Tips and pointers on how to bet on horses at the races: tactics, tools, and instructional information on vital racing statistics to take into account.

Multi-Race Bet Builder

Multi-Bet BuilderIf you're anything like me then you love the idea of a nice payout for a smallish stake. The best way I know of achieving that is the good old placepot (or your national equivalent: pick 3, pick4, pick 6, etc).

Obviously, trying to win the 'pot with a single selection in each race is akin to searching for and hoping to find a needle in a haystack, so the savvy punter uses a permutation of more than one horse in some of the races. This is more commonly known as a perm.

But then it's quite easy to encounter the opposite conundrum: too many permutations.

Enter the multi-race bet ticket builder, a clever piece of web software I've had developed that recognises the unlikelihood of your longer priced horses winning (or placing) in all legs, and creates a series of 'most likely scenario' tickets based on how you identify A, B and C selections.

Let me explain in more detail...

Let's say there's a race where the favourite is 6/4 and you quite like it. But there's also another horse in the race who you think is over-priced at 8/1, though clearly is a less likely winner than the favourite. In terms of the multi-bet builder, we'd call the favourite an 'A' selection, and the 8/1 lively sort, a 'B' selection.

If there was another horse who you thought might sneak in at a longer price, then you might add it in as a 'C' selection.

This process is repeated throughout the number of legs in your bet (e.g. three in a Pick3, six in a placepot, etc) and, as you make your choices, the multi-bet builder calculates the 'part-perm' combinations for each of the following:

- All 'A' selections on one ticket
- Any five 'A' selections with each 'B' leg
- Any five 'A' selections with each 'C' leg
- Any four 'A' selections with each combination of two 'B' legs

You can de-select some of these options if you like. Personally, I very rarely use 'C' selections on placepots, but I do occasionally use them on multi-race win bets, like the jackpot.

OK, enough theory. Let me show you how this works in practice. This is the opening portion of the screen you will see:

The numbers represent the following fields, some of which MUST be entered and some of which are optional:

1. Date - this is pre-populated to today's date, but can be changed if you need/want to.
2. You may choose any track from UK, Ireland, USA, Australia and South Africa - again this field is optional.
3. Select the number of legs in your multi-race bet - it is mandatory to select this one.
4. Choose the start race leg - optional, but will help you if for instance you are playing rolling Pick 3's.
5. Select a base unit for your bet. For example, if you are planning to make a 10p perm placepot, then the base bet would be .1 (mandatory field)
6. Choose your total budget. Again, this is a mandatory field.
7. If there are races with more than 20 runners, select the 40 runners option from the dropdown.
8. Once you've completed the fields you need/want to, hit the 'Create' button.

You will now be presented by a series of numbers and boxes, similar to the image below (for a three race sequence bet)

It's now a case of simply 'dragging and dropping' the relevant numbers to the appropriate boxes in the grid. So for instance, if you like horse #6 in the first race, drag it to the 'A' box. If you think horse #2 also has a chance, though less so than the #6, drag it to the 'B' box.

As you complete each race (see the numbers on the left side, corresponding to your selection of start race in the first part), the tickets are automatically created beneath.

Let's look at both a part completed, and a fully completed example. First, a ticket with partial completion.

We can see from the above that as the first two legs have been completed, four tickets have been created. These are, as follows:

Ticket 1 - The 'all A' ticket

Ticket 2 - The first of the 'A's with 1 B' tickets

Ticket 3 - The second of the 'A's with 1 B' tickets

Ticket 4 - The first 'A's with 2B's' ticket

Now let's look at a completed ticket. In this example, I've used different numbers for each leg, so that you can see how the ticket combinations are pulled together. (Click the image to see full screen).

In this example, I have included A, B and C selections to illustrate all the possible ticket combinations.

Note that the tickets are always displayed in the order: all A's (ticket 1, in this case); A's with 1 B (tickets 2-4, in this case); A's with 1 C (tickets 5-7, in this case); and, A's with 2 B's (tickets 8-10, in this case).

Also note that the total stake here is in dollars. This is because the selected race meeting is from Belmont Park, a US track. Each track will calculate the ticket totals using the local currency denomination.

To de-select any of these combinations of A, B and C, simply untick the relevant box - they're located between the race boxes and the ticket combinations.

Finally, if you'd like to accentuate any of the tickets, you can tick the 'x2/x3/x4' box on the ticket(s) you'd like to emphasise. For instance, I generally use the 'x3' or 'x4' for my 'all A' ticket, and the 'x2' or 'x3' for my 'As with 1B' tickets.

The multi-bet builder will automatically calculate the revised total value, and each individual ticket value as well.

