Tag Archives: theory

Tongue Tie Research

You'll remember that last week I mentioned the Geegeez article that talked about the use of tongue ties and how a horse needs a few runs with a tongue tie before they will let them self go.

The theory being that the horse still thinks that it's tongue will get in the way and is worried it won't be able to breathe and so doesnt give all.

But after a few runs with a tongue tie it starts to realise that it doenst have tongue problems anymore.

So I've been doing some research.

First off some facts. All horses wearing a tongue tie for the first time in 2013 & 2014 produces the following big losses.

Runs = 3959
Wins = 319
Strike Rate = 8.06%
Loss at iSP = -1335.24
ROI = – 33.73%

So it seems that wearing a tongue tie for the first time is a negative factor and the losing ROI is such that maybe it has the makings of a lay system.

Then it occurred to me that the reason that the horse doesnt perform well first time out with the tie is because it is still worried about a previous experience with breathing and doesn't realise it will be ok with the tie.

But surely there are some trainers that use the tie at home and get the horse used to it and trusting it before they ever go racing with the tie on and that maybe there are trainers that win first time-out with a tongue tie.

So I had a search for trainers who are profitable with first time tongue tie wearers.

And I found some.

For example Rebecca Curtis had 22 starts over the two year period that ran with a tongue tie for the first time.

Seven of those won for a 32% strike rate and they made an industry SP profit of 5.86 which is a 27% ROI.

Charlie Longsdon had 32 starts and 8 wins and an industry SP profit of 20.3. Which is a strike rate of 25% and an ROI of 63%.

I've selected the best performers from 2013/14 and checked their 2015 performance and a good profit has been made so I'm going to run this as a system live for a while and see if we have something worth following long term.

Today's Selection

2.30 Wolverhampton Kalimantan – win bet – 11/8 Bet 365, Paddy Power

In Running Delusion!

Today we have a guest article from Malcolm Pett of http://greyhorsebot.com

1.09 in running just won’t work…

Hi

Every so often we get an influx of support questions about betting in-play and the issues people are getting when they are trying to get matched at 1.09 or whatever the latest fad is regarding this idea.

This idea has been going around in different forms since Betfair began and is based around getting matched as often as you can on the horse that looks like it will win the race.

The normal explanation is that you get on the first runner that drops below a certain price.

It’s started in the early days of getting matched at 1.01 or 1.02 gradually it has moved out to 1.09 or somewhere close.

On paper the ideas may sound feasible but in practice it really doesn’t work that well and here is why…

The problem lies with Betfair’s matching policy.

If you put a “back” bet into the market at 1.09 then only 3 things can happen.

1. You get matched at 1.09
2. You don’t get matched at all.
3. You get matched higher than 1.09.

You get matched at 1.09

If you are lucky and as soon as you put your bet into the market Betfair has enough money on the lay side to match your bet, you will get matched at 1.09.


You don’t get matched at all.

Betfair will not match a back bet under the price you asked for, so if the price has moved past 1.09 IE it has continued shortening you will not get matched.

You get matched higher than 1.09

Betfair’s policy allows them to match a back bet at a higher price than you asked for. This is how the exchange works if they couldn’t do this then Betfair wouldn’t exist.

So if the price drifts because the horse no longer looks like a winner then you will get matched at the higher price.

So with the above in mind let me show you how this idea is flawed.

You are sitting there watching the screen or running a bot that is set to put a bet into the market either on the first runner to hit 1.09 or a pre determined named runner.

The runner hits 1.09 and you place your bet into the market.

So our first assumption is that this runner is likely to win the race because it has hit 1.09.

If it is winning the race (and a lot of people will be watching live at the course checking this) then two things will be happening….

1. All the people out there using a similar strategy will be putting as much money into the market as they can.

2. Many traders will be trying to offset an earlier lay bet.

If this horse is looking like it will win the race that price of 1.09 won’t be there for long…Probably less than a second.

So if you’re doing this manually your probably be too late and even bots may not be quick enough.

The biggest issue will be that Betfair won’t have enough money to match at 1.09 and because they can not match your back bet under 1.09, then you will end up with an “unmatched” bet.

But then we have the other side…

Again we see the price go under 1.09 and we are at the same scenario as before except this time something happens on the course and suddenly our selection is no longer winning.

So the opposite starts to happen and the layers get into the market and probably a lot of traders.

Before we know it the price goes from 1.09 to 1.2 or higher and you are just in line to get matched as soon as Betfair can.

In theory this could be as high as 999 but it doesn’t matter it is over 1.09 so you have been matched on a runner you weren’t expecting. (A runner that no longer looks like winning)

The real point is that you are going to find it easier to get matched on a runner that has hit 1.09 and then goes on to lose, than you will on one that goes on to win.

