Why Horseplayers Continue to Struggle

[Eddie W]

Because they think they have a good thing tell everybody about
there program, put there picks online and most of the time lose
because they want there names up in lights, when really they
should be trying to win....With-0ut there names in light

[Charlie D]

Evens money shots win around 54% in UK

Sorry, that should be evens and below.

[Charlie D]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

When you say "there you go again" to me...what does it mean?

When have I EVER gotten into an argument with you?

I would NEVER consider calling your opinion RUBBISH Charlie...because I know nothing about you, or your handicapping prowess.

By calling my opinion "rubbish"...YOU are disrespecting ME. And yet...you spin it around as if it is ME who has insulted YOU!

Nobody in this game has it all figured out...and if you think that even money shots win 54% of the time in the USA...then you have a lot to learn about this game.

Excuse thaskalos, but it's you who seems to have started the BS remarks and it's you who seems to be implying your an expert and know everything with "i've been betting X number of years" .

Anyway, i'm done with you as i've had enough of people who can not debate/discuss topics without resorting to this kind of BS.

People can read the posts and make thier own decisions as to how to approach game.

All te best.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

Excuse thaskalos, but it's you who seems to have started the BS remarks and it's you who seems to be implying your an expert and know everything with "i've been betting X number of years" .

Anyway, i'm done with you as i've had enough people who can not debate without resorting to this kind of BS.

People can read the posts and make thier own decisions as to how to approach game.

Go back and read our posts again...and see who has the more bitter tone.

I was just stating my opinion...you were the one trying to correct me...as if you had this game all figured out.

The only BS remark I made was when you called my opinion "utter rubbish".

Enjoy your night.

[Charlie D]

Is this why you became such an advanced pace handicapper...and "match-up" enthusiast? In order to isolate on the even money shots

The start of your BS thaskalos and you know it.

And with that i'm done


All the best

[DeanT]

Not to get into this brou-haha too much.... but it is an interesting topic in this day and age (IMO).

Charlie is of course arguing that any overlay is an overlay; Thask is arguing that a 3-5 shot might be an overaly in his line, but the risk for the return (i.e. that his line is wrong, and with the changing odds board) does not pay off at low odds.

I agree with both of you of course!

But Thask, I could not agree more that lower odds horses, even if you *think* you are getting an overlay are a mugs game in this century. The computer teams own this part of the market and they set the odds. They are setting the odds with a 10% rebate in most cases. In addition, if a likely obvious horse, with all that perfect information out there (like there is on heavy chalk) is too high, you are probably the sucker.

I often read about "dumb money" when a chalk loses. But that is completely not the case. It might make us feel good when we bet against a heavy chalk like that and win, but the numbers are not on our side.

Take Zenyatta against St. T. She touched 4-5 on the board. There was 20,000 people at the track all wanting to bet Z, but she touched 4-5! One would think she would have been 1-9 with all that "dumb money". Clearly the big computer teams saw a good horse with a good chance to beat her - and the odds line was set accordingly. If we think the 'public ' is setting these lines, we are delusional, imo.

The point being - with low odds horses we are not getting an overlay almost ever, as a weekend warrior or casual bettor. Over time, we get raked to death on those horses, and it is much easier to see a gap in the lines in horses 3-1 to 10-1, so spending time on those looking for overlays is often a very good strategy.

All my opinion. But in this day and age I think it has some merit. It's not like 1970 anymore.

[Charlie D]

Charlie is of course arguing that any overlay is an overlay;

Correct Dean

But Thask, I could not agree more that lower odds horses, even if you *think* you are getting an overlay are a mugs game in this century.

Incorrect thinking Dean inho.


Edit to add

The point being - with low odds horses we are not getting an overlay almost ever,

Incorrect inho Dean, there are plenty of low odds horses going off as overlays and if your not seeing them your methodology probably needs a tweak or two.


All the best.

[Charlie D]

Dean

If i remember correctly QR was 1.37 on my tissue, but heavily bet at lower by some on Betfair.


Were these SHARP MINDS or MUG bettors backing QR iyo???

[DeanT]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

Dean

If i remember correctly QR was 1.37 on my tissue, but heavily bet at lower by some on Betfair.


Were these SHARP MINDS or MUG bettors backing QR iyo???

There are tons of examples we can use, most certainly. If it works long term, it is a good strategy. I would never say anyone can not do it; that would be silly. There are many ways to win at the game.

I am using my personal betting experience and some chatter with other players who play the game with rebated bettors in mind.

I track all my win bets and have for years. I group even money and lower bets, even to 2-1 bets, 2-1 to 3-1 bets, 3-1 to 5-1 bets, 6-1 to 10-1, 10-1 to 20-1 and over 20-1 in a spreadsheet. It is amazing to me to watch the drop off in ROI under 2-1. I have tens of thousands of bets and it is clear as day.

So I asked Dave S and a few other players about it. The answer was "that is common", because the low end of the odds board is more perfectly accurate than the higher ends, and you are battling people who are getting 10 points back and betting huge money, down to fair. So, in effect, competing there is a crowded house, where I am taking a knife to a gun fight.

That is for me; if others are doing great with premier capping and selective plays or whatever, then great.

