TOTE BOARD ANALYSIS_ VALUED PLAYS

[formula_2002]

here is how the winner of gg r9 ststs looked

$1 return =$3.56
% of pool bet = 27%
estimated $1 return = $3.65

play was a .98 underlay (1.00) is breakeven

[formula_2002]

so far 10 posted races, $10 bet, returned $10.78 for a 1.08 roi
, 4 winners

however I down loaded 15 races today 9 won $1 returned $26.27 for a 1.75 roi

for the last few days, I was attempting to see how dutch betting results compared to normalized proportional odds bet. Not only did I find they are similar, I also came upon a method of tote board analysis that looks good enough to follow up on.

Using this method, I selected the data base containing the 10-12-2016 races.
18 races, 7 wins a 1.40 roi

todays plays are based on that same method

currently I'm playing 3 horses per race, however i'll review what happens when I bet at least those horses whose probability approach say 50% minimum

[formula_2002]

dd r5

[formula_2002]

that last bet represented 29% of the pool and lost.
there were two others that could have qualified. the total probability of those five amounted to 47%
the winner #6 was on of them
bet size on that horse would be .14 normalized to .14/.47 = .30

the $1 track payout on the #6 was $7.2
7.2 x .30 = $2.16. the total normalized bet always=1.00
therefore a play on those 5 horses in a 9 horse field returned a 2.16 roi
the expected roi was 1/.47 = 2.12

got it?

[formula_2002]

i'M CLOSING OUT THIS THREAD AND WILL START ANOTHER THREAD, SOMETHING LIKE "TOTE BOARD ANALYSIS USING MULTI NORMALIZED PROPORTIONAL ODD BET SIZES.


HERE ARE THE FINAL RESULTS FOR THIS THREADS COMPARISON BET SIZE PERFORMANCE.

[formula_2002]

testing new look

"SAF Fairview
 Race
2

 Post
7:25

 MTP
2

 $1 Exacta Pool
$3,106 "	
PGNO	% bet
1	0.35
2	0.23

[formula_2002]

testing new look

#11,the 3rd choice won. bet size would have been .32
it paid $4.90 on the dollar

.32 x 4.90 = 1.58 return a $1 bet

the top three represented 61% of the pool
therefore,, min $1 ret = 1/.61= 1.63

actual return/expected return = 1.58/1.61 = .98, an underlay, but still beat the track out (say 17%) by about 118%

ps the posted program numbers are incorrect, it should read 10 and 4. I've corrected that

[formula_2002]

field size	13
"SAF Fairview
 Race
3

 Post
8:00

 MTP
2

 $1 Exacta Pool
$4,101 "	
PGNO	% bet
5	0.42
13	0.24
2	0.34

[formula_2002]

testing new look

#2,the 3rd choice won. bet size was.34
it paid $6.30 on the dollar

.34 x 6.30 = 2.14 return a $1 bet

the top three represented 22% of the pool
therefore,, min $1 ret = 1/.22= 4.54

actual return/expected return = 2.14/4.54 = .47, an underlay

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

testing new look

#2,the 3rd choice won. bet size was.34
it paid $6.30 on the dollar

.34 x 6.30 = 2.14 return a $1 bet

the top three represented 22% of the pool
therefore,, min $1 ret = 1/.22= 4.54

actual return/expected return = 2.14/4.54 = .47, an underlay

I need to look at the final track odds to determine how much my plays were an over lay or under lay. I'll include that information my results file, the following day.
in this case, based on the appox final odds, the play covered 37% of the true pool. that would make the min $1 return about $2.67

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

here is how the winner of gg r9 ststs looked

$1 return =$3.56

when compared to the final odds, this was a very large overlay.
a $1 return was $3.56
to break even it had to be $2.75
therefore it was a 3.56/2.75 = 129% overlay

[formula_2002]

					
	"SANTA ANITA PARK
 Race
2

 Post
3:00

 MTP
2

 $1 Exacta Pool
$354,786 "				
	RANK		1	2	3
	PGNO		12	4	2
	BET SIZE	0.72	0.15	0.13
	BET SUM		0.72	0.87	1.00
	NUMBER OF BETTING INTEREST			12	
	ESTIMATED  BET %	26.21%