And that's it. One important note - when dragging and dropping, your cursor MUST be over the number as you place it to a box, or it will not release.

Click here to access the ticket builder.

Betting For A Living Part 2

Finding betting value is key to winning at betting

Finding betting value is key to winning at betting

This is part two in the series about how to bet for a living. You may remember in part one, 'How To Be A Professional Gambler', that I talked about the differences between romantic fiction (i.e. the usual media portrayal of pro punters) and reality. Read more

How To Be A Professional Gambler

Professional gambler.

Those two words instantly conjure an image in the minds of every reader.

Some may think of the 'face' at the track, picking his moment before plunging into the betting ring, and striking his trade with a wad of fifties.

Others imagine the sharply dressed poker player in the dark glasses, outwitting his Read more

How To Win The Placepot

How to Bet (and Win) The Placepot

placepot

Winning The Placepot

Winning the placepot bet is a great feeling. Not only does the average placepot dividend amount to over £500, and frequently go into the thousands, but the feeling it produces when you 'have' it is incredible.

And in that feeling when you 'have' it is one of the biggest drawbacks of betting this kind of wager. I'll explain what I mean in a moment, but for now, let's quickly recap what the placepot is and how it works.

What is a Placepot?

A placepot is a pool bet operated by the tote, where the player is required to select a placed horse in six consecutive races (usually the first six on the card at any given meeting).

Place positions vary depending on number of runners and type of races, but typically we're trying to get a horse to finish first, second or third in each of the six races.

As I say, this is a pool bet, which means all of the money wagered is placed into a central betting pool, from which a deduction is made (28%) to cover admin but mostly to put money back into the sport.

The remaining 72% of money in the pool is divided equally between the number of winning players. So, for instance, suppose the pool of money was £100,000, and there were 72 winning tickets.

The dividend (always declared to a £1 unit stake, though players can play multiples of as little as 5p) would be calculated as follows:

£100,000 - 28% /72 (because of the 28% deduction and the fact that we have 72 winners in this example).

In other words, £100,000 - £28,000 / 72 = £72,000 / 72 = £1,000

So the dividend in this case is £1,000. Make sense so far? Good!

Now of course you might only 'have' 20p of it, or you might have £12 of it, depending on how you staked your bet.

Alternatively, you might very well have none of it, depending on how you picked horses in your bet! 😉

So that's what a placepot is: a six leg place wager where you get back a return based on how many of your fellow placepot wagerers also correctly selected six placed horses.

How to pick your horses in a placepot

This is one of two places I think a lot of people make mistakes when betting the placepot. Sometimes people - and I've been guilty of this many times myself - try to be too 'cute' in their selections.

They might put in the long odds on favourite, and also a 16/1 who they quite like, just in case.

There's nothing wrong with that per se, but... it is clear that there is far more likelihood of the 2/5 favourite placing than the 16/1 chance. So it must be equally clear that both horses ought to be 'weighted' differently in the bet. That people don't do this is almost certainly THE most common mistake in placepot (and jackpot and scoop6 and exacta and tricast) betting. More on that in a moment.

So, back to how to pick horses for a placepot. Obviously, we're picking horses that we need to place. This may mean that we actually select horses differently from the one we might pick to win the race.

Many horses have form figures like '4011816'. In other words, they either win or run nowhere if things don't go their way. If I was playing a jackpot (I never do, though I love the US Pick 3, a more achievable mini-jackpot), I'd definitely have this horse in the mix.

But in a placepot, I'd think twice, because he's as likely to finish nowhere as he is to place, and there may be more reliable place wagers.

A good example of this is in the 1.15 race at Cheltenham today (12th November 2010), where Theatrical Moment has form figures of 44116P-

He has two wins to his name, but they were sandwiched in between a number of unplaced performances. (Clearly, there is a lot more to the selection process than that, but these horses take an inappropriate amount of the pool money quite frequently).

The other problem with contrarian views - or trying to beat the odds on favourite out of the frame - is that generally you'll be wrong. But you don't want to miss out on the relatively rare occasions that you're right! So, what to do?

Well, Steven Crist in his excellent book 'Exotic Betting', has a solution to this problem. [Exotic bets are what these type of wagers are referred to in the US, and they take FAR more of the money bet than straight win, and place bets.]

