Is this value

B

baldeagle

Conditional
Joined
Mar 3, 2012
Messages
538
Location
Kanturk Co Cork
Im looking at the lock master in the 4.30 at Southwell today
currently 9 from 12 10 in places he gave Admiral Duque 12 lbs including riders claim,last time they met and today is in receipt of 2lbs surely enough of a swing to turn around 3 3/4Lengths.
The fly in the ointmemt could be marsh warbler 149 rated and in off 77
 
baldeagle said:
Im looking at the lock master in the 4.30 at Southwell today
currently 9 from 12 10 in places he gave Admiral Duque 12 lbs including riders claim,last time they met and today is in receipt of 2lbs surely enough of a swing to turn around 3 3/4Lengths.
The fly in the ointmemt could be marsh warbler 149 rated and in off 77
Click to expand...

Eh?
Ignoring riders allowances, Admiral Duque gave Lockmaster 2lbs and beat him a sh hd on 15 Jan, then beat him 3.75l on the same terms on March 1.
Today he is 7lbs worse in with the latter, but the extended trip should be much more in his favour.
Wouldn't back Lockmaster with someone else's, under the circumstances.
 
Last edited:
reet hard said:
Eh?
Ignoring riders allowances, Admiral Duque gave Lockmaster 2lbs and beat him a sh hd on 15 Jan, then beat him 3.75l on the same terms on March 1.
Today he is 7lbs worse in with the latter, but the extended trip should be much more in his favour.
Wouldn't back Lockmaster with someone else's, under the circumstances.
Click to expand...

I respectfully suggest you look at the weights again on both occasions as on both days the lockmaster gave 5lbs according to ATR as regards trip ??
He will surely get stronger handling today from Luke Morris
 
Absolute monster of a race, all 9 of them have the potential to throw up a win when unexpected.

Really couldn't fancy anything but good luck on you bet.
 
Last edited:
BE
I did say ignoring rider's allowances:

OR's 24 Jan AD 79, LM 77.
1 Mar AD 82, LM 80
today AD 89 LM 80

Luke Morris may be some advantage, whether that outweighs the stiffest test the horse has ever tried, and the advantage that trip offers to AD, I sincerely doubt.
 
Presuming you took an early price, it was most definitely value. It was 11-10/1 in the morning and SP'd at 13/2.
 
Gamla Stan said:
Presuming you took an early price, it was most definitely value. It was 11-10/1 in the morning and SP'd at 13/2.
Click to expand...

Is the SP a good enough guide to a horses chances to infer that you're getting value constantly if you beat it?
 
Nope not necessarily,especially if you're backing stables that are usually overbet and also jocks fanning and luke morris every other ride they're getting overbet.Just a simple example but there's loads of others why you could be backing horses that shorten that probably aren't value as in terms of backing winners.But you could be backing them simply to trade knowing they will be overbet and unlikely to win,that would be good judgement!
 
Put another way, if most of the time you're not doing better than sp, with its built in advantage to the odds setters, you'll be up against it.
 
The most liquidity on Betfair is at the off which is not far away from SP. As it is so hard to get decent amounts on at EP there must be people that can make it pay betting off of shows. Therefore it's not as simplistic to say that constantly beating SP will guarantee a profit. There is also the problem that doing so means accounts become clamped meaning it actually could be argued that beating SP constantly can be uneconomical in the long run. The next time you see one who is 20/1 and should be 5/1 you won't be able to get your maximum bet on because you've been greedy and constantly backing 7/1 shots that go off 11/2.

Betting is not black and white and beating price is not necessarily conducive to.maximising profits. I've thrown this out in conversation with people in the industry and was surprised how quickly my reasoning threw them. They are all obsessed with beating SP but not cognasant of the long term damage they are having on their bottom line.
 
gigilo said:
Nope not necessarily,especially if you're backing stables that are usually overbet and also jocks fanning and luke morris every other ride they're getting overbet.Just a simple example but there's loads of others why you could be backing horses that shorten that probably aren't value as in terms of backing winners.But you could be backing them simply to trade knowing they will be overbet and unlikely to win,that would be good judgement!
Click to expand...

Sorry I didn't see this post earlier. Excellent points. Understanding why horses shorten is the key to the perceived value you hold.

Gigilo, have you ever run a comparison over a random set of your trades to see if it would be more or less profitable to let them all run?
 
Today's 13/2 'value shot' finished 6th, behind horses priced at 10's, 14's and 33. By any sane standards, its price did not reflect its chance, and therefore it was never 'value'.
 
It's 20x more profitable but trying to get £400 ew on something at 16s most of the time especially on the aw is impossible,even though i've got loads of people helping me out.T here won't be much trading in the summer as it's a bit easier to get some decent bets on most of the time,although i'll probably put some up for icebreaker as i know thats the way he bets.
 
It's x20 more profitable but there is no downside to the trsdibg. I would be including the emotional downside of backing a string of losers when I say that. Others might argue that trading out of a winner will drive you insane as well but it depends what type of punter you are.
 
If you're making your books then the trade out point would be laying at the Bookmakers price and backing at the higher prices on the exchanges?

If I could get 20-1 on Betfair and the Bookmakers are going 14-1 then shouldn't I be laying at 14-1 and backing at 20-1?
 
Bruce_Savage said:
If you're making your books then the trade out point would be laying at the Bookmakers price and backing at the higher prices on the exchanges?

If I could get 20-1 on Betfair and the Bookmakers are going 14-1 then shouldn't I be laying at 14-1 and backing at 20-1?
Click to expand...

You're missing the point completely.
 
Back
Top