what to do in exotics, maybe?

Is it more the order of the horses in their respective (WPS) odds line that matter? I mean how could I tell by looking at that odds line in W,p,S that the 2 and 5 were overlays other than looking at your "Dark Horses?"

And how do I interpret the WP and WPS lines from the three lines discretely?

And if the odds line can change radically with the scratch of a top horse that doesn't help people who wouldn't know how you adjust it.

When a horse is 10-1 in the "Place" odds line, what does that mean if you are betting on the race? Surely not that I should bet the horse to place if i can get more than 10-1 -- I figure some kind of clue on what to do in exotics, maybe?





If you have the odds of 10-1 in the “place” odds doesn’t mean you will get 10-1 payoff for place. It can’t be determined. But it does mean that you’ll know what the fair odds for an exacta “should” be. Let’s deal in probability terms instead of odds. What it means is that an exacta combination of horse X win odds and our 10-1 place odds horse should pay equivalent to their win, place probability…exacta probability equals win probability times the place probability.



Let me regress a bit with a simple exercise.



Let’s assume I have an X factor, which truly represents a horse’s inherit ability. This X factor is not a constant. And I can determine such a factor for each (obviously first time starters not included) horse. Now, let’s say that I can represent this X factor statistically by 2 numbers: the mean and standard for each horse entered in a race. Now, I can randomly sample from each horse’s distribution (Monte Carlo Simulation) and determine the number of times each horse, wins, place, shows or finishes fourth. At the conclusion of the exercise, I have a probability for each horse in the win, place, show and fourth slot. And the probabilities are independent for each slot(win, place, etc).



I’ll answer your second question later. At the moment I’m hectically placing bets.



BTW I just crushed the 2nd at Gulstream

[john messina]

9th works; 10th says "Webpage not found".
" PN W PN W-P PN W-P-S PN W PN P PN S
-- - -- --- -- ----- -- - -- - -- -
5 1.7 5 0.6 5 0.3 5 1.7 3 2.7 4 2.8

6 2.6 6 1.3 3 0.5 6 2.6 5 3.1 3 2.9

3 5.1 3 1.3 6 0.8 3 5.1 4 4.0 5 5.1
__________________
I'm wondering why the numbers go up then down on the #6 WPS, but go down then up on the WPS for the #4 horse (AQ 9th, 1st race). Thanks!

Firstly, the Aueduct 10th is up... my fault I was waiting for the scratches.

WP -> The odds of finishing 1st or 2nd
WPS -> The odds of finishing 1st, 2nd or 3rd

What it means is that the 6 has a higher probability of finishing 1st or 2nd then he has of finishing 1st, 2nd or 3rd.

And the 4 has a higher probability of finishing 1st, 2nd or 3rd then has of finishing 1st or 2nd.

For example, if were betting a box key trifecta and had to choose between the 4 and the 6, I would choose the 4.

I hope this answers your question.

[john messina]

I think you know Yogi right? This was a good one! :lol:

LOL ..That is a Yogism. However, in context I was referring to the exotics.

[john messina]

When a horse is 10-1 in the "Place" odds line, what does that mean if you are betting on the race? Surely not that I should bet the horse to place if i can get more than 10-1.

Andicap, after reading your post again. I realized that your reading of the place column is incorrect. The 10-1 odds you are referring to are the horses win odds.
That is not what the Place Column represents. The 10-1 odds would be the odds of the horse running second. 10-1 to finish exactly in the second slot.

[john messina]

Is it more the order of the horses in their respective (WPS) odds line that matter? I mean how could I tell by looking at that odds line in W,p,S that the 2 and 5 were overlays other than looking at your "Dark Horses?"

Sorry, I'm not at liberty to explain Dark Horse determination. Although, I will continue to list them.

The WPS odds matter greatly. It denotes the odds for each horse placing in the money. Great for boxing, and wheeling. The WPS odds are derived from the individual W, P, S odds. Here's an insight. The LIVE horses especially longshots will be found in the S column. Why? I'll leave it to you to ponder.
The longer the race the more significance the S column has. Turf races at any distance over 6.5 furlongs... even greater significance.

And how do I interpret the WP and WPS lines from the three lines discretely?

And if the odds line can change radically with the scratch of a top horse that doesn't help people who wouldn't know how you adjust it.

You're correct. I can't help you will that. Except to update the line. However, with experience one could make some educated guesses and adjust.