Crist suggests you break the horses down in each race, according to how likely you think they are to get the required placing. He talks of dividing them into four categories:

A - horses you feel have a very high chance of being placed
B - horses you feel have a reasonable chance of being placed, and who represent value (i.e. who might be 'dark' horses)
C - horses who might just enjoy a revival today based on some element (course, distance, going, jockey, etc) coming in its favour, and who represent value (i.e. who might be 'dark' horses)
X - horses who either have no chance, or are terrible value to place at their expected odds, or on whom you have no strong opinion

As you can see, these gradings take into account two elements: your ability to read a race (reflected in terms of what you like) and the market's relative ability to read a race (reflected in terms of where you see value horses, or under-priced horses)

By breaking each race down like this, you might end up with a chart as per the below. (This example assumes six nine-horse races).

------ A                     B                            C                             X

1   3,4                                                  1,8                    2,5,6,7,9

2   1                        4,6                                               2,3,5,7,8,9

3  2,3                     9                            5,7                    1,4,6,8

4  1,3,6,7                                              2                      4,5,8,9

5   8,9                                                                          1,2,3,4,5,6,7

6   6                      4,7                                                   1,2,3,5,8,9

How to bet your horses in a placepot

The good news is we've managed to discard many of the runners in most of the races. The bad news is that if we tried to perm all the runners in our A, B and C lists, we'd still end up with 4 x 3 x 5 x 5 x 2 x 3 = 1800 lines.

Even if we did just 10p per line, that comes to £180 and, more worryingly still, we'd need some luck to get big priced horses hit all place positions in one, and possibly two races at least in order to get back more than the £180 we'd invested.

But, by weighting our opinions according to our perception of the likelihood of those horses making the frame, we can bet the horses in a commensurately weighted fashion.

In other words, if we can't get at least four of our A horses in the frame, we don't really deserve to win the bet, because we don't have a strong enough and / or smart enough opinion of the sextet of contests that form the placepot that day. Besides, getting four out of six on the placepot is easy, right?! 😉

So, if we accept that we should have at least four of our A-team selections come in, then we can write out multiple tickets where we'll collect if any of the following scenarios occur:

- A in all six races
- A in five races, and a B or C in the other
- A in four races, and B in the other two

This gives us lines that look like this, from our example above:

AAAAAA             2x1x2x4x2x1 = 32 bets
ABAAAA             2x2x2x4x2x1 = 64 bets
AABAAA            2x1x1x4x2x1 = 16 bets
AAAAAB            2x1x2x4x2x2 = 64 bets
CAAAAA            2x1x2x4x2x1 = 32 bets
AACAAA            2x1x2x4x2x1 = 32 bets
AAACAA            2x1x2x1x2x1 = 8 bets
ABBAAA            2x2x1x4x2x1 = 32 bets
ABAAAB            2x2x2x4x2x2 = 128 bets
AABAAB           2x1x1x4x2x2 = 32 bets

So we now have ten different placepot perms we're going to strike, and we could stake them differently as well. In this case, for simplicity, we won't bother to do that.

The total number of lines comes down to just 440, or less than a quarter of the initial number of plays for 'full coverage'.

We have lots of chances to win and, because it's a placepot bet where we can get more than one horse placed, we still have lots of chances to double - or even triple - up.

So, our previous 1800 x 10p bet, which would cost us £180, can now be re-struck at a cost of just £44 (440 x 10p), or we could 'go large' and play 40p lines for £176 - still four quid cheaper than the initial permutation.

In order to exemplify this further, I am (stupidly) going to attempt this on today's Cheltenham placepot... Drum roll...

------A ------------------------  B--------------------  C----------------------  X

1- 4,6,9-------------------  3,10--------------------------------------  1,2,5,7,8,11,12

2- 2------------------------  1,4 -----------------------------------------  3,5,6,7,8

3-  1-----------------------  4,7 -------------------  2,6-----------------  3,5,8,9,11,12

4- 1,5------------------------------------------------------------------  2,3,4,6,7,8,9,10

5-  11,12,17,21----------  9,18------------------------------------------  THE REST

6-  7,8--------------------  3,6-----------------------------------------  1,2,4,5,9,10

Again, we have to get four A's at least for a score. Just eight tickets this time, as follows:

AAAAAA  3 x 1 x 1 x 2 x 4 x 2 = 48 bets
AABAAA  3 x 1 x 2 x 2 x 4 x 2 = 96 bets
AAAAAB  3 x 1 x 1 x 2 x 4 x 2 = 48 bets
CAAAAA  2 x 1 x 1 x 2 x 4 x 2 = 32 bets
ACAAAA  3 x 2 x 1 x 2 x 4 x 2 = 96 bets
AACAAA  3 x 1 x 2 x 2 x 4 x 2 = 96 bets
AAAACA  3 x 1 x 1 x 2 x 2 x 2 = 24 bets
AABAAB  3 x 1 x 2 x 2 x 4 x 2 = 96 bets

The total is simply perming all A, B and C selections would be a whopping 5 x 3 x 5 x 2 x 6 x 4 = 3,600 lines. Even for ten pence a line, that's a scarcely affordable £360 which is a lot of money to recoup even if you 'have' the placepot at the end of the day.

