Queen Anne Stakes

what is wrong with 1/2 even? There may be 5 horses or so in this race (excluding pacemakers).
 
Hamm said:
Except this time you are getting 2/1. What a great bet.
Click to expand...

You're not though Hamm, which is the point i was making, as you may as well write off the win part of the bet so it's not 2/1 at and I doubt you'll get enough on and its AP so he's not sure to run...

Nobody is going to lay you 2/1 about excelebration placing - You know that as well as I do!!!!

Edit - Sorry, I wasn;t meant to hammer the point - didn;t realise Brendan had posted..
 
Last edited:
rorydelargy said:
Not if the highest rated horse is 4/5 when it should be 2/1, as I'm sure you'll agree. The primary aspect to finding value is to identify the "correct" price of the favourite as a starting point. Bad favourites should be opposed on the grounds that they are poorly priced - as you did with the jolly in the Perth bumper yesterday. Once you've established that a favourite is bombproof (cf Frankel), deciding to oppose it on the off chance it won't perform will lead you to penury. Would you agree.
Click to expand...

i personally wouldn't oppose him no..but i can see that people are fancying the place on E at 8/1...last time they met E was 11/4 which was shocking bad price..but i can see what Hamm is getting at

yes the win part is highly unlikely..but the place part makes up for that
 
brendanr said:
Wow you have to explain that to me. At 6/1 a quarter the odds e/w you are most certainly not getting 6/4 for the place. You can't forget the win bet if it places 2nd. At that point you are getting 1/4 for a place bet hardly the value you think. The Betfair odds in your example above are reflecting of this. Your statement that Mathematically, this is a fantastic bet regardless of the amount of value you are giving away on the win part of the bet. is nonesense because if he does not win you have to factor that money into the bet as well.

At 8/1 e/w you are getting 1/2 on the place bet not 2/1.

However if you know of a bookmaker that will offer you those odds without the win portion let me know because then it becomes a very good bet. Obviously if he wins you are way ahead but won't happen in this case.
Click to expand...

If you are getting 6/4 to place on an EW bet when it's 1.63 to place, you're getting twice the true odds thus the value lost on the win part of the bet is paid for by the value you are getting on the place bet.

Here is another example from yesterday's racing:

http://form.horseracing.betfair.com/horse-racing/110612/Newton_Abbot-GB-NAb/1600

Traditional Bob was 2/1 at the off with bookmakers, in this race they would have been betting 1/5 odds thus the place part of the bet with bookmakers was 2/5. However the "true" place price, i.e. the market value price on Betfair was 1.21, half the price you're getting with bookmakers.

Therefore, if you're consistently having these bets, especially when betting them when the place price with bookmakers is double the true place price then you're essentially paying for the win bet with the extra value on the place.

Why do you think these bets are so hard to place in bookmakers? Because they are mathematically impossible to win when laying them.
 
Does the place value you are gaining cover the value you lose by having all you're accounts closed down?
 
SlimChance said:
Does the place value you are gaining cover the value you lose by having all you're accounts closed down?
Click to expand...

:lol:

Illustrates my point perfectly. Why do you think firms close your accounts if you place these bets?!

Stick to shops for bad EW bets.
 
Gamla Stan said:
If you are getting 6/4 to place on an EW bet when it's 1.63 to place, you're getting twice the true odds thus the value lost on the win part of the bet is paid for by the value you are getting on the place bet.

Here is another example from yesterday's racing:

http://form.horseracing.betfair.com/horse-racing/110612/Newton_Abbot-GB-NAb/1600

Traditional Bob was 2/1 at the off with bookmakers, in this race they would have been betting 1/5 odds thus the place part of the bet with bookmakers was 2/5. However the "true" place price, i.e. the market value price on Betfair was 1.21, half the price you're getting with bookmakers.

Therefore, if you're consistently having these bets, especially when betting them when the place price with bookmakers is double the true place price then you're essentially paying for the win bet with the extra value on the place.

Why do you think these bets are so hard to place in bookmakers? Because they are mathematically impossible to win when laying them.
Click to expand...

In the example you quote above while the place part may be 2/5 if the horse does not win you lose the win part and collect on the place part. E.g. if you bet it 100 e/w that's an outlay of 200 if it places you get 140 back for a loss of 60. If I take that same 100 from the e/w place part and play the place market on Betfair then I get 120 back. In one instance I've lost money in the other I've won. If bookmakers are closing accounts because of those bets then so be it but I don't understand why.

I could see books closing accounts when using these type of bets in e/w doubles as they are almost loss proof, if both horses place.
 
Because you are not talking about one instance, but many instances of the same scenario over a long period of time. The 2/1 shot will win once every 3 times (assuming his win price reflects his actual winning chance) but you are always gaining on the place odds versus his actual chances of placing.
 
My favourite e/w bets are 7/4-9/4 shots in maidens against an odds on shot. The win part is live and the e/w part leverages your win odds favourably for your total stake.


.
 
Last edited:
SlimChance said:
My favourite e/w bets are 7/4-9/4 shots in maidens against an odds on shot. The win part is live and the e/w part leverages your win odds favourably for your total stake.


.
Click to expand...

While I might 7/4 a tad short for that type of bet at 9/4 I'm with you. The operative words in your statement "win part is live". I love those bets. With Frankel in a race though the win part is basically thrown away, so in this singular instance it would make sense to me to just put the entire bet on the place markets on Betfair.
 
The win part is NOT thrown away. Frankel does not have a 100% chance of winning this race, no matter what anyone thinks.

Would you back Excelebration/the field against him at 50/1?
 
No, but would anyone say it's not true? For the record, I don't think he will be beaten, and am not betting for that reason, but there is a reasonable (between 10 and 20% perhaps) chance he will be. If I'm wrong, why don't people put their mortgage on at 1/4?
 
For all we know there might be people that have put their mortgage on in the past. If everybody put their mortgage on then the market would most likely disappear. Me personally I think he is unbeatable in that race but still won't be getting mortgage money out. I could however see myself say putting on 2 or 3K at 1/4 with a BOG book and hope he drifts a little
 
No horse has a 100% chance of winning any race, even a walkover.

It amazes me how the theory of probability is so often ignored when discussing racing.
 
Gamla Stan said:
No horse has a 100% chance of winning any race, even a walkover.

It amazes me how the theory of probability is so often ignored when discussing racing.
Click to expand...

Look Gamla 'Pythagorus' Stan, as Harry Findlay used to always say after he called it better than the stats men.

"Shove your numbers up your hole'.
 
Gamla Stan said:
No horse has a 100% chance of winning any race, even a walkover.

It amazes me how the theory of probability is so often ignored when discussing racing.
Click to expand...

There's more to winning in this game than just understanding probability.
I find those statements above in the context of this discussion just silly but each to their own.
 
Last edited:
brendanr said:
There's more to winning in this game than just understanding probability.
Click to expand...

No there isn't, it's the fundamental principle which underpins winning at the game. If you're backing horses at odds which over estimate their probable chance of winning, you'll lose, very simple.

You could win at punting on horses without knowing how many furlongs are in a mile, indeed I know several people that do but that destroys the fun and interest in it for me.
 
Gamla Stan said:
No there isn't, it's the fundamental principle which underpins winning at the game. If you're backing horses at odds which over estimate their probable chance of winning, you'll lose, very simple.

You could win at punting on horses without knowing how many furlongs are in a mile, indeed I know several people that do but that destroys the fun and interest in it for me.
Click to expand...

Yeah whatever., you should be cleaning up then. 1/4 does not overestimate Frankel's ability at RA. in my book. If you think so lay the daylights out of him.
 
Back
Top