I often long for my old pal Dan G as we would get into chats here about racing, and respect people who were doing something (even show bettors or super-exotic players etc) that some of us were not, and doing well at it. We have strong opines as players that usually ends up with "if we can not do it, no one can". I take the opine that "there are plenty of ways to skin a cat in racing, and if you are doing something I am not and succeeding; well good for you!"

For me, this is a non-starter, and my data over years proves it. If someone else is betting 1-2 shots and showing long term ROI, I simply tip my cap, because in my opinion, it is very hard to do.

[Charlie D]

There are tons of examples we can use, most certainly. If it works long term, it is a good strategy. I would never say anyone can not do it; that would be silly. There are many ways to win at the game.

And now, i'm totally confused by and not uderstanding why you made this statement Dean

I could not agree more that lower odds horses, even if you *think* you are getting an overlay are a mugs game in this century

[Charlie D]

So I asked Dave S and a few other players about it. The answer was "that is common", because the low end of the odds board is more perfectly accurate than the higher ends, and you are battling people who are getting 10 points back and betting huge money, down to fair. So, in effect, competing there is a crowded house, where I am taking a knife to a gun fight.

Dean

If these dudes were so smart at forecasting would not the result be a higher % of winning favs than now?? Also, if these dudes are so smart, would not the rest be wasting thier time, as what we would probably see is 1-10 winner after 1-10 instead of evens winner , 3-2 , 2-1winners etc


KISS thinking Dean.

[Dave Schwartz]

If these dudes were so smart at forecasting would not the result be a higher % of winning favs than now??

Actually, the favorites' win percentage has gone up a little - almost 3 points.

And that's a lot, considering they see the world similarly to you and me.


Actually, Charlie, I agree with you. I see my "overlayed" odds-on horses showing a profit. albeit a very small one. I have a client who uses a strictly trainer-based approach. (He is unique in the availability of this approach in our software.) Essentially, he looks for a trainer that is "all go-signs" in a race with no other trainers being "all go."

His experience is 54% winners, with an average mutuel that nets him about 3%. On a typical card he will get a little over one bet. (There is no line involved.)

Having the system in front of me (an advantage of being the programmer) I tested several days of races. The sample I tested hit precisely 54% winners and showed a 1% edge. I am confident that had I continued the test I would see the 3% he described simply because this man has been a professional for so long.


But, like Dean, I also agree with Thaskalos. Imagine this player, wagering $500 per race, with (say) 20 bets per day. He lays out $10,000 to net $300. Now, I can see that as a great, consistent investment, but in order to feel that way you really need to be able to pop for $500 a horse. Somehow at $50 per horse ($30 daily profit) it feels like a waste of time.


I really liken this example to commercial fishing boats. Do you want to catch marlin or minnows? Or perhaps a more appropriate analogy would be to say that there are just some fish that aren't worth catching because of their size. Despite that, somebody, somewhere is making a living from small fish.


BTW, when it comes to whales, they typically do not make money when the low favorites come in. That means that all/most of the whales agreed, making it impossible for any of them to make money in the race.



I have advocated dutching as a viable approach for a long time. My usual approach was to play multiple horses, netting even-money or better. Obviously, my hit rate was high.

One day I was looking at a race that had a 2/5 favorite in the race that I did not like. As I structured my bet - probably 4 horses that would net me maybe 6/5 - I suddenly had an epiphany: This 2/5 favorite looks bad, but how bad can he be? If I figure him to be a $1.60 $net (i.e. -20% bet) and that is very bad for an odds-on horse, he still wins 57% of the time!

Where does that leave me trying to win money netting 6/5? I've got to win 45% just to be even and, if the favorite is going to win 57% there is only 43% left! (Not to mention that the horses I don't bet are certainly going to win some percentage of the time.)


My point is that there are certainly races where the low-priced, bad bet makes the rest of the race unplayable simply because they will win too often to fit your particular strategy. Yes, you can certainly have a different strategy, but many people find it simpler to just move their fishing boat to a different part of the ocean.


Just my opinion.

Dave

[DeanT]

Dave,

What would you recommend for a weekend warrior or newer player who wants to play win only?

Is it futile, with late odds changes, and no rebate to give them some direction to win long term. Or is there a spot you would recommend?

I, from chatting with many of you and with my own opinion, would recommend the 3-1 to 7-1 ranges, with a field size of 8 or more. Simple reason: A little better chance at finding an overlay, and the hit rate would be high enough to keep you sane.

I wonder, in the absence of dutching, or building a trading plan on an exchange or other fixed odds mechanism, what you would recommend.

D

[Charlie D]

But, like Dean, I also agree with Thaskalos. Imagine this player, wagering $500 per race, with (say) 20 bets per day. He lays out $10,000 to net $300. Now, I can see that as a great, consistent investment, but in order to feel that way you really need to be able to pop for $500 a horse. Somehow at $50 per horse ($30 daily profit) it feels like a waste of time.

Dave, but making money is not a waste on time though is it?? If we multiply that $30 daily profit by 365 days, you've got a nice little earner going on have you not??

[Charlie D]

As you know we are probably not going to win everyday, but if you profit from this strategy to the tune of say 3/4/5K over a year you've not wasted your time, in fact, you are WINNER unlike the majority out there in betting land.

You can use this profit to increase stakes and if you continue in a similar vien, you'll be the next guy betting $500 a race that Dave mentioned.