Granted it is still not the most affordable of placepot bets even with the 'four A's' rule in play. But at least we've managed to massage that figure down to a more palatable (and affordable) 536 lines which, at the aforementioned 10p a turn, is £53.60. That's just under 15% of our full coverage, and we have very good chances of getting through at least the second and last races.

Initially, I played one each in the B and C slots in the cross country race, but it's VERY hard to envisage both Garde Champetre and Sizing Australia being out of the first three. So I've used that as the banker play in the ticket.

I have placed these bets this afternoon, so we'll see how it goes!

Cheltenham Placepot

The eight tickets for my Cheltenham Placepot

And that, dear reader, is how to play the placepot. 🙂

Matt

p.s. if you have any clever ways of whittling the number of perms down, do please leave a comment...

More Betting Thoughts: What Trends To Look For In A Horse Racing System…

The cold continues, dear reader, ensuring my nose and throat are as full as my inbox currently. And it's directly to the inbox that we'll go, as promised yesterday, to answer publicly another reader's question.

Steve, from Tasmania no less (you devil!), wrote in to ask about systems research, specifically in relation to trainer patterns. His email is below, and my answer then follows:

From: Steve W
Sent: 18 December 2008 23:27
To: in**@**********co.uk
Subject: Geegeez Question

Hello there Matt,

Firstly - I hope you're feeling a bit better?? Nothing worse than being crook!

My name's Steve, and I'm in Tasmania - Australia.

I've been looking up your stuff and read some of your articles - excellent stuff!

To be brief:- I was hopeless in my 20's on the punt. I read some good stuff (good books), but had neither the capital nor the discipline to bet sensibly. I had a good long break from punting that did me the world of good.

Now, a bit older (33) and wiser(!) I'd like to make a fresh start. One of the things that always intrigued me was trainer stats. I have a couple questions, if you don't mind. I'm hoping you might swing me in the right direction with a bit of advice and guidance?

(a) Have you found any books particularly helpful? Been a long time since I've bought any.

(b) I intend to purchase a database of some sort for Austalian racing, so I should be able to have a look at some systems. I'm looking forward to that. Any advice there (other than, keep the rules logical?) I note with interest that you don't mind being track specific in your mechanical systems that you have posted in some of your old newsletters? Have you ever gone back to see how they've held up? Can a portfolio of systems approach win overall?

(c) Trainer stats! Where do I start?? lol Here is where I'm really hoping you might help me on my path. Obviously there's a lot of things one can look for. Are you able to guide me in what you've found to hold up over time? When I've had a cursory look, I've noted that stats between different trainers in broad categories just don't seem to hold up year to year (e.g. one year J Smith made a profit with first uppers, the next year you would have lost following them). In fact, so far, (albeit from a cursory look), the stat that seems to hold up strongly is that some trainers are very much overbet on there short priced horses. So - either lay them, or, the overbetting of them creates value in the race.

In the DRF form guide (for the USA) I noticed that they track the trainer patterns (switches) - things like blinkers on, big class changes etc. Is that the sort of thing you are looking for??

One thing I've noticed here in Australia, is that a trainer who has a really good strike rate at that particular track, do seem to win a good few races!!

So - I'm looking for advice really!

What type of stats to track

How to use those to bet! (i.e. does one still handicap the horse etc)

Finally - I'm interested in your answer if I were to ask you: "why do you fundamentally believe that your trainer stats method will continue to be an underbet (therefore profitable) method into the future?

If you've read this far - many thanks for your time! It's a big ask of a stranger, but I'm really hoping you might help me out here!

Blessings & merry christmas to you,

Steve

--------------

Hi Steve

Many thanks for your long email, and sorry for the delay in coming back to you. I’ve been under something of a deluge just recently! Still feeling rough, I’m sorry to report on the sickness front, which of course doesn’t help anything.

Regarding your questions

(a) I’m not sure if you’re referring to Australian racing (about which I have no knowledge!), or UK racing. If the latter, there are some excellent statistical compilations, such as Raceform’s ‘Trainer Jump Statistics 2007-8’ (ISBN 978-1-905153-78-7), in which you may find some lucrative lesser known trainers with profitable sub-trends.

There is also a flat racing version of this book, called ‘Trainers Flat Statistics’, ISBN (978-1905153749).

Both of these are available from Amazon, and all good sports book resellers.

