Bad EW multiples

Your wrong about the paper punter, I do put it down.
Value lies in the eye of the beholder; to spend 2 hours studying form and then conclude a horse could easily get third after already concluding that the first and second favourite's were bound to finish in the money, is not. Especially when you then caveat other reasoning's with "as long as it was trying" and "is likely to be hidden". How big a price do you settle for with such guess work?
 
Maxbet said:
Your wrong about the paper punter, I do put it down.
Value lies in the eye of the beholder; to spend 2 hours studying form and then conclude a horse could easily get third after already concluding that the first and second favourite's were bound to finish in the money, is not. Especially when you then caveat other reasoning's with "as long as it was trying" and "is likely to be hidden". How big a price do you settle for with such guess work?
Click to expand...

You're clueless on bad e/w mate. Happyaslarry's bets are incredibly smart.
 
Dear Slim,

Please don’t take offence at how I express my thoughts. I use many tools and schemes in an effort to profit from this game. One of them is to be inquisitive, and I do this using a tool I have learned from my work; that of practical problem solving. It requires a lot of lateral thinking, even tackling problems backwards. Like most threads on racing forums, disagreement usually deteriorates into a slagging match and moves completely away from the subject, largely because ego’s are at play.

I hold my hands up and admit that I have been guilty of this in the past. These days I try to be careful not to be offend and limit facetiousness. I always attempt to calculate, and give a credible argument, and equally value being proven wrong. I entered the debate by offering an opinion, along with a few calculations.

But without enlightening me, or disproving my reasoning; you just bombed me out,......“You clearly don't understand bad e/w. I shan't be educating you.”

Then along comes Happy Larry with just such an example that he so happened to do that very day. He gave his twist on the subject which in my opinion only opened up more conjecture.

Once again I attempted to prove, in my opinion; that I don’t see the same values. Your reply,..... “You made a point about playing place only doubles and trebles on the exchange’s which suggests to me you don't understand the math’s in bad e/w.”

One of the points that I made, or intimated, was that due to the Very long odds-on in the said Cheltenham races, was the odds on the other runners wont diminish much, and that nearer the time would be a cleverer way to play. You just singled out the Exchanges and offered no elaboration.

To discuss subjects in this manner is like waving a bone at a dog but not letting him have it, it also comes across as one-upmanship, and would surely be better to keep quiet if you don’t want to reveal.

A far cry from the excellently written thread you started “The Will Win”. The irony here is you opened with; “Post Winners that are absolute max bet material”. So Maxbet did just that, and at the risk of ridicule, or getting told to "get off your thread", had the balls to post a 16/1 shot, won 13/2 an hour later. Another irony is that I have that very same horse in many e/w doubles on the handicaps at the festival.

I’d finish with and thank you in advance; if you would enlighten me, I’m absolutely certain you have the rhetoric.

Regards Maxbet.
 
Last edited:
Slim, I can account for Max's creds. He's very far from a chancer. I can assure you, despite a disagreement in overall terms between the two of you, he's one of the very few that makes the game pay.
 
Maxbet said:
Dear Slim,

Please don’t take offence at how I express my thoughts. I use many tools and schemes in an effort to profit from this game. One of them is to be inquisitive, and I do this using a tool I have learned from my work; that of practical problem solving. It requires a lot of lateral thinking, even tackling problems backwards. Like most threads on racing forums, disagreement usually deteriorates into a slagging match and moves completely away from the subject, largely because ego’s are at play.

I hold my hands up and admit that I have been guilty of this in the past. These days I try to be careful not to be offend and limit facetiousness. I always attempt to calculate, and give a credible argument, and equally value being proven wrong. I entered the debate by offering an opinion, along with a few calculations.

But without enlightening me, or disproving my reasoning; you just bombed me out,......“You clearly don't understand bad e/w. I shan't be educating you.”

Then along comes Happy Larry with just such an example that he so happened to do that very day. He gave his twist on the subject which in my opinion only opened up more conjecture.

Once again I attempted to prove, in my opinion; that I don’t see the same values. Your reply,..... “You made a point about playing place only doubles and trebles on the exchange’s which suggests to me you don't understand the math’s in bad e/w.”

One of the points that I made, or intimated, was that due to the Very long odds-on in the said Cheltenham races, was the odds on the other runners wont diminish much, and that nearer the time would be a cleverer way to play. You just singled out the Exchanges and offered no elaboration.

To discuss subjects in this manner is like waving a bone at a dog but not letting him have it, it also comes across as one-upmanship, and would surely be better to keep quiet if you don’t want to reveal.

A far cry from the excellently written thread you started “The Will Win”. The irony here is you opened with; “Post Winners that are absolute max bet material”. So Maxbet did just that, and at the risk of ridicule, or getting told to "get off your thread", had the balls to post a 16/1 shot, won 13/2 an hour later. Another irony is that I have that very same horse in many e/w doubles on the handicaps at the festival.

I’d finish with and thank you in advance; if you would enlighten me, I’m absolutely certain you have the rhetoric.

Regards Maxbet.
Click to expand...

I don't read essays but in this instance I've made an exception. My problem is you're lecturing on e/w betting and making some glaringly novice mistakes/assumptions. I used to make the same assumptions around 15 years ago, the worst one being calculating the value of an each way bet from the total outlay. You also referenced place only multiples being better value. In 99% of cases this will be mathematically wrong, something that can't be argued one way or the other. If you go to page 72 of the original will win thread I posted a number of bad e/w bets on sports something the average punter is incapable of seeing the value in.

In terms of Cheltenham this year I have clearly outlined the reasons I currently have nothing in play on the projected bad e/w races because I currently don't see the risk reward being any greater than the value that will be available on the day when getting bets on will take minimal effort due to the strength of the market.

If you have any particular point you would want me to flesh out than please ask but there is no way I'll come around to your side of the argument because the facts are with me.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top