Is there any value left?

[EC1]

Using traditional value seeking where a punter makes his own tissue and then looks at which horses are have bigger odds than his assessment - is it possible now that this is still a valid approach?

I ask this because we regularly see on betfair that horses drift to double their odds and lose. Some drifters do win of course, I don't know about you guys, but when I see a reasonable drift now I mentally cross it off...not through any sort of logic..its like I have been programmed to believe the horse is a non tryer..most probably.

Obviously the above method of striving for value is not everyones way of doing it...most people just check there balance at the end of the year..if its in profit..they have been getting value..if its in loss then they haven't.

The game is very transparent now in regards to which horses are "trying" or "not trying"..or so it appears

So the horse you believe to be a value price today..is only that if it is "trying" is it not?

 

[Colin Phillips]

I think to some extent that has always been the case.

Even before the exchanges if you saw a horse at double the odds you expected didn't you ask yourself the question.......why?

 

[EC1]

I don't really mean the big drifters....lets say you fancy a horse..think its value at 4/1..in the last 5 minutes it drifts to 6/1..it now looks super value to you...but is it really?

it seems to me that the first answer to the problem is a straight 50/50 decision about a horse..is it trying or not?

if its not..then all the form study in the world won't swing you into profit...the horse could 12/1..you think its a 4/1 shot..massive value...when in fact its exactly the opposite because the horse is not there to win...the big price is partly telling you that....I know..all drifters don't lose..but it never seems a good thing.

its this quandry that is a big issue to anyone punting

yes..its probably not different to how it used to be..but when you are watching betfair these days you notice it more.

do you all think that horses are either "trying" or "not trying"...is this thinking a fallacy?

 

[Desert Orchid]

I think the early betfair signs tell enough of a story. There were a couple I fancied lately which were ominously weak at Betfair, enough for me not to back them. They duly ran down the park. I like to get my bets on quite early, usually before 10.30am so when they're that weak that early it's usually quite significant.

 

[EC1]

its not just me then that thinks the signs on Betfair are pretty telling

this seems to show that form study to a degree is pretty irrelevant

maybe it should be..are they trying study

 

[Warbler]

It's something that Segal has been lamenting (which is possibly ironic given that pricewise routinely kills value) but that would be disingenious as Pricewise clearly serves a function beyond day to day gambling. The effects of the exchanges can probably be seen best of all in the performance of the ubiquitos "favourites" in these tipping competitions/ napsters tables. For years the 'top course jockey', 'top course trainer' or 'favourite' used to run well down the league table, in recent years however, the favourite has been comprehensively out-performing many of the tipsters and journalists whose job it is to know these things. This has to be down to the impact of betting exchanges ensuring that many more 'proper' favourites are being sent off as favourites. Segal would maintain that it's another reason 'not to go racing' as on-course bookies have had their job made much easier by simply logging in and seeing where the money is going and how a market is forming and rather than pricing up themselves with the attendant risk of getting one wrong, they simply use the exchange to mark their card. When you add in their lousy e/w terms (not to mention of costs of travel and entrance) then we might be going back over old ground again. Where is the incentive to go racing if you can achieve better value, and often get a better view sitting at home.

Ironically, one of the better ways of restoring value must be to promote racecourse attendance to what I'll risk calling 'mug money' and hope that the drunken 'office night out' crowd who keep backing 'Frankie' blind can help create value. I think it might be another reason why so many people (I've certainly heard enough pro-punters say it) seem to lament the difficulty in making the jumps pay. As a general rule they don't attract the same levels of casual interest (lets face it, who wants to attend mid week meetings at some of the peripheral venues in the depths of winter?). It's entirely probable therefore that you get an altogether more informed crowd setting a market over obstacles, making the value connundrum even harder to crack. The other lament one often hears is the need to have 'stable contacts' to know when a horse is trying which seems to be more prevalent in the winter game (I wouldn't know if there's any truth in this but I've heard it enough times now). I guess that with so much of the season concentrated on mid March there is probably more of a temptation to run concealed marks?