• Hi Guest Just in case you were not aware I wanted to highlight that you can now get a free 7 day trial of Horseracebase here.
    We have a lot of members who are existing users of Horseracebase so help is always available if needed, as well as dedicated section of the fourm here.
    Best Wishes
    AR

Compiling Speed figures.

Phil Waters said:
I'm not pinning you down here Mike, just interested to know how the figures translate to the chance of a horse winning.
Click to expand...

Usually you start at the top rated speed figure and work backwards.

With regards to what chance a top rated horse has of winning, I only have to think of Chesham's Chesham Chesham "Well In" blog in the inner sanctum, where he quotes my speed figures, his winning percentage must be around 90%.

Mike.
 
TheBluesBrother said:
Usually you start at the top rated speed figure and work backwards.

With regards to what chance a top rated horse has of winning, I only have to think of Chesham's Chesham Chesham "Well In" blog in the inner sanctum, where he quotes my speed figures, his winning percentage must be around 90%.

Mike.
Click to expand...

It's not just top rated horses for me though. And my questioning applies to any ratings compiler, not just speed gurus who seem to get an unfair slice of criticism when compared to the "traditional" handicappers.

I believe every performance figure, regardless of it's makeup has a relative chance of success. It's about finding those horses who have a better chance than their available price.

This could well be the 6th best rated horse in the race.

My only concern with translating speed figures to a probability figure (and this is down to my own knowledge limitations and not a flaw in the ratings) is the seemingly large differences between the runners. You could have a horse consistently rated 30lbs below others where in traditional handicapping this would translate to a massive difference in prices/chances, but in speed figures you might have the lower rated horse a shorter price than its opponent.

I get that I am generalising here but I hope my point is in there somewhere!
 
Chesham said:
I think that perhaps you are trying to compile odds on one piece of evidence, ie a stand alone Rating, when a reliable Rating that is backed up with other evidence is likely to achieve better results
Click to expand...

That's definitely the case. Not in practice but just for this conversation - I mean converting ratings into odds.

My thinking is that yes there is a lot more to consider and the speed rating should be viewed as one piece of the puzzle - I was wondering if there was a direct link between the ratings and the odds but there doesn't seem to be, it seems the odds only come about when added to other sources of information.
 
As for Celtic Manor, all the pieces were there and he wins at 13/8. All well and good but I have some reservations about the whole thing.

I sound like I am dismissing all the hard work by yourself and Mike, I'm not!

Haggas and Tudhope when teaming up on a horse that is carrying between 9-4 and 9-10 and priced between 1.36 and 4.00 returned 9 wins from 11 bets - there is something that does not sit well with me, albeit in the face of some impressive numbers there.

I don't think the weight carried had any real relevance, other than to show under these circumstances runners could lump big weights. Even that doesn't sit well with me, it's only a big weight when compared to 8-0 but it is all relevant to the OR, all horses get their turn to carry low weights and high weights, and they all do without an issue. It is when compared with the opposition and their relevant ability ratings that it starts to hold meaning.

But back to Celtic Manor. That sort of form study is excellent, added to the speed figure work and you have a good case for a winner. The thing that bothers me is how much in depth analysis is given to the opposition? He beat 3 horse by no more than a length, did these horses provide a betting opportunity prior to the race? Was the 25/1 about the runner up a great bet for some reason?

I think I'm being rhetorical and not expecting or asking for all the answers.

I guess what I'm honing in on is the guys who compile the odds, do they have the same in depth analysis carried out about all the runners for every race? I find that hard to fathom given the time it must take to do a day's racing!
 
Hi P Phil Waters

You probably need to read “The Art Of Legging”

Better still “The Four Quarters Of Horse Racing Investment” recommended as a starting point by Rob Morris.

The Four Quarter assumes that you can form read and suggests that Rces are either 3 contender races or 4 contender races. You then Price up your contenders to 80% and leave 20% for S—-T Happens . Then look for overlays with your Contenders.
 
Phil Waters said:
As for Celtic Manor, all the pieces were there and he wins at 13/8. All well and good but I have some reservations about the whole thing.

I sound like I am dismissing all the hard work by yourself and Mike, I'm not!

Haggas and Tudhope when teaming up on a horse that is carrying between 9-4 and 9-10 and priced between 1.36 and 4.00 returned 9 wins from 11 bets - there is something that does not sit well with me, albeit in the face of some impressive numbers there.

I don't think the weight carried had any real relevance, other than to show under these circumstances runners could lump big weights. Even that doesn't sit well with me, it's only a big weight when compared to 8-0 but it is all relevant to the OR, all horses get their turn to carry low weights and high weights, and they all do without an issue. It is when compared with the opposition and their relevant ability ratings that it starts to hold meaning.

But back to Celtic Manor. That sort of form study is excellent, added to the speed figure work and you have a good case for a winner. The thing that bothers me is how much in depth analysis is given to the opposition? He beat 3 horse by no more than a length, did these horses provide a betting opportunity prior to the race? Was the 25/1 about the runner up a great bet for some reason?

I think I'm being rhetorical and not expecting or asking for all the answers.

I guess what I'm honing in on is the guys who compile the odds, do they have the same in depth analysis carried out about all the runners for every race? I find that hard to fathom given the time it must take to do a day's racing!
Click to expand...
The four qtrs is good four top four. But you want to a rate odds for all runners. Just rate all the runners in the race or use some one elses rating , could be as simple newspapers form ratings or any other - Total them - turn the total into 100% or ? Depends on your ideas flat book using Betfair could be 105% to allow for commission - bookmakers i use 115% Turn all rating in to a % fig of the total - list them largest to smallest - set your minimum required odds - apply that price to your top rated and then use the percentages difference between runners to set the odds . You have now priced the ratings - if you want to profile the horses chances remove the no hopers and start again.
 