I do of course produce my own jumps statistical guide, called ‘TrainerTrackStats’, which you can get from www.trainertrackstats.com. I’ve produced this in conjunction with Gavin Priestley this season, and it continues to show a profit as it has done in every previous season we’ve produced it.

(b) and (c) Regarding what sorts of parameters to look for when researching a system, if the system is based on trainer patterns, then it logically follows that you should consider possible differences in the way trainers train. Taking that a step further, I mean that here in the UK, some trainers are more effective with horses run over shorter trips or on sharper, i.e. less stamina sapping courses. Some perform best when there is a real slog.

For instance, Nigel Twiston-Davies has the following record over the last four seasons (14/1 odds or shorter):

2m races 68 wins from 332 runs (20.48% strike rate) Loss of 34.62 points

2m1f – 3m 145 wins from 781 runs (18.57% strike rate) Loss of 40.22 points

Over 3m 48 wins from 236 runs (20.34% strike rate) Profit of 56.58 points

Although the strike rate remains consistent, the profit emerges only in races with more of an emphasis on endurance. (Incidentally, this implies that his horses are overbet at shorter distances, and underbet at longer distances.

Taking another example, let’s look at Alan King’s record over the same period:

2m races 128 wins from 571 runs (22.42% strike rate) Loss of 62.31 points

2m1f – 3m 184 wins from 870 runs (21.15% strike rate) Profit of 47.27 points

Over 3m 30 wins from 146 runs (20.55% strike rate) Profit of 22.31 points

Although on the face of it, it appears that we should back King’s runners at anything beyond the minimum trip, slightly deeper research reveals that for trips beyond 3m, you would have lost in three of the four seasons in questions, and a couple of big priced winners in 2006/7 season have skewed the stats somewhat.

Trainers may also train horses for chases rather than fences, or vice versa (or even for bumper / flat races).
Consider the following over the last four seasons:

Alan Swinbank (3 and 4 year old horses)

Hurdles 3 wins from 17 runs 17.65% strike rate

Bumpers 27 wins from 75 runs 36% strike rate

Nicky Henderson (all horses)

Chases 73 wins from 358 runs 20.38% strike rate

Hurdles 159 wins from 659 runs 24.13% strike rate

Bumpers 51 wins from 159 runs 32.08% strike rate

Some trainers focus more on precocious early types (both the above are examples of this), whereas others tend to allow their horses more time to mature.

Some trainers focus on setting horses up for nice priced handicap wins, so the race type is another area to look at.

Some trainers see their horses perform on certain ground conditions (often, though not always, allied to whether they train horses for stamina or speed).

And all trainers go through good and bad runs – in some cases, this is ‘deliberate’ in so much as they train their horses en masse for certain key targets, such as the Cheltenham or Aintree festivals.

Although in the above examples I’ve tried to find positive indicators, do bear in mind that with all of these, you may well uncover strong negative patterns that can be used to handicap a race without a certain runner (or, of course, to lay the negative trend horses).

Finally Steve, in answer to your question about why I think TTS will continue to be underbet and therefore profitable to follow, this is simple. We don’t make fortunes and most of my customers are small players whose total cumulative investment measures more as a ripple than a splash in the great liquidity ocean that is Betfair (where virtually all TTS players wager).

In other words, TTS is not mainstream. Even though a few hundred people now use it, that’s as nothing to the tens of thousands who play on Betfair. And, moreover, when the average TTS punter stake is factored in against the average Betfair unit stake, again TTS is not hitting the pools hard. Of course, this may not last forever. But for now, I’m comfortable and confident that things will continue ‘as is’.

Hope this helps, and if you do find anything interesting in your Oz research, perhaps I can help you market your system (if that’s a route you’d like to take).

Best Regards,
Matt

********

I will try to feature some of the more interesting letters on here going forwards, as this seems to be a popular feature in newspapers and magazines (I assume for their reader interest rather than just as filler - I hope you don't consider the above to be the latter!).

********

Onto Project Betfair, and after a no bets day yesterday, today's runners are:

Hereford
2.10 Six Day War

Ok, so that should have been today's runner is... but no matter.

********

Finally, although its only Monday, I heard a great joke yesterday from my old friends Ronnie and Ronnie (Barker and Corbett, lest you're not following), in the 'And here is the news' section of their timeless, peerless Christmas Special of many moons ago:

A woman from Worcester was seen covering her horse with lettuce and tomato yesterday. When asked what she was doing, she replied that she wanted to ride side salad... Boom, boom!

It may just be me, but I thought that was brilliant.

Until tomorrow,
Matt

Your first 30 days for just £1