The complaint we always get from people who do not understand the way Betfair works is that you were matched higher than 1.09.

Yep and that will happen a lot because that’s the way Betfair works!

Just a little more information…

First of all if a runner goes to 1.09 then that would have been your selection. It doesn’t matter what price you get matched at after that, unless your runner goes onto win then you lose your stake.

The point is (according to the rules of the system you are following) the runner did hit 1.09 at some stage so it was a selection.

Secondly if you stick to 1.09 then you probably won’t get matched often enough to make the idea viable.

Thirdly I am sorry to say but I know of people who have created very specialized software to follow this idea.

I believe many of these people also have people at the tracks feeding them information or they have a connection that lets them see the race live.

There are only two ways you may get this idea to work.

When your selections hits 1.09 you put the bet into the market at 1.01 and see how often you get matched and at what price and see if it works.


You put a bet into the market wait a second and then cancel. You either got matched or didn’t but at least you may not have wasted a bet on a runner that ended up losing.

As I said at the beginning on paper the idea seems as if it will work but in practice it is a different matter.

Still some sites still insist on selling this strategy as “easy money”.

I don’t agree.

Thank you as always for reading I really do appreciate it.

Malcolm
“The Nerd”

http://greyhorsebot.com

Today's Selection

2.35 Goodwood 7 Moonraker – eachway bet – 12/1 Bet 365

Profitable Yarmouth Trainers

I guess there are a lot of race courses that are out on a limb, as it were, geographically.

Yarmouth is local to me and I know what a pain it is to travel there from anywhere else in the country. I also remember years ago there was a system doing the rounds based on betting the runners of Newmarket based trainers.

The theory being that the big HQ yards would try out their hotshots at Yarmouth because it is relatively local to them.

So this morning I thought I'd run a report on top performing trainers at Yarmouth and see what I come up with.

Amazingly there is a trainer with a 40% strike rate (Ed Walker) at Yarmouth from all runs and another with a 39% strike rate (Mrs L Wadham).

Profitable Yarmouth Trainers

Below I have listed all the trainers with a 20% or higher strike rate, who have had more than 10 runners at Yarmouth.

Baker, George
Bravery, G C
Burke, Mrs K
Carson, Anthony
Cecil, H R A (Lady Cecil!)
Cumani, L M
Fahey, R A
Haggas, W J
Hannon, R
Haynes, A B
Hutchinson, Alison
McBride, P J
Meehan, B J
Mohammed, Ismail
Noseda, J
Powell, B G
Varian, Roger
Wadham, Mrs L
Walker, Ed
Wall, C F
Williams, Ian

Following these trainers at Yarmouth betting all horses they send would have returned a whopping 51% Return on Investment at SP over the last 3 1/2 years.

Today the following runners are trained by a trainer from our high strike rate list above…

5.50 Orlando Rogue
6.50 Censorious (trained by Ed Walker), Hamble & Sermarel
7.20 Venus Marina
7.50 Peacemaker
8.20 Piemans Girl, Roring Samson
8.50 Vodka Chaser

Rolling Doubles Staking Plan

This idea started off as an argument in a pub, but I'm sober now and it still seems to make sense!

So the conversation started with a discussion about how doubles, trebles, accas etc were mugs bets and bookie benefits.

Then it moved onto examples of where a double was a solid bet because it multiplied the value and it ended with me promising to test a theory out on one of our odds on systems.

You'll remember a while back we published a system for backing odds on shots when certain jockeys were on board.

Well I've taken the results for that system back to March 2011 and compared level stakes back betting at SP with betting a rolling doubles staking plan.

The theory being that because it is a high strike rate system that there will be lots of winning runs. And more winning runs than losing runs, so it makes sense to bet the selections in doubles instead of singles!

So here's how I've calculated this…

Race 1 Horse 1
Race 2 Horse 2
Race 3 Horse 3
Race 4 Horse 4

We bet a double on Horse 1 with Horse 2, we also bet a double on Horse 2 with Horse 3 and so on.

So the next bet will be a double on Horse 3 with Horse 4.

Sometimes these horses will run on different days, in which case you bet a single and if it wins you place the whole return on the next qualifier on the day that it runs.

How did that work out?

Well level staking over the 449 bets produced a profit of 46.79 which is a 10.4 % Return on Investment (ROI).

Rolling doubles staking produced a profit of 96.26 which is a 21.4% ROI which is almost double! Spooky!

Today's Selection

3.00 Leicester Kodafine – win bet – 4/1 Bet 365

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close