Jackform
Mare
For mick and markfinn, I agree with you both 
. If I put it into context, I am an old man in my 85th year now and enjoy betting as an intellectual exercise and don't expect to win much money, although I don't wish to lose any either. If I had an infallible method what would I do with all the money, in fact would i be able to get any bets on? I do derive a great deal of satisfaction in finding winners from assessing races (markfinn is probably the only person who thinks I am not a total wally!)
The reason I returned to this subject was due to reading stuff from my racing library, such as follows:
Calculating the Value (a synopsis of an article in Smart magazine, March 1995)
‘To be certain you are using an accurate method for calculating value it’s only necessary to keep an extended record of the calculated prices and results matching the win/lose ratio to the average percentage indicated by value odds. If the method is accurate, they should of course come out the same. Based on an analysis of close to 5,000 races, the following approach delivers the goods.
Using the Racing Post betting forecast strip out the over-round increment and the resulting prices reflect their Spotlight correspondent’s opinion of fair odds. The 5,000 after the deduction compared with the actual over-round at starting price came out almost the same. This is close enough to accept the calculation as true for betting purposes. These being fair odds it’s not enough to simply bet them to show a profit a percentage must always be added to come out ahead on a permanent basis.’
This is me Jackform. The above then is the basis in trying to resolve the problem of selecting the best available bet as opposed to a value bet. Comparing the early morning betting market, hopefully formed by more professional money, with the betting forecast as above gives an indication of the horses to consider in a race. It does mean that more often than not the layers still have the advantage and to overcome this it is necessary to strive for a high strike-rate. Supporting up to three runners in a race is currently the approach employed to achieve this aim after a simple form analysis. The bet being any in the early betting market that have shown some form that are at bigger odds (or at least comparable odds) than the calculated betting forecast fair odds.
More on Value (a synopsis of an article with a different opinion in Smart magazine, August 1995)
‘Being interested as to how SP forecasts were compiled I gave the Racing Post a ring. They told me that they were compiled by whichever reporter was Spotlight at the meeting in question and were based on their evaluation of form for the smaller races while reflecting bookmakers’ early prices for the larger, more competitive handicaps. So, the value supporter is using either one person’s interpretation of form via the odds compiled, or worse still, is using the bookmakers’ prices to base his system on – surely an unlikely source of value?
Therefore, any value system must be based on what a horse has achieved in relation to its competitors. By this is meant that a horse whose form is equal to its chief rivals but is at a larger price is the value bet, form however, is subjective not objective. So what is needed, some kind of form rating? Whatever method is used is unimportant as long as the rating is compiled in the same way every time it is not open to opinion, discussion or interpretation. It cannot be swayed by such things as jockey bookings, fashionable trainers, the need to balance a book etc.
A high speed rating means that a race was won in a fast time – knock the form if you will, but you ignore the time recorded at your peril. Likewise private handicap ratings can put you on to a value bet whilst the horse in question has been ignored by the majority of professional opinion, something such as RPR where the latest rating compares to the best rating.’
This is me Jackform. I try to incorporate some of this thinking into my basic form analysis of a race. However, at the end of the season if you are in profit you have been getting value and if not you ain’t .
. If I put it into context, I am an old man in my 85th year now and enjoy betting as an intellectual exercise and don't expect to win much money, although I don't wish to lose any either. If I had an infallible method what would I do with all the money, in fact would i be able to get any bets on? I do derive a great deal of satisfaction in finding winners from assessing races (markfinn is probably the only person who thinks I am not a total wally!)The reason I returned to this subject was due to reading stuff from my racing library, such as follows:
Calculating the Value (a synopsis of an article in Smart magazine, March 1995)
‘To be certain you are using an accurate method for calculating value it’s only necessary to keep an extended record of the calculated prices and results matching the win/lose ratio to the average percentage indicated by value odds. If the method is accurate, they should of course come out the same. Based on an analysis of close to 5,000 races, the following approach delivers the goods.
Using the Racing Post betting forecast strip out the over-round increment and the resulting prices reflect their Spotlight correspondent’s opinion of fair odds. The 5,000 after the deduction compared with the actual over-round at starting price came out almost the same. This is close enough to accept the calculation as true for betting purposes. These being fair odds it’s not enough to simply bet them to show a profit a percentage must always be added to come out ahead on a permanent basis.’
This is me Jackform. The above then is the basis in trying to resolve the problem of selecting the best available bet as opposed to a value bet. Comparing the early morning betting market, hopefully formed by more professional money, with the betting forecast as above gives an indication of the horses to consider in a race. It does mean that more often than not the layers still have the advantage and to overcome this it is necessary to strive for a high strike-rate. Supporting up to three runners in a race is currently the approach employed to achieve this aim after a simple form analysis. The bet being any in the early betting market that have shown some form that are at bigger odds (or at least comparable odds) than the calculated betting forecast fair odds.
More on Value (a synopsis of an article with a different opinion in Smart magazine, August 1995)
‘Being interested as to how SP forecasts were compiled I gave the Racing Post a ring. They told me that they were compiled by whichever reporter was Spotlight at the meeting in question and were based on their evaluation of form for the smaller races while reflecting bookmakers’ early prices for the larger, more competitive handicaps. So, the value supporter is using either one person’s interpretation of form via the odds compiled, or worse still, is using the bookmakers’ prices to base his system on – surely an unlikely source of value?
Therefore, any value system must be based on what a horse has achieved in relation to its competitors. By this is meant that a horse whose form is equal to its chief rivals but is at a larger price is the value bet, form however, is subjective not objective. So what is needed, some kind of form rating? Whatever method is used is unimportant as long as the rating is compiled in the same way every time it is not open to opinion, discussion or interpretation. It cannot be swayed by such things as jockey bookings, fashionable trainers, the need to balance a book etc.
A high speed rating means that a race was won in a fast time – knock the form if you will, but you ignore the time recorded at your peril. Likewise private handicap ratings can put you on to a value bet whilst the horse in question has been ignored by the majority of professional opinion, something such as RPR where the latest rating compares to the best rating.’
This is me Jackform. I try to incorporate some of this thinking into my basic form analysis of a race. However, at the end of the season if you are in profit you have been getting value and if not you ain’t .
. This is an exercise in 'pure' form that is comparing past performance on the track and the early market expected for today's race. For added interest I have compared the overall form with that old rascal Van der Wheil as he would have rated them (except the old duffer's top ratings were the lowest making it a little more difficult). The rated races are all forecast as restricted races in the early market.
! Basically IMO it's when the punter is making an overall profit from his betting.
, to calculate a successful financial edge without too much effort? There's the rub.