Phil Waters said:
That's definitely the case. Not in practice but just for this conversation - I mean converting ratings into odds.

My thinking is that yes there is a lot more to consider and the speed rating should be viewed as one piece of the puzzle - I was wondering if there was a direct link between the ratings and the odds but there doesn't seem to be, it seems the odds only come about when added to other sources of information.
Click to expand...
P Phil Waters Converting Ratings to Odds is something i dabbled seriously with a couple of years ago ,i had astonishing results for about 6 months using my own form ratings , i thought i had cracked it never had pre-race results like it in 30 years punting , stated low stakes increased in confidence upped staked and then it started to steadily lose back all the profits i had made and eventually after 15 months it was loss making and i ditched the whole idea, anyway the reason i'm saying this is i used a special formula in a spreadsheet that was really clever at Converting Ratings to Odds, i no longer have the sheet but after looking online i found something similar.
I have no idea if its ok the post external links on here, if not then sorry and please remove.
 
markfinn said:
The four qtrs is good four top four. But you want to a rate odds for all runners. Just rate all the runners in the race or use some one elses rating , could be as simple newspapers form ratings or any other - Total them - turn the total into 100% or ? Depends on your ideas flat book using Betfair could be 105% to allow for commission - bookmakers i use 115% Turn all rating in to a % fig of the total - list them largest to smallest - set your minimum required odds - apply that price to your top rated and then use the percentages difference between runners to set the odds . You have now priced the ratings - if you want to profile the horses chances remove the no hopers and start again.
Click to expand...

I had a look for that book, seems out of print. Granted it was only a brief look.

Simon Rowlands posted a piece on converting ratings to odds a few years back. Somewhat accuracy at times but other times all over the place. This is to be expected when relying on ratings.

I found the most interesting was taking the RPR for a recent run (last 6 weeks or so) and firing up Simon's odds compiler. Still, a full in depth study is required. I think the speed ratings at hand could be utilised in this manner.
 
Outlander said:
P Phil Waters Converting Ratings to Odds is something i dabbled seriously with a couple of years ago ,i had astonishing results for about 6 months using my own form ratings , i thought i had cracked it never had pre-race results like it in 30 years punting , stated low stakes increased in confidence upped staked and then it started to steadily lose back all the profits i had made and eventually after 15 months it was loss making and i ditched the whole idea, anyway the reason i'm saying this is i used a special formula in a spreadsheet that was really clever at Converting Ratings to Odds, i no longer have the sheet but after looking online i found something similar.
I have no idea if its ok the post external links on here, if not then sorry and please remove.
Click to expand...
That's the one! I still have the Simon Rowlands spreadsheet and dabble in it every now and again.
 
In all this - I found that although we start by looking for perfection! it can never be found - who is to say what is definitive correct price - or which horse ranks above another - its all about opinions and yes all these ideas help to gain a better understanding of racing as a whole and hopefully lead to forming better opinions - but if you are happy with the price on offer then that's the price you were looking, you can ask for more and may get it - I found I was spend more time doing stuff like this and messing with ratings when if fact it is better to spend the time in understanding form.
 
markfinn said:
In all this - I found that although we start by looking for perfection! it can never be found - who is to say what is definitive correct price - or which horse ranks above another - its all about opinions and yes all these ideas help to gain a better understanding of racing as a whole and hopefully lead to forming better opinions - but if you are happy with the price on offer then that's the price you were looking, you can ask for more and may get it - I found I was spend more time doing stuff like this and messing with ratings when if fact it is better to spend the time in understanding form.
Click to expand...
This is true everyday i would find 2/1 shots that i would have to add 10lb + to any known form to get them anywhere near 2/1, no matter what price the ratings said they should be they would over time average returns of 2/1 shots, on the flip side there were horse who had run very well in recent runs and couldn't get them over 8/1 on form going off 25/1+ on a daily basis and the would get stuffed about as many times you would expect for a 25/1 shot, i have some very nice winners was backing everything that was 20% above tissue price but eventually it all corrected itself to the mean, the conclusion i get was i couldn't beat the market using this approach long term.
 
True but all you need to do is run a query through HRB to see how many horses at a certain price end up winning. The prices, especially on Betfair SP seem pretty accurate. I wonder where the long term edge really is.
 
I would not be fooled by reported SP - A small amount of money on course near the off can skew any small market one way or the other- the bookies are good at their - job we know the optimum 8/1 and down and you will back winners - not say they will be value when measured against your own ideas - I used to price every race but now I know where I need to be so its not so important - If my favs are 4/1 and 5/1 but I rate them at 8 what do you do ? - no bet no loss is perhaps our strongest weapon or bet and take not as much but still at reasonable value - its opinions that count and if you opinion says dont back at even's dont back if your opinion says dont back at over 8/1 dont back - or do you change the way you bet in order to get on - whatever we do there is no definitive answer as to right or wrong in this but experience shows we have to compromise to survive in most things.
Betfair - there was a horse that won at 3/1 sp but was bet in running @ 49/1 some machine took it to a £1000 ! who got the value

The edge is in knowing what you are about - which horses to back - how to back them and in what